Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Journal of Bacteriology, April 2001, p. 2306-2315, Vol. 183, No. 7
Department of Biochemistry and Molecular
Biology, Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova
Scotia, Canada B3H 4H7
Received 5 September 2000/Accepted 11 January 2001
Both of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae 2µm
circle-encoded Rep1 and Rep2 proteins are required for efficient
distribution of the plasmid to daughter cells during cellular division.
In this study two-hybrid and in vitro protein interaction assays
demonstrate that the first 129 amino acids of Rep1 are sufficient for
self-association and for interaction with Rep2. Deletion of the first
76 amino acids of Rep1 abolished the Rep1-Rep2 interaction but still
allowed some self-association, suggesting that different but
overlapping domains specify these interactions. Amino- or
carboxy-terminally truncated Rep1 fusion proteins were unable to
complement defective segregation of a 2µm-based stability vector with
rep1 deleted, supporting the idea of the requirement of Rep
protein interaction for plasmid segregation but indicating a separate
required function for the carboxy-terminal portion of Rep1. The results
of in vitro baiting assays suggest that Rep2 contains two
nonoverlapping domains, both of which are capable of mediating Rep2
self-association. The amino-terminal domain interacts with Rep1, while
the carboxy-terminal domain was shown by Southwestern analysis to have
DNA-binding activity. The overlapping Rep1 and Rep2 interaction domains
in Rep1, and the ability of Rep2 to interact with Rep1, Rep2, and DNA,
suggest a model in which the Rep proteins polymerize along the 2µm
circle plasmid stability locus, forming a structure that mediates
plasmid segregation. In this model, competition between Rep1 and Rep2
for association with Rep1 determines the formation or disassembly of
the segregation complex.
Most strains of the budding yeast
Saccharomyces cerevisiae contain an endogenous plasmid, the
2µm circle. This 6,318-bp double-stranded circular DNA plasmid is
located in the nucleus at approximately 60 copies per haploid cell and
replicates autonomously from, but synchronously with, the chromosomal
DNA (for a review, see reference 9). The 2µm circle
confers no phenotype or selective advantage on the host yeast; indeed,
2µm plasmid-bearing ([cir+]) cells grow 1%
more slowly than isogenic plasmid-free
([cir0]) cells (10). Despite this
disadvantage, the 2µm plasmid displays a high level of mitotic
stability. This stability results from the presence of a
plasmid-encoded copy number amplification system and a partition
mechanism which together ensure that the rates of plasmid loss in
mitosis and meiosis are very low (4, 10, 16, 18).
Partitioning of the 2µm plasmid requires two proteins encoded by the
plasmid genes REP1 and REP2 and a
cis-acting 2µm locus termed STB (16,
18). The role of these three components has been examined in a
variety of studies involving mainly deletion or insertion analysis of
2µm-derived plasmids (17, 18, 23). In the absence of any
one of these three components, the 2µm plasmid displays a strong
maternal bias in inheritance; most plasmids are retained in the mother
cell (22). The 2µm circle partition system overcomes
this bias by an as yet unknown mechanism.
The Rep1 and Rep2 proteins mediate 2µm plasmid segregation, but their
mode of action is unclear. Lack of either Rep1, Rep2, or the
STB locus results in the same degree of mitotic instability (18, 27). Experiments designed to reconstitute efficient
2µm segregation by expressing different amounts of Rep1 and Rep2 in the cell have shown that the relative levels of the two proteins are
important for their partitioning function (5, 6). In addition to having a role in plasmid partitioning, the Rep proteins repress transcription of the 2µm plasmid FLP gene
(25, 27, 31, 35). The FLP gene encodes a
site-specific recombinase required for plasmid amplification, and the
control of Flp expression by Rep proteins has been proposed as the
mechanism by which 2µm plasmid copy number is regulated (8,
37). Rep protein-mediated transcriptional repression, like Rep
protein segregation function, requires the concerted action of both
Rep1 and Rep2 (25, 31, 35). Taken together, these data
suggest that Rep1 and Rep2 may function as part of a complex. Recently,
evidence for interaction between Rep1 and Rep2 and for self-association
of the two proteins has been obtained both by two-hybrid genetic assays
and in vitro protein interaction assays (1, 30, 36). We
have used similar approaches here to delineate the regions of Rep1 and
Rep2 that are required for these associations. Amino-terminal
truncations of Rep1 abolish Rep1-Rep2 interaction and are unable to
complement the segregation defect of a 2µm-based stability vector
with rep1 deleted, while Rep2 has two separate domains
capable of mediating Rep2 self-association, one of which has
DNA-binding activity while the other interacts with Rep1.
Yeast and bacterial strains.
Escherichia coli
strain DH5 Media.
Yeast cells were routinely grown at 30°C in liquid
or on solid synthetic defined (SD) medium containing 0.67% yeast
nitrogen base (without amino acids) and 2.0% dextrose, supplemented
with appropriate amino acids as described by Rose et al.
(28). Selection for plasmids in CTY10/5d was maintained by
omitting either leucine or histidine or both from the SD medium. Yeast
was grown in YEPD rich medium (1% yeast extract, 2% Bacto Peptone,
2% dextrose) prior to transformation. SD medium supplemented only with
tryptophan and histidine was used for selective growth conditions for
plasmid rate loss experiments, whereas SD medium supplemented with
tryptophan, histidine, and adenine was used for nonselective growth.
E. coli was grown in 2× YT with 50 µg of ampicillin per
ml as described by Sambrook et al. (29). Media were
solidified with 2.0% agar. All medium reagents were obtained from
Difco Laboratories or Sigma Chemical Co.
Generation of REP1 and REP2 BamHI
fragments.
BamHI restriction fragments containing
REP1 and REP2 open reading frames (ORFs) were
generated by PCR using the 2µm-based plasmid pJDB219B
(3) as a template and the following oligonucleotide primers: for REP1, REP1-1
(5'GGATCCATATGAATGGCGAGAGACTGC3')
and REP1-2 (5'GGATCCTATATAACCTACCCATCCAC3')
and for REP2, REP2-1
(5'GGATCCAAATGGACGACATTGAAACAGCC3') and REP2-2 (5'GGATCCTCATACCCTAGAAGTATTACGTG3').
