Grace Gill

The small ubiquitin-related modifier SUMO posttranslationally modifies many proteins with roles in diverse processes including regulation of transcription, chromatin structure, and DNA repair. Similar to nonproteolytic roles of ubiquitin, SUMO modification regulates protein localization and activity. Some proteins can be modified by SUMO and ubiquitin, but with distinct functional consequences. It is possible that the effects of ubiquitination and SUMOylation are both largely due to binding of proteins bearing specific interaction domains. Both modifications are reversible, and in some cases dynamic cycles of modification may be required for activity. Studies of SUMO and ubiquitin in the nucleus are yielding new insights into regulation of gene expression, genome maintenance, and signal transduction.

The yeast GAL4 protein (881 amino acids) binds to specific DNA sites upstream of target genes and activates transcription. Derivatives of this protein bearing as few as 74 amino terminal residues bind to these sites but fail to activate transcription. When appropriately positioned in front of a gene these derivatives act as repressors. These and related findings support the idea that GAL4 activates transcription by touching other DNA-bound proteins.

Activation of transcription by the promoter-specific factor Sp1 requires coactivators that are tightly associated with the TATA-box-binding protein (TBP) in the TFIID complex. Recent work has shown that the two glutamine-rich activation domains of Sp1, A and B, can interact with at least one component of this complex, the TBP-associated factor dTAFII110. Here we report the mapping of a region of Sp1 with alternating glutamine and hydrophobic residues which is required for the interaction with dTAFII110 and is important for mediating transcriptional activation. Substitution of bulky hydrophobic residues within this region decreased both interaction with dTAFII110 and transcriptional activation in Drosophila cells. In contrast, mutation of glutamine residues in this region had no effect. Thus, the strength of the Sp1-TAF interaction correlates with the potency of Sp1 as a transcriptional activator, indicating that this activator-TAF interaction is an important part of the mechanism of transcriptional activation. Sequence comparison of three activation domains shown to bind dTAFII110 suggests that different activators that utilize dTAFII110 as a coactivator may share common sequence features that we have determined to be important for the Sp1-dTAFII110 interaction.