Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Journal of Virology, November 2001, p. 10603-10611, Vol. 75, No. 22
Department of Cancer Genetics, Roswell Park
Cancer Institute, Buffalo, New York 14263
Received 25 May 2001/Accepted 13 August 2001
oriP is a 1.7-kb region of the Epstein-Barr virus
(EBV) chromosome that supports replication and stable maintenance of
plasmids in human cells that contain EBV-encoded protein EBNA1.
Plasmids that depend on oriP are replicated once per
cell cycle by cellular factors. The replicator of oriP
is an ~120-bp region called DS which depends on either of two pairs
of closely spaced EBNA1 binding sites. Here we report that changing the
distance between the EBNA1 sites of a functional pair by inserting or
deleting 1 or 2 bp abolished replication activity. The results
indicated that, while the distance separating the binding sites is
critical, the specific nucleotide sequence between them is unlikely to
be important. The use of electrophoretic mobility shift assays to
investigate binding by EBNA1 to the sites with normal or altered
spacing revealed that EBNA1 induces DNA to bend significantly when it
binds, with the center of bending coinciding with the center of
binding. EBNA1 binding to a functional pair of sites which are spaced
21 bp apart center to center and which thus are in helical phase
induces a larger symmetrical bend, which based on electrophoretic
mobility approximates the sum of two separate EBNA1-induced DNA bends. The results imply that replication from oriP requires a
precise structure in which DNA forms a large bend around two EBNA1 dimers.
When Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)
infects cells latently, its circularized chromosome is replicated only
once per cell cycle (1) by cellular enzymes, presumably
under the same regulatory control that limits initiation of replication
on cellular chromosomes. Only one EBV-encoded protein, EBNA1, is known
to participate in this replication, which it does by directing
replication to initiate at oriP. oriP is a 1.7-kb
region of the EBV chromosome that permits plasmids that carry it to be
replicated and stably maintained in human cells that contain EBNA1
(22, 37, 40). Replication initiates at or near a 120-bp
region called DS (14), for dyad symmetry, which contains
four EBNA1 binding sites. DS is also the replicator of oriP;
that is, it contains the cis-acting elements that lead DNA
replication to initiate (16, 36, 38). The other functional
component of oriP, FR, for family of repeats, is an array of
20 EBNA1 binding sites that prevents the loss of plasmids from dividing
cells (19), apparently by tethering the plasmids via EBNA1
to condensed human chromosomes during mitosis (18, 24,
30).
Replication of oriP-dependent plasmids occurs only once
within a cell cycle (39), so it has long been suspected
that DS may recruit factors that are involved in the mechanisms of
origin licensing and delicensing (4), which are believed
to control initiation of replication for the chromosomes of all
eukaryotic cells. Indeed, emerging data indicate that DS functions by
recruiting the human homologues of the eukaryotic initiation factors
ORC and MCM and that MCM, the ultimate licensing factor, associates at
or near DS during G1 and dissociates during S
phase (9, 10, 28). It thus appears that replication
initiates at or near DS and uses essentially the same set of factors
and mechanisms that operate at the replication origins of cellular
chromosomes. However, DS depends entirely on EBNA1 for its replicator
activity, and its only essential sequences are its EBNA1 binding sites
(38). EBNA1 and ORC can each be detected in
immunoprecipitates of the other from cell lysates (10,
28), so it is likely that EBNA1 is critical either for
recruiting the cellular factors or for assisting them in some manner.
In principle EBNA1 might assist the replication initiation factors in
different ways. It might recruit the factors to the vicinity in the
manner of a transcriptional enhancer without a strict positional
requirement. Where replication initiates, at or near DS, is known only
to a resolution of a few hundred base pairs (14).
Alternatively, EBNA1 might participate more directly by helping to
assemble factors locally in a more precise manner. Previously it has
been speculated that EBNA1 might have a direct role in initiation by
deforming or slightly untwisting DNA (5, 11), although it
is clear that EBNA1 is not a DNA helicase (13, 25).
Finally, EBNA1 might exclude nucleosomes from a region to permit access
by replication factors or it might position them strategically, as the
presence of a nucleosome adjacent to ORC has been found to be important
for the efficiency of the Ars1 origin in Saccharomyces
cerevisiae (21).