Initiation codons and BamHI sites are underlined. PCR
was carried out with Taq DNA polymerase (Boehringer)
according to the manufacturer's instructions except that an additional
10 mM Tris, pH 8.8, was added to the commercial buffer, which
significantly improved yields. Amplification was carried out for 30 cycles, each consisting of 1 min at 94°C, 2 min at 50°C, and 4 min
at 72°C. PCR products were cloned directly into
SmaI-digested phagemid pTZ18R (Pharmacia) to which 3' T
overhangs had been added by incubation with Taq DNA
polymerase and TTP to give pTZ18-REP1 and pTZ18-REP2. The REP
BamHI fragments were sequenced using a Sequenase 2.0 sequencing
kit (U.S. Biochemicals) according to the manufacturer's instructions.
Plasmid construction.
REP1 and REP2
BamHI fragments were subcloned into the BamHI site in
the HIS3 two-hybrid vector pSH2-1 (2) to give
in-frame fusions with LexA, producing pLEX-REP1 and pLEX-REP2, and also at the BamHI site in the LEU2 two-hybrid vector
pGAD424 (Clontech) to give in-frame fusions with the Gal4
transcriptional activation domain (Gal4AD), producing
pGAD-REP1 and pGAD-REP2. pGADrep1
0021-9193/01/$04.00+0 DOI: 10.1128/JB.183.7.2306-2315.2001
Copyright © 2001, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Functional Domains of Yeast Plasmid-Encoded
Rep Proteins

![]()
ABSTRACT
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
![]()
INTRODUCTION
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
![]()
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
(29) was used for propagating plasmids,
strain JF1754 (hisB leuB met thi) was used for expression of
glutathione S-transferase (GST) fusion proteins, and strain BL21(DE3) (Novagen) was used for expression of pET fusion proteins. S. cerevisiae strains used were isogenic
[cir+] and [cir0] AS3
(MAT
his3
1 ura3-52 leu2-3 leu2-112
trp1-289 ade2
::URA3), AS2 (AS3 with an
ade2
rather than an
ade2
::URA3 allele), and CTY10/5d
[MATa gal4 gal80 his3-200 trp1-901 ade2
ura3-52 leu2-3,112
URA3::(lexAop)8-lacZ]
(2).
1-76 and pGADrep1
1-129 were
constructed by ligating an end-filled SpeI/BamHI
fragment and an end-filled StuI/BamHI fragment
from pTZ18-REP1, respectively, with BamHI-linearized,
end-filled pGAD424. In both constructs, amino-terminally truncated Rep1
is fused in frame to the carboxy terminus of the Gal4AD.
pGADrep1
130-373 was constructed by StuI/BamHI
digestion, end filling, and self-ligation of pGAD-REP1.
pGADrep2
1-57 and pGADrep2
59-296 were constructed by
EcoRI/NcoI and NcoI/BgIII
digestion, respectively, and end filling of pGAD-REP2. pGADrep2
1-14
was a gift from J. Sherk and is a MaeII partial digestion
product containing the truncated REP2 ORF inserted at the
ClaI site in pGAD424. For the expression of GST-Rep fusion
proteins in E. coli, the REP BamHI fragments were
end-filled with the Klenow fragment and cloned into
SmaI-digested pGEX-2T (Pharmacia) in the correct
orientation, to give pGEX-REP1 and pGEX-REP2. For the expression of S
peptide-tagged, hexahistidine-tagged, thioredoxin-Rep fusion proteins
in E. coli (hereinafter termed pET-Rep fusion proteins),
EcoRI/SalI fragments containing intact or
truncated REP gene ORFs from the appropriate pGAD-REP
plasmids were ligated with EcoRI/SalI-restricted
pET32 LIC (Novagen).
2µm plasmid which can be propagated in
yeast and E. coli. The version of pAS4 with rep1
deleted was created by digestion with PvuII, which excises
the entire REP1 coding region, including 126 bp of a
5'-end-flanking sequence and 3'-end-flanking sequence up to the
XbaI site, and also removes all but 215 bp of the pTZ18R vector sequence. The large PvuII fragment lacking
REP1 sequences was gel purified and self-ligated to create
pAS4-
rep1, which can be propagated only in yeast.
Two-hybrid assays.
Transformants and cotransformants in the
two-hybrid yeast host CTY10/5d (2) were assayed for
-galactosidase expression using a permeabilized cell assay
(28). Specificity of the interactions was confirmed by
expressing all Rep fusion proteins in the absence of other fusion
proteins and with either Snf1 or Snf4 fusion proteins (7).
Anti-Rep antibodies. GST-Rep1 and GST-Rep2 fusion proteins were expressed in, and extracted from, E. coli transformed with pGEX-REP1 and pGEX-REP2, respectively, as described by Koerner et al. (19). Both GST-Rep fusion proteins were found in the insoluble fraction of E. coli extracts and were further purified by electroelution from unfixed sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS)-polyacrylamide gels in which the insoluble fraction had been electrophoresed (20). Rep1 and Rep2 polyclonal antisera were generated by subcutaneous injection of rabbits with purified GST-Rep fusion proteins monthly and then every 2 weeks until a sufficient titer of anti-Rep antibodies was obtained, as assayed against Western blots of GST-Rep1 and GST-Rep2 fusion proteins and [cir+] and [cir0] yeast whole-cell extracts (14). Anti-GST-Rep1 and anti-GST-Rep2 antibodies were affinity purified from the undiluted crude polyclonal antisera by the method of Pringle et al. (26) using a Trans-Blot 0.2-µm-pore-size polyvinylidene difluoride membrane (Bio-Rad) for immobilization of gel-purified GST-Rep1 and GST-Rep2 and GEG buffer (0.2 M glycine, 1 mM EGTA, pH 2.5) for antibody elution.
Western blotting. Proteins were separated on SDS-10% polyacrylamide gels (20) and transferred to a polyvinylidene difluoride membrane for Western blotting analysis as described by Towbin et al. (32) except that 0.037% SDS was included in the transfer buffer since this was found to be essential for efficient transfer of Rep2. Rabbit anti-Gal4AD antibodies were purchased from Santa Cruz Biotechnology. The secondary antibody for Western blotting was peroxidase-labeled goat anti-rabbit immunoglobulin G, which was detected by chemiluminescence using a LumiGLO kit (Kirkegaard & Perry Laboratories, Inc.).
