2011
DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkr070
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Using a structural and logics systems approach to infer bHLH–DNA binding specificity determinants

Abstract: Numerous efforts are underway to determine gene regulatory networks that describe physical relationships between transcription factors (TFs) and their target DNA sequences. Members of paralogous TF families typically recognize similar DNA sequences. Knowledge of the molecular determinants of protein–DNA recognition by paralogous TFs is of central importance for understanding how small differences in DNA specificities can dictate target gene selection. Previously, we determined the in vitro DNA binding specific… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

5
91
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 73 publications
(96 citation statements)
references
References 51 publications
5
91
0
Order By: Relevance
“…1), and there is a corresponding paucity in the diversity of preferred recognition sequences observed for the characterized HD population (Berger et al 2008;Noyes et al 2008a). This focused sequence preference is similar to many other families of DNA-binding domains (Deppmann et al 2006;Wei et al 2010;De Masi et al 2011) and could be the result of a general constraint of the domain architecture on its recognition potential. Consistent with this conjecture, previous attempts to select HDs with novel specificity have not succeeded in achieving dramatic alterations in recognition potential (Pomerantz and Sharp 1994;Connolly et al 1999).…”
supporting
confidence: 54%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…1), and there is a corresponding paucity in the diversity of preferred recognition sequences observed for the characterized HD population (Berger et al 2008;Noyes et al 2008a). This focused sequence preference is similar to many other families of DNA-binding domains (Deppmann et al 2006;Wei et al 2010;De Masi et al 2011) and could be the result of a general constraint of the domain architecture on its recognition potential. Consistent with this conjecture, previous attempts to select HDs with novel specificity have not succeeded in achieving dramatic alterations in recognition potential (Pomerantz and Sharp 1994;Connolly et al 1999).…”
supporting
confidence: 54%
“…The diversity in zinc finger protein (ZFP) recognition potential is even manifest within the human population, where differences in the fingers present in PRDM9 and their resulting specificity lead to differences in the location of meiotic recombination hotspots in individuals (Baudat et al 2010). In this regard, ZFPs appear to be an outlier, as most other well-characterized families of DNA-binding domains-like HDs-display limited diversity in their core recognition motifs and the recognition residues that they employ (Deppmann et al 2006;Wei et al 2010;De Masi et al 2011). It is possible that the recognition potential of these other families of DNA-binding domains are similarly constrained.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For structural reasons, individual bHLH proteins display a preference towards particular E-box half-sites, which however, does not necessarily predict the exact binding site of a given hetero-dimer that can even vary at different sites of the genome [9]. Class II bHLH factors cannot form homo-dimers and exert their transcriptional function only in concert with a class I or E-protein such as TCF4 [1].…”
Section: The Basic-helix-loop-helix Protein Tcf4mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our comparative DNA retardation assay showed that VP80 efficiently binds DNA in an E-box-independent manner, at least under in vitro conditions. Recently, it was shown for some other bHLH proteins, for instance, Drosophila melanogaster HLH-27 and HLH-29, that they recognize different, E-boxunrelated DNA sequence motifs (4).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%