The arrangement of the EBNA1 binding sites at DS suggests that a
precise architecture could be important for its function. These four
sites are arranged such that the spacing between sites 1 and 2 and
between sites 3 and 4 is 21 bp center to center, exactly two turns of
the double helix, which places the bound EBNA1 dimers on the same side
of the DNA (Fig. 1A). Either pair of
sites, sites 1 and 2 or sites 3 and 4, supports replication, while
other combinations of sites do not (16, 38). Increasing
the spacing between the EBNA1 sites of either active pair by 5 or 10 bp
was found to eliminate the activity of the pair (16).
These alterations can be viewed as drastic, particularly the insertion
of 5 bp, which places the neighboring EBNA1 dimers on opposite sides of
the DNA. Nevertheless, the results demonstrated the importance of the
spacing between EBNA1 sites and accounted for the fact that the FR
component of oriP does not have detectable EBNA1-dependent
replication activity (16, 36, 38), since EBNA1 sites at FR
are spaced at 30-bp intervals.
0022-538X/01/$04.00+0 DOI: 10.1128/JVI.75.22.10603-10611.2001
Copyright © 2001, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Replication from oriP of
Epstein-Barr Virus Requires Exact Spacing of Two Bound Dimers of EBNA1
Which Bend DNA
![]()
ABSTRACT
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
![]()
INTRODUCTION
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References

View larger version (37K):
[in a new window]
FIG. 1.
EBNA1 binding sites at DS of oriP and
mutations that alter their spacing. (A) EBNA1 dimers (double spheres)
bound to their four sites at the ~120-bp replicator DS. Distances
between the centers of the binding sites and some restriction sites are
indicated. (B) Nucleotide sequences between the active pairs of EBNA1
sites 3 and 4 and 1 and 2 for wild-type (WT) and mutants, with the
outermost two nucleotides of each EBNA1 site underlined. The boundaries
of the 16-bp palindromic EBNA1 binding site were determined in a study
of synthetic sites and from crystallographic data (3, 5).
Substituted or inserted nucleotides are in bold; dots indicate deleted
nucleotides.
For this study, we tested just how critical the spacing between EBNA1 binding sites might be for replicator function by altering the spacing by just 1 or 2 bp. Such mutations abolished activity, indicating that a very specific structure composed of adjacent EBNA1 dimers is essential. While measuring the binding of EBNA1 to sites with altered spacing, we found that EBNA1 bends DNA when it binds and estimated that binding of EBNA1 to an active pair of sites at DS bends the DNA by perhaps 90° or more.
| |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Plasmids and oriP mutations.
All mutations in
oriP were constructed in pHEBo, a 7.2-kb plasmid that
contains oriP and that confers on human cells resistance to
hygromycin B (32). Plasmids harboring the dpm
(double point mutation) mutations that inactivate individual EBNA1
binding sites and the 5- and 10-bp insertion mutations
(16) were kindly provided by Janet Hearing. Plasmids with
DS (p571),
FR (p413),
2&4 (p658), and
1&2 (p740)
alterations in oriP have been described (38). In p740, EBNA1 sites 1 and 2 at DS have been replaced by an
XbaI site and the EcoRV site at nucleotide (nt)
8992 has been converted to an SstI site. An
AvrII site was created between EBNA1 sites 3 and 4 of p740,
as indicated in Fig. 1B, using divergent primers 5'-CGCCTAGGGTAACATATGCTATTGAATTAGGGT and
5'-CGCCTAGGGGAAGCATATGCTATCGAATTAGGGT to amplify DNA
segments in each direction by PCR; the flanking primers used for
amplification were ODJ4 (5'-GGAATCCTGACCCCATGT) and ODJ10
(5'-AACGTCAATCAGAGGGGC), which have 5' ends at nt 8943 and
9220, respectively. The two products were cut with AvrII, ligated together, cut with SstI and XbaI, and
used to replace this section of p740. The 1-bp deletion at nt 9053 was
found unintentionally in one clone that was tested for this
construction. The other deletions and insertions between sites 3 and 4 were then made using primers containing the AvrII site and
the desired mutations to amplify site 4 and sequences extending
leftward beyond the SstI site. The 1&2 plasmids of Fig. 2C
lack EBNA1 sites 3 and 4 at DS and are based on p715 (38);
1&2c (p718) is similar but has consensus mutations in sites 1 and 2 that slightly increase replication activity (38). The 1-bp
insertion between sites 1 and 2 was introduced into p718 using a primer
including the XbaI site to the left of site 2 and extending
into site 1 to amplify DNA extending rightward beyond the
HpaI site, which was used to replace the DNA between the
XbaI and HpaI sites of p718. The resulting "+1" mutant plasmid also acquired a partial copy of this sequence, which added half of site 2 followed by an intact site 1 at the HpaI site. Mutant plasmid 1&2m contains the intended 1-bp
insertion between sites 1 and 2 but also has 1 bp deleted from the
center of site 2.