In vitro protein interaction assay.
Expression of GST and
pET fusion proteins was induced with 0.3 mM IPTG
(isopropyl-
-D-thiogalactopyranoside) for 5 h at
25°C. GST fusion proteins were isolated and in vitro protein
interaction assays were carried out as described by Ahn et al.
(1). Equal amounts of GST fusion proteins were incubated
with 50 µl of a 50% slurry of glutathione-agarose beads (Sigma) that
had been preequilibrated in PBS (137 mM NaCl, 2.7 mM KCl, 4.3 mM
Na2HPO4, 1.4 mM KH2PO4,
pH 7.3) containing 0.2% Nonidet P40 (NP-40) and a protease inhibitor
cocktail (a 1× concentration contains 0.5 µg of leupeptin per ml, 1 µg of aprotinin per ml, and 0.8 µg of pepstatin A per ml). The
final volume was increased to 200 µl with buffer A (50 mM Tris-Cl
[pH 8.0], 150 mM NaCl, 0.1% NP-40, 2 mM methionine) containing
protease inhibitors, 1 mM dithiothreitol, and 1 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl
fluoride, and the beads were incubated for 1 h with gentle rocking
at room temperature (RT). Bound GST fusion proteins were collected by
centrifugation at 500 × g for 3 min. Beads were washed
three times with 10 volumes of cold PBS-0.2% NP-40, with rocking for
5 min between washes. Beads were resuspended in 100 µl of PBS-0.2%
NP-40-150 µg of bovine serum albumin per ml. pET fusion proteins
were prepared by resuspending cell pellets in ice-cold sonication
buffer (50 mM NaH2PO4 [pH 8.0], 10 mM Tris [pH 8.0], 100 mM NaCl) with 15% glycerol, freezing at
20°C, and low-speed centrifugation. The pellet was resuspended in sonication buffer containing 8 M urea. Following sonication at 4°C, the
urea-solubilized E. coli extracts were centrifuged at
15,800 × g for 15 min. The pET fusion proteins were
purified from the supernatant by affinity chromatography on TALON resin
(Clontech) under denaturing conditions according to the manufacturer's
directions. The TALON-purified material was diluted to 10 ng/µl in
buffer A containing protease inhibitors, 1 mM dithiothreitol, and 1 mM
phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride and dialyzed against three changes of
buffer A at 4°C. The purified pET fusion protein extracts were
centrifuged at 15,800 × g for 10 min at 4°C to
remove any particulate matter. The equivalent of 500 ng of renatured
pET fusion protein was added to the bead-bound GST fusion proteins, and
the volume was increased to 500 µl with buffer A. Samples were rocked
for 1 h at RT, followed by centrifugation at 500 × g for 3 min. Beads were washed five times with an equal volume of
PBS-0.2% NP-40 by rocking them for 5 min, followed by centrifugation
at 500 × g for 3 min. The beads with any bound proteins were then resuspended in 50 µl of 2× gel loading buffer and
one-fifth of each sample was subjected to SDS-polyacrylamide gel
electrophoresis (PAGE) on a 12% polyacrylamide gel and Western blot
analysis. The presence of pET fusion proteins was detected by
incubation with chemiluminescent reagents directed against the S
protein tag (Kirkegaard & Perry Laboratories, Inc.).
Southwestern assay.
Southwestern blotting was performed as
described by Mellor et al. (21). Western blots of
SDS-PAGE-separated TALON-purified pET fusion proteins were incubated
with radiolabeled probes generated by using the Klenow fragment;
unlabeled dGTP, dATP, TTP; and [
-32P]dCTP to label
either a 375-bp EcoRI/BamHI fragment from the E. coli plasmid pBR322 or a 312-bp
EcoRI/HindIII fragment containing the 2µm
STB-proximal locus [the 2µm STB
AvaI/HpaI fragment had been end filled and subcloned at
the EcoRV site in the pBluescript II SK(+) (Stratagene)
polylinker region, where it is flanked by these two sites]. Specific
activities of the probes were 1.4 × 108 for the pBR322
probe and 7.5 × 107 cpm/µg probe for the
STB-proximal probe. Duplicate Western blots were preincubated in BBW
buffer (3 g of Ficoll per liter, 3 g of polyvinylpyrrolidone per
liter, 10 mM NaCl, 20 mM Tris [pH 8.0], 0.25% milk powder) and then
placed in 1 ml of this buffer in a sealed bag for a 1-h incubation at
RT with 5 µg of unlabeled sonicated salmon sperm DNA and 50 ng of
either radiolabeled probe. The membranes were then washed four times
for 30 min in the BBW buffer before exposure to X-ray film for 3.5 h at
70°C with an intensifier screen.
Plasmid stability assays.
LEU2 pGAD-REP1 fusion
plasmids and the ADE2 pAS4-
rep1 plasmid were
cotransformed into the [cir0] yeast strain AS3
by the LiAc/SS-DNA/PEG protocol of Gietz et al. (11). For
the plasmid stability assay, cotransformed yeast cells were initially
grown in media lacking adenine and leucine to select for the presence
of both plasmids. The cells were then allowed a period of growth where
there was no selection for the presence of the ADE2
stability vector. The proportion of cells containing both plasmids, or
just the LEU2 pGAD424-based plasmid, was determined both
before and after the period of nonselective growth by plating cells on
the appropriate selective medium and counting the number of viable
colonies formed. The rate of plasmid loss per generation was calculated
as previously described (6).
| |
RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Rep protein interactions in vivo.
Genetic data have suggested
that Rep1 and Rep2 function as part of a complex to regulate
FLP gene expression and to mediate 2µm plasmid segregation
(5, 6, 35). A two-hybrid genetic assay has previously
shown that these two proteins interact in vivo (1, 36). We
have used a similar approach here to investigate the ability of
truncated versions of Rep1 and Rep2, expressed as in-frame fusions with
the Gal4AD, to interact with either Rep1 or Rep2 expressed
as in-frame fusion proteins with the bacterial DNA-binding protein
LexA. Plasmids were cotransformed into the yeast two-hybrid host, where
transcription of a lacZ reporter gene (detected by measuring
-galactosidase activity) requires interaction of the two fusion
proteins to recruit RNA polymerase to the LexA binding site upstream of
the reporter gene (2). The results of the two-hybrid assay
are shown in Fig. 1. None of the Rep
fusion proteins or their truncated derivatives activated the
lacZ reporter gene when they were singly expressed in the yeast two-hybrid host (data not shown), demonstrating that neither Rep1
nor Rep2 has an intrinsic transcriptional activation function in this
assay. In accordance with the results of earlier studies (1,
36), expression in the reporter strain of both
Gal4AD-Rep1 and LexA-Rep2, or both Gal4AD-Rep2
and LexA-Rep1, resulted in activation of the lacZ reporter
gene, indicating a Rep1-Rep2 interaction.
-Galactosidase production
was also observed when the plasmids expressing Gal4AD-Rep2
and LexA-Rep2 were cotransformed into the yeast two-hybrid host,
although at a lower level than that observed for the Rep1-Rep2 fusion
protein cotransformants. Although Rep1 self-association has previously
been observed using a two-hybrid assay (1, 36), no
association was detected in our assay. This may reflect interference
with the interaction by the LexA moiety fused to the amino terminus of
the Rep1 protein or differences between the two-hybrid assay systems
used in the two studies. Neither of the pGAD-REP plasmids expressing
Rep1 proteins with amino-terminal deletions induced
-galactosidase
expression when they were coexpressed with LexA-Rep2, suggesting that
loss of Rep1 amino-terminal sequences abolishes interaction with Rep2. In contrast, when LexA-Rep2 was coexpressed with the version of Rep1
with a carboxy-terminal deletion, expression of the reporter gene was
significantly enhanced. These results suggest that the first 129 amino
acids of Rep1 are sufficient for interaction with Rep2 and that Rep1
carboxy-terminal sequences may influence this association.
|
-galactosidase when these fusion
proteins were coexpressed with LexA-Rep1, while removal of the first 57 amino acids of Rep2 led to loss of expression of the reporter gene.
Taken together, these data suggest that the amino-terminal 57 amino
acids of Rep2 are required for Rep1 interaction and that residues 15 to
58 are sufficient for this association. All Rep2 truncations gave lower
-galactosidase levels than full-length Rep2 when they were
coexpressed as Gal4AD fusions with LexA-Rep2. However, the
level of activation was significantly higher than when LexA-Rep2 was
expressed in the absence of a Gal4AD fusion protein,
suggesting that none of the truncations completely abolished the
ability of Rep2 to interact with the LexA-Rep2 fusion protein.
Rep fusion protein expression.
Lack of
-galactosidase
expression in the two-hybrid assay may be due to a lack of interaction
between the Rep1 and Rep2 portions of the two fusions, or it may be due
to a lack of expression or lower abundance of the Rep deletion fusion
proteins. To verify expression of the Rep fusion proteins, whole-cell
protein extracts from the two-hybrid cotransformants were isolated and
analyzed by SDS-PAGE and Western blotting using affinity-purified
polyclonal antibodies specific for Rep1, Rep2, and the
Gal4AD (Fig. 2). The anti-Rep1 antibody Western blot (Fig. 2a) shows a band migrating with a
molecular mass of 50 kDa in all protein extracts made from [cir+] yeast (lanes 1 and 3 to 7) but not from
a [cir0] yeast strain (lane 2). The size of
this band is slightly larger than the 43-kDa predicted molecular mass
for native Rep1 protein (15) but similar to that observed
in previous studies (30, 38). A novel Rep1-antigenic band
with a mobility of approximately 56 kDa was observed in the extract
derived from yeast containing the pLEX-REP1 plasmid. All transformants
containing plasmids expressing Gal4AD-Rep1 fusion proteins
showed novel Rep1 antigenic bands with mobilities consistent with the
amount of the REP1 coding region remaining in each,
and these bands were also detected with the Gal4AD-specific
antibody. In the case of the
Gal4AD-Rep1
130-373 fusion protein, the
anti-Rep1 antigenic bands were faint, presumably due to loss of
epitopes in the deleted carboxy-terminal portion of the protein.
Lower-molecular-weight bands were also detected by both antibodies in
all extracts derived from yeast expressing Gal4-Rep fusion proteins and
probably represent products of premature translational termination or
proteolysis.
|
1-14, and
pGADrep2
1-57, respectively. These molecular masses are
consistent with the sizes expected for these Gal4AD-Rep
fusion proteins. No novel anti-Rep2 antigenic band was observed in
extracts derived from yeast containing the pGADrep2
59-296
plasmid. The anti-Gal4AD antibody did detect low levels of
a protein with an apparent mobility of 31 kDa in these extracts, close
to the expected size for this fusion protein, suggesting that the Rep2
truncation eliminated the epitopes recognized by the polyclonal
anti-Rep2 antibodies. Despite the low steady-state level of the
Gal4AD-Rep2
59-296 fusion protein, the level was sufficient to activate the reporter gene when it was coexpressed with LexA-Rep1. In contrast, the
Gal4AD-Rep2
1-57 fusion protein, which was
expressed at a higher level than the carboxy-terminally truncated Rep2
fusion protein, did not activate the reporter gene when it was
coexpressed with LexA-Rep1 and neither did the higher levels of
amino-terminally truncated Rep1 when it was coexpressed with LexA-Rep2.
In these cases, lack of
-galactosidase expression for the two-hybrid
cotransformants must have been due to lack of interaction between the
fusion proteins being tested rather than a result of the lack of
expression of the truncated protein.
Rep protein interactions in vitro.