Plasmid replication assays. EBNA1-expressing 143B cells were described previously as 143/SVoB-H2.9, clone 4 (40). Assays for plasmid replication assays following transient transfection and for maintenance under selection were done as described in detail previously (38). Briefly, for transient transfections, duplicate 6-cm-diameter dishes of cells were transfected with 2.5 µg of plasmid as calcium phosphate coprecipitates followed by a glycerol shock, and the dishes in each pair were expanded into two 10-cm-diameter dishes the next day. To measure EBNA1-independent replication, transfected 293 cells were washed twice in phosphate-buffered saline containing 1 mM EDTA to remove extracellular plasmids before replating. Plasmids were extracted using a standard alkaline lysis protocol, digested with BamHI and DpnI, and detected by Southern analysis. For maintenance under selection, just 1/10 of the cells were replated into 6-cm-diameter dishes the day after transfection and cultured in the presence of 275 µg of hygromycin B per ml beginning the following day. Plasmids that failed to replicate gave primarily colonies that aborted by 2 weeks (due to the maintenance function of FR of oriP and EBNA1 [19, 27]), so approximately 4 weeks were required to expand these cultures enough to cover 10-cm-diameter dishes before harvesting plasmids. For replication-competent plasmids that gave stable colonies under selection, the cultures were split back as needed and harvested after 3 weeks under selection.
Electrophoretic mobility shift assays (EMSA).
Assays were
performed as described previously (38). EBNA1 N
407 was
a generous gift from David Mackey and Bill Sugden. End-labeled DNA
fragments spanning DS were made using primers ODJ4 and ODJ10 to extend
from nt 8943 to 9220 except when testing DS versions carrying the 47-bp
deletion removing EBNA1 sites 1 and 2, in which case the boundary on
the right was moved to nt 9266 to keep the size and center of the
fragment similar to those of the other fragments.
Circular permutation assay.
Using p740 (38),
which lacks EBNA1 sites 1 and 2, as a template for PCR, the sequence
from nt 8967 to 9295 was amplified using primers that added a
BglII site to the left end and a BamHI site to
the right end. The DNA fragment was digested with BstYI, which cuts both restriction sites, and inserted in tandem duplication between the BglII and BamHI sites of a derivative
of pUC12 which contains a BglII site inserted at the
EcoRI site. The duplicated region was amplified using
standard sequencing primers and labeled internally with
[
-32P]dATP at a specific activity of 3 µCi/nmol. The product was cut with different restriction enzymes, and
the unit length fragments were purified by agarose gel electrophoresis
and diluted with unlabeled fragments to a specific activity of 4,000 cpm per 15 fmol for use in EMSA with a 4% polyacrylamide gel. The
electrophoretic mobilities were plotted using Origin, version 5, software, and curves were drawn using the spline curve function. The
data were plotted twice in tandem to extend for two cycles so that the
curves would be continuous at the ends. Only a single cycle is shown in
Fig. 4C.
| |
RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
EBNA1 sites must be exactly 21 bp apart at their centers to support
replication.