To assess the significance
of the two-hybrid assay results, we performed an in vitro protein
interaction assay in which GST-Rep fusion proteins and GST, bound to
glutathione-agarose beads, were tested for their ability to bind either
full-length or truncated Rep proteins expressed as pET fusion proteins
(Fig. 3). Equal amounts of the indicated
target pET-Rep fusion proteins were incubated with either GST-,
GST-Rep1-, or GST-Rep2-bound beads. Neither Rep1, Rep2, nor any of the
truncated Rep fusion proteins were brought down by GST. In agreement
with previous studies (1, 30), both Rep1 and Rep2 were
brought down by either GST-Rep1 or GST-Rep2, although the amount of
pET-Rep1 retained on the GST-Rep2 beads was less than that bound by
GST-Rep1 beads, while the opposite was observed for pET-Rep2, with more
being bound to GST-Rep2 than to GST-Rep1. The pET-Rep1
130-373
fusion protein was retained on both the GST-Rep1 and GST-Rep2 beads
significantly more efficiently than the nontruncated Rep1 fusion
protein. A small amount of the pET-Rep1
1-76 fusion protein was
bound by the GST-Rep1 beads, but no association of this
amino-terminally truncated Rep1 fusion protein with the GST-Rep2 beads
was observed, even after prolonged exposure of the membrane to film or
when increased amounts of the truncated fusion protein were added to
the beads. These results support the findings from the two-hybrid assay
indicating that the first 76 amino acids of Rep1 are required for
association with Rep2 but that the first 129 amino acids are sufficient
for this interaction. The in vitro association of Rep1 supports studies showing Rep1 self-association in vivo (1, 36) and suggests that the region comprising amino acids 77 to 129 is required for this
interaction.
|
59-296 protein was brought down much less
efficiently by the GST-Rep2 beads than was the amino-terminally truncated Rep2 fusion. The converse was observed for the interaction with the GST-Rep1 beads; the carboxy-terminally truncated Rep2 was more
efficiently retained than the pET-Rep2
1-57 fusion. The two-hybrid
assay results support an interaction between Rep1 and the
amino-terminal portion of Rep2 but did not provide evidence for the in
vitro association observed between Rep1 and the carboxy-terminal domain
of Rep2.
Rep2 DNA-binding activity.
Although the Rep proteins are
hypothesized to interact with the 2µm STB locus to mediate
plasmid segregation, direct association of either of the Rep proteins
with DNA has yet to be demonstrated. Transient association of the Rep
proteins with STB DNA has been shown by a biosensor assay
but requires the presence of other unidentified host proteins
(13). Biochemical studies of Rep1 and Rep2 have been
complicated by the inherent insolubility of the native proteins when
they were isolated from yeast (13, 38) or when they were
expressed as fusion proteins in E. coli. (M. J. Dobson,
unpublished results). To circumvent these insolubility problems, a
Southwestern assay was used to determine whether either Rep1 or
Rep2 might have intrinsic DNA-binding activity (Fig.
4). Rep1 and the carboxy-terminally
truncated Rep2 did not demonstrate any DNA-binding activity in this
assay. Rep2 and amino-terminally truncated Rep2 both bound a DNA
fragment containing the repeat region of STB and with lower
efficiency bound a DNA fragment derived from the E. coli plasmid pBR322.
|
Rep1 segregation function.
The results of the two-hybrid and
baiting assays provide evidence for in vivo association of Rep1 and
Rep2. To determine the connection between this association and 2µm
plasmid segregation, we decided to test the ability of the truncated
forms of Rep1 to mediate plasmid segregation. To assay plasmid
segregation, we used a 2µm-based stability vector, pAS4 (A. Sengupta,
unpublished data). In addition to containing all 2µm sequences, the
vector carries an ADE2 gene, which allows selection for the
plasmid in an ade2 host strain. If the REP1 and
REP2 genes on the vector are wild type, the plasmid
segregates in a [cir0] host almost as
efficiently as native 2µm (A. Sengupta, unpublished results). For
this study, a rep1 deletion derivative of pAS4, pAS4-
rep1, was cotransformed into a leu2 ade2
[cir0] yeast host with the LEU2
pGAD424-derived plasmids expressing the
Gal4AD-Rep1 fusion proteins to determine whether the fusion proteins could complement the rep1 deletion in the stability
vector. pGAD424 is itself a 2µm-based vector but contains
only the cis-acting STB locus; its normal mitotic
stability relies on Rep1 and Rep2 being supplied in trans
from the 2µm plasmids in the [cir+]
two-hybrid host. In our [cir0] assay system,
the stability vector with rep1 deleted supplies Rep2 while
the Gal4AD-Rep1 fusion protein is the only source of Rep1.
If the Gal4AD-Rep1 fusion protein is able to supply Rep1 function, most cells grown under conditions selecting for the presence
of both plasmids should be able to form colonies on medium lacking
adenine and leucine since both contain the STB locus and will be efficiently partitioned at each cell division. Conversely, if
the Gal4-Rep1 fusion protein does not restore Rep1 function, a
significant proportion of the cells grown in selective medium will not
contain both plasmids, reflecting the inability of the plasmids to be
segregated to the daughter cells. Similarly, the rate of loss of the
ADE2 stability vector with rep1 deleted from cells containing the LEU2 Gal4AD-Rep1 fusion
protein-expressing plasmid should be high if the Rep1 fusion protein is
nonfunctional but low if Rep1 function is restored. The percentage of
Leu+ cells which also contain the ADE2 plasmid
was determined for the cotransformants, both during growth selecting
for the presence of both plasmids and after a period of growth in which
selection for the ADE2 plasmid had been relaxed. The results
are shown in Table 1. A comparison of
yeast cotransformed with pAS4-
rep1 and pGAD-REP1 versus
those cotransformed with pAS4-
rep1 and the vector pGAD424
indicates that the full-length Rep1-Gal4AD fusion protein
is able to restore mitotic stability to the version of pAS4 with
rep1 deleted. The rate of loss of the pAS4-
rep1 plasmid during nonselective growth was also reduced by expression of the full-length Rep1-Gal4AD fusion protein. In contrast, none
of the truncated Rep1-Gal4AD fusion proteins was able to
increase the mitotic stability of pAS4-
rep1 beyond that observed
with the pGAD424 cotransformant. The results show that
deletion of the amino-terminal 76 amino acids or the carboxy-terminal
244 amino acids of Rep1 destroys its ability to mediate plasmid
segregation.
|
| |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
We have used two-hybrid and in vitro baiting assays to determine
the regions of the yeast 2µm plasmid-encoded proteins Rep1 and Rep2
that mediate the interactions of these proteins and a Southwestern
assay to identify Rep2 DNA-binding activity. These interactions are
summarized in Fig. 5. A plasmid
segregation assay was used to demonstrate that amino-terminal deletions
of Rep1 that abolish Rep1-Rep2 interaction and a carboxy-terminal
deletion that does not impair this interaction both result in loss of
Rep protein-mediated plasmid partitioning.
|
The predicted amino acid sequence of the Rep proteins reveals little about how they mediate plasmid partitioning. Proteins with functions analogous to those of Rep1 and Rep2 are encoded by other 2µm-like plasmids in several closely related yeasts, Zygosaccharomyces rouxii, Zygosaccharomyces bisporus, and Kluyveromyces marxianus (33). Despite the lack of any apparent DNA sequence homology between these yeast plasmids, all share remarkably similar structures; they are similar in size and have a large perfect inverted repeat which divides the plasmid into two unique regions encoding at least three ORFs and a locus required in cis for mitotic stability (33). The encoded proteins include a site-specific recombinase which, like 2µm Flp, promotes amplification of the plasmids by catalyzing recombination between the inverted repeats and two proteins which, like Rep1 and Rep2, are required in trans for mitotic stability of the plasmids. The Rep1-equivalent trans-acting stability factors encoded by the other 2µm-like plasmids share a limited degree of amino acid sequence similarity with 2µm Rep1, whereas the Rep2-like factors are too dissimilar to be aligned (24). The first 129 amino acids of 2µm Rep1, which we have shown to be essential and sufficient for Rep1 self-association and for interaction with Rep2, include a domain which is conserved between Rep1 and the Rep1-like ORFs from the other 2µm-like plasmids (6). The proteins share about 44% amino acid similarity across a 60-amino-acid stretch (residues 30 to 89) (24). The sequence conservation in this amino-terminal domain may reflect its dual functions of mediating Rep1 and Rep2 interaction. However, given the lack of sequence conservation between the Rep2 analogues and their inability to complement the segregation defect of rep2 derivatives of 2µm-like plasmids other than their own, we might not expect the Rep1-Rep2 interaction domain to be as highly conserved as the Rep1 self-association domain (24). In our in vitro association assay, deletion of the first 76 amino acids of Rep1 reduced but did not abolish Rep1 self-association, while data from Velmurugan et al. (36) demonstrated that loss of the first 100 amino acids of Rep1 abolished interaction with both Rep1 and Rep2. Taken together, these data imply that residues critical for Rep1 self-association lie between residues 76 and 100. Almost completely contained within this region is the most significant block of identity shared by the different Rep1 proteins, a region spanning residues 72 to 85. We suggest that this conserved block is at least part of the Rep1 self-association domain. Our data do not allow us to precisely delineate the Rep1 domain responsible for Rep2 interaction, other than by indicating that residues amino terminal to residue 77 and those between positions 77 and 129 must be required.
The inability of the amino-terminally truncated Rep1 fusion proteins
analyzed in our study to interact with Rep2 or to provide Rep1 plasmid
segregation function indicates that the carboxy-terminal two-thirds of
the protein is insufficient for these functions. Interestingly,
deletion of this carboxy-terminal portion of Rep1 appeared to enhance
both Rep1 self-association and interaction with Rep2, suggesting that
this region may play an inhibitory role in Rep protein interactions.
Despite the ability of carboxy-terminally truncated Rep1 to associate
with both Rep1 and Rep2, the truncated protein was unable to promote
segregation of a rep1
2µm-based plasmid,
indicating that this domain is required for the plasmid segregation
function of Rep1. Examination of the amino acid sequence of S. cerevisiae Rep1 has revealed that the carboxy-terminal 40% of the
protein has about 60% similarity to two coiled-coil proteins: myosin
heavy chain and the intermediate filament protein vimentin
(38). This carboxy-terminal domain of Rep1 also shows some
degree of conservation between Rep1 analogues from other 2µm-like
plasmids, although to a lesser extent than that observed for the
amino-terminal domain; only 37% similarity is present over an
80-amino-acid stretch (24). Subcellular fractionation experiments have shown that S. cerevisiae Rep1 copurifies
with a nuclear karyoskeletal fraction (38). These
observations have led to the suggestion that Rep1 intercalates in the
nuclear matrix or lamina by means of this carboxy-terminal domain to
provide dispersed attachment sites for the 2µm plasmid, thereby
ensuring its efficient partitioning when the nucleus divides
(38). If Rep1 is normally tethered at these sites through
this domain, the Rep1 two-hybrid fusion proteins may be restricted in
their ability to participate in the two-hybrid assay. Deletion of this domain may release the sequestered proteins and may account for the
enhanced two-hybrid interaction of carboxy-terminally truncated Rep1
with Rep2.
Protein interaction assays with truncated versions of Rep2 showed that the amino-terminal 58 amino acids were sufficient for promoting interaction with Rep1 and, to a lesser extent, self-association but that the carboxy-terminal 239 amino acids promoted self-association. The in vitro baiting assay also indicated that this carboxy-terminal protein of Rep2 might interact with Rep1. These nonoverlapping interaction domains raise the possibility that the Rep proteins can form a multimeric complex in vivo and may explain their inherent insolubility when they are purified from yeast. Further deletion derivatives of both Rep1 and Rep2 are needed to precisely delineate which protein domains determine the ability of the Rep proteins to interact with and to mediate 2µm plasmid segregation.
Most models of 2µm plasmid segregation predict that Rep1 and/or Rep2 will interact with the DNA repeats of the plasmid STB locus. Direct association of either of the Rep proteins with any 2µm DNA sequence has not previously been demonstrated. Evidence for such an association in vivo comes from observations of alterations in the DNase sensitivity of the STB region when Rep1 is not expressed in the cell and in that of the FLP promoter region, if either Rep1 or Rep2 is absent, compared to the pattern observed in [cir+] cells (34). These alterations might also occur if the Rep proteins interact with host proteins that bind to the DNA rather than binding directly to the DNA themselves. Hadfield et al. (13) reported an uncharacterized yeast host protein that interacts with the 2µm segregation locus, STB, in vitro. The binding activity was observed only in urea-solubilized yeast extracts isolated from cells expressing both Rep1 and Rep2 or in [cir0] extracts to which exogenous Rep1 and Rep2 had been added. This result suggests that the host protein may need to interact with the Rep1-Rep2 complex in order to bind STB or that Rep1 and Rep2 may need the host factor to promote formation of a complex that binds STB. The requirement for urea solubilization of the host factor may indicate that this protein(s) is normally associated with a subcellular structure (13). Our Southwestern assay demonstrated that Rep2 can preferentially bind STB DNA, but efficient binding of Rep2 to other AT-rich repeated DNA sequences has also been observed (M. J. Dobson, unpublished results). It is possible that additional sequence specificity is conferred when Rep2 is associated with Rep1 or other host proteins. Recently, Velmurugan et al. (36) isolated a potential candidate for a host protein involved in STB binding when they identified the SHF1 gene on the basis of its ability to activate expression of a reporter gene lying downstream of the STB repeats in a one-hybrid screen.
On the basis of the data presented here and in previous studies of the 2µm plasmid, we propose a model for plasmid partitioning in which there is competition between the Rep proteins for heterodimerization versus self-association. In this model, the Rep1-Rep2 complex is the functional unit for segregation, with Rep2 mediating polymerization of a multimeric Rep protein complex along the STB locus, both through its DNA-binding activity and its potential ability to interact simultaneously with both Rep1 and Rep2. Homodimerization of Rep1 may block the formation or allow the disassembly of this partitioning complex in synchrony with detachment of chromosomal kinetochores from the spindle apparatus during mitosis. The overlap in Rep1 of the regions required for Rep2 interaction and for self-association suggests that these two interactions may be mutually exclusive. Support for this comes from the results of in vitro assays similar to those reported here in which simultaneous addition of Rep1 and Rep2 fusion proteins to GST-Rep1 beads reduced the amounts of bound protein for both compared to when either was added alone, whereas no reduction was observed when they were both added to GST-Rep2 beads (30). In our baiting assays, deletion of the carboxy-terminal portion of Rep1 consistently led to an increase in the amount of self-association of Rep1 while the effect on Rep2 interaction was generally less pronounced. These results suggest that the carboxy-terminal region of Rep1 may inhibit the ability of the amino-terminal domain to interact with either Rep1 or Rep2. In vivo, it is possible that host proteins interacting with the carboxy-terminal domain of Rep1 influence the balance between hetero- and homodimerization and hence between formation and disassembly of the partitioning complex.
There is some experimental support for this model. First, insufficient
expression of Rep1 relative to normal Rep2 levels should disrupt
segregation of 2µm-based plasmids. Cashmore et al. (5) have shown that a single chromosomally integrated copy of the REP2 gene expressed from its own promoter was able to fully
complement the segregation defect of a multicopy
rep2
plasmid. In contrast, one integrated copy
of the REP1 gene was not sufficient to stabilize a multicopy
rep1
plasmid. When the number of integrated
copies of the REP1 gene was increased, the stability of the
rep1
plasmid increased. These results suggest
that Rep1 expression must reach a certain level for efficient plasmid
segregation to be established. Further support for this model comes
from the experiments of Hadfield et al. (13), in which an
observed in vitro STB-binding activity was found to be
dependent on the relative levels of expression of Rep1 and Rep2,
insufficient Rep1 relative to Rep2 resulting in reduced binding.
Second, if the only requirement for segregation is to maintain a sufficient supply of the Rep1-Rep2 heterodimer, overexpressing Rep1, without altering Rep2 levels, should have no effect on plasmid segregation. Support for this possibility comes from experiments in which an efficient heterologous promoter was used to direct expression of the REP1 ORF on a 2µm-based vector in a [cir+] cell (6). The plasmid displayed high mitotic stability, suggesting that segregation was unperturbed. Concomitant overexpression of Rep1 and Rep2 might have an effect on the cell if the excess Rep1-Rep2 complex can polymerize on other chromosomal DNA sequences, forming a functioning partitioning complex, or is otherwise able to interact with and titrate host proteins, preventing them from performing their normal functions. These host proteins might be required for mediating chromosome segregation. Reynolds et al. (27) reported a reduction in the growth rate of [cir0] cells when Rep1 and Rep2 were simultaneously overexpressed under the control of the GAL1-10 promoter. This reduced growth was not observed when either of the Rep proteins was overexpressed alone, suggesting that the Rep1-Rep2 complex was interfering with some normal cellular process. We are currently continuing our studies to further elucidate the nature of the Rep1-Rep2 complex and to determine the host proteins with which it interacts to ensure the efficient segregation of the 2µm plasmid when the nucleus divides.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
We acknowledge that Kristina Blomqvist and Arpita Sengupta contributed equally to this research.
This work was supported by research grant number OGP0155268 from the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada. K.B. was supported by a postdoctoral fellowship from the Swedish Foundation for International Cooperation in Research and Higher Education. A.P. was supported by an NSERC postgraduate scholarship.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada B3H 4H7. Phone: (902) 494-7182. Fax: (902) 494-1355. E-mail: DOBSON{at}is.dal.ca.
Present address: Department of Biotechnology, Royal Institute of
Technology, S-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. |
Ahn, Y.-T.,
X.-L. Wu,
S. Biswal,
S. Velmurugan,
F. C. Volkert, and M. Jayaram.
1997.
The 2µm-encoded Rep1 and Rep2 proteins interact with each other and colocalize to the Saccharomyces cerevisiae nucleus.
J. Bacteriol.
179:7497-7506 |
| 2. | Bartel, P., C. T. Chien, R. Sternglanz, and S. Fields. 1993. Using the two-hybrid system to detect protein-protein interaction, p. 153-179. In D. A. Hartley (ed.), Cellular interactions in development: a practical approach. IRL Press, Oxford, United Kingdom. |
| 3. | Beggs, J. D. 1978. Transformation of yeast by a replicating hybrid plasmid. Nature 275:104-109[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 4. | Broach, J. R., and J. B. Hicks. 1980. Replication and recombination functions associated with the yeast plasmid, 2µm circle. Cell 21:501-508[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 5. | Cashmore, A. M., M. S. Albury, C. Hadfield, and P. A. Meacock. 1986. Genetic analysis of partitioning functions encoded by the 2µm circle of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol. Gen. Genet. 203:154-162[CrossRef]. |
| 6. |
Dobson, M. J.,
F. E. Yull,
M. Molina,
S. M. Kingsman, and A. J. Kingsman.
1988.
Reconstruction of the yeast 2µm plasmid partitioning mechanism.
Nucleic Acids Res.
16:7103-7117 |
| 7. |
Durfee, T.,
K. Becherer,
P. Chen,
S. Yeh,
Y. Yang,
A. E. Kilburn,
W. Lee, and S. J. Elledge.
1993.
The retinoblastoma protein associates with the protein phosphatase type 1 catalytic subunit.
Genes Dev.
7:555-569 |
| 8. | Futcher, A. B. 1986. Copy number amplification of the 2µm circle plasmid of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. J. Theor. Biol. 119:197-204[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 9. | Futcher, A. B. 1988. The 2µm circle plasmid of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Yeast 4:27-40[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 10. |
Futcher, A. B., and B. S. Cox.
1983.
Maintenance of the 2µm circle plasmid in populations of Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
J. Bacteriol.
154:612-622 |
| 11. | Gietz, R. D., R. H. Schiestl, A. R. Willems, and R. A. Woods. 1995. Studies on the transformation of intact yeast cells by the LiAc/SS-DNA/PEG procedure. Yeast 11:355-360[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 12. | Gottschling, D. E., O. M. Aparicio, B. L. Billington, and V. A. Zakian. 1990. Position effect at Saccharomyces cerevisiae telomeres: reversible repression of polII transcription. Cell 63:751-762[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 13. |
Hadfield, C.,
R. C. Mount, and A. M. Cashmore.
1995.
Protein binding interactions at the STB locus of the yeast 2µm plasmid.
Nucleic Acids Res.
23:995-1002 |
| 14. | Harlow, E., and D. Lane. 1988. Antibodies: a laboratory manual. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y. |
| 15. | Hartley, J. L., and J. E. Donelson. 1980. Nucleotide sequence of the yeast plasmid. Nature 286:860-865[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 16. | Jayaram, M., Y.-Y. Li, and J. R. Broach. 1983. The yeast plasmid 2µm circle encodes components required for its high copy propagation. Cell 34:95-104[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 17. |
Jayaram, M.,
A. Sutton, and J. R. Broach.
1985.
Properties of REP3: a cis-acting locus required for stable propagation of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae plasmid 2µm circle.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
5:2466-2475 |
| 18. | Kikuchi, Y. 1983. Yeast plasmid requires a cis-acting locus and two plasmid proteins for its stable maintenance. Cell 35:487-493[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 19. | Koerner, T. J., J. E. Hill, A. M. Myers, and A. Tzagoloff. 1991. High expression vectors with multiple cloning sites for construction of trpE fusion genes: pATH vectors. Methods Enzymol. 194:477-490[Medline]. |
| 20. | Laemmli, U. K. 1970. Cleavage of structural proteins during the assembly of the head of bacteriophage T4. Nature 227:680-685[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 21. |
Mellor, J.,
A. M. Fulton,
M. J. Dobson,
N. A. Roberts,
W. Wilson,
A. J. Kingsman, and S. M. Kingsman.
1985.
The Ty transposon of Saccharomyces cerevisiae determines the synthesis of at least three proteins.
Nucleic Acids Res.
13:6249-6263 |
| 22. | Murray, A. W., and J. W. Szostak. 1983. Pedigree analysis of plasmid segregation in yeast. Cell 34:961-970[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 23. | Murray, J. A. H., and G. Cesareni. 1986. Functional analysis of the yeast plasmid partition locus STB. EMBO J. 5:3391-3399[Medline]. |
| 24. | Murray, J. A. H., G. Cesareni, and P. Argos. 1988. Unexpected divergence and molecular coevolution in yeast plasmids. J. Mol. Biol. 200:601-607[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 25. | Murray, J. A. H., M. Scarpa, N. Rossi, and G. Cesareni. 1987. Antagonistic controls regulate copy number of the yeast 2µm plasmid. EMBO J. 6:4205-4212[Medline]. |
| 26. | Pringle, J. R., A. E. M. Adams, D. G. Drubin, and B. K. Haarer. 1991. Immunofluorescence methods for yeast. Methods Enzymol. 194:565-602[Medline]. |
| 27. |
Reynolds, A. E.,
A. W. Murray, and J. W. Szostak.
1987.
Roles of the 2µm gene products in stable maintenance of the 2µm plasmid of Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
7:3566-3573 |
| 28. | Rose, M. D., F. Winston, and P. Hieter. 1990. Methods in yeast genetics, a laboratory course manual. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y. |
| 29. | Sambrook, J., E. F. Fritsch, and T. Maniatis. 1989. Molecular cloning, a laboratory manual, 2nd ed. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y. |
| 30. | Scott-Drew, S., and J. A. H. Murray. 1998. Localization and interaction of the protein components of the yeast 2µm circle plasmid patitioning system suggest a mechanism for plasmid inheritance. J. Cell Sci. 111:1779-1789[Abstract]. |
| 31. | Som, T., K. A. Armstrong, F. C. Volkert, and J. R. Broach. 1988. Autoregulation of 2µm circle gene expression provides a model for maintenance of stable plasmid copy levels. Cell 52:27-37[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 32. |
Towbin, H.,
T. Staehelin, and J. Gordon.
1979.
Electrophoretic transfer of proteins from polyacrylamide gels to nitrocellulose sheets: procedure and some applications.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
76:4350-4354 |
| 33. |
Utatsu, I.,
S. Sakamoto,
T. Imura, and A. Toh-e.
1987.
Yeast plasmids resembling 2µm DNA: regional similarities and diversities at the molecular level.
J. Bacteriol.
169:5537-5545 |
| 34. |
Veit, B. E., and W. L. Fangman.
1985.
Chromatin organization of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae 2µm plasmid depends on plasmid-encoded products.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
5:2190-2196 |
| 35. |
Veit, B. E., and W. L. Fangman.
1988.
Copy number and partition of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae 2µm plasmid controlled by transcription regulators.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
8:4949-4957 |
| 36. |
Velmurugan, S.,
Y. Ahn,
X. Yang,
X. Wu, and M. Jayaram.
1998.
The 2µm plasmid stability system: analyses of the interactions among plasmid and host encoded components.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
18:7466-7477 |
| 37. | Volkert, F. C., and J. R. Broach. 1986. Site-specific recombination promotes plasmid amplification in yeast. Cell 46:541-550[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 38. |
Wu, L. C.,
P. A. Fisher, and J. R. Broach.
1987.
A yeast plasmid partitioning protein is a karyoskeletal component.
J. Biol. Chem.
262:883-891 |
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»