To test the importance of the spacing between EBNA1
binding sites 3 and 4 at DS, we used a derivative of
oriP-containing plasmid pHEBo, from which EBNA1 binding
sites 1 and 2 at DS were deleted and which thus depends on sites 3 and
4 to replicate (38). Just 5 nucleotides, CGTTG,
separate the boundaries of the 16-bp EBNA1 binding sites 3 and 4. The
identity of the bases at these five positions is unlikely to be
very important since sites 1 and 2 are separated by ACCCG. To
facilitate the construction of mutants with altered spacing between
these sites, 2 bp between sites 3 and 4 were altered to create an
AvrII restriction site (Fig. 1). This altered DS half,
called 3&4, supported plasmid replication about as well as wild-type DS
during 2 to 3 days following transfection of EBNA1-containing 143B
cells (Fig. 2A) and during 3 weeks
while the cells were grown under selection with hygromycin B (Fig. 2B). Deletions of 1 or 2 bp and an insertion of 2 bp were introduced between
sites 3 and 4, as shown in Fig. 1B. Each of the mutations that altered
the spacing between the sites reduced replication activity to the
background level in the transient transfection assay and eliminated
plasmid maintenance under selection (Fig. 2A and B).
|
The spacing mutants abolish DS activity by interfering with EBNA1 function. Some replication activity that is independent of EBNA1 has been attributed to oriP (2, 18), although such activity appears to be very inefficient compared to EBNA1-dependent replication (18, 38). To test whether the altered spacing between sites 3 and 4 might affect replication in the absence of EBNA1, plasmids were introduced into 293 cells and harvested 48 h later for analysis. In several experiments, one of which is shown in Fig. 2D, pHEBo, carrying wild-type oriP, replicated 2-fold to 3.5-fold more efficiently than vector pHyg did alone. The small magnitude of this difference and the weak signals made it necessary to normalize the amount of replicated, DpnI-resistant plasmids to the total amount of plasmids taken up by the cells (Fig. 2D, bottom). Deletion of FR from oriP lowered the efficiency of replication by nearly 50%, on average, but deletion of DS had no measurable effect, as noted previously (38). Likewise, in the absence of EBNA1, the 2-bp insertion between sites 3 and 4 had no effect on the inefficient replication of the plasmid carrying only these sites at DS.
It is useful to consider the activity of the spacing mutants in the EBNA1-positive cells (Fig. 2A and C) in light of the fact that the EBNA1-independent activity of oriP is not affected by the spacing between EBNA1 sites or, for that matter, by the presence or absence of DS at all. This means that the very low relative activity of the spacing mutants in the presence of EBNA1, typically only a few percent, provides an independent view of the inefficiency of EBNA1-independent replication compared to EBNA1-dependent replication. We conclude that the DS site spacing mutants essentially abolish the capacity of oriP to support replication by interfering with EBNA1 function.Binding of EBNA1 to sites with altered spacing. For each functional pair of EBNA1 binding sites at DS there is one site with relatively high affinity, site 1 or 4, and one site with relatively low affinity, site 2 or 3. At limiting EBNA1 concentrations, binding to each weaker site can depend on binding to its partner site of higher affinity, revealing cooperativity (16, 33). We tested how the altered spacing between sites 3 and 4 affected their ability to bind EBNA1 using EMSA as described previously (38). We also examined the 5- and 10-bp insertions previously studied by Harrison et al. (16). It was necessary to use the DNA-binding domain of EBNA1 without the amino-terminal half of the protein, which causes aggregation of EBNA1-DNA complexes (25).
The results are shown in Fig. 3A for the binding of EBNA1 N
407 (23) to a 278-bp DNA with sites 3 and 4 near its center. For the mutants with altered spacing, the EMSA
patterns differed from the wild-type pattern in two ways. Most obvious
is that the complex formed by simultaneous binding to both sites varied
markedly in mobility as the spacing was changed, while the complex with only one site bound varied little. This is because EBNA1 bends DNA when
it binds and because altered spacing changes the helical phase between
the two bends, which changes the overall DNA shape and mobility through
a gel matrix.
|
407 for binding. When EBNA1
N
407 was used in excess (lanes 9 to 15), both sites were bound even
with the spacing altered. However, with the
1 and
2 mutants, the
complex with both sites occupied was unstable and dissociated during
electrophoresis, producing a smear in the gel between the positions of
the complexes that have one site bound and two sites bound. A similar
streak was also evident, though much less prominent, for the mutants
with increased spacing. With the sites brought closer together,
adjacent EBNA1 N
407 dimers might be expected to interfere with each
other's binding. With increased spacing, it is expected that
cooperative interactions between the adjacent DNA-binding domain dimers
would be lost, causing binding to be less stable at the lower-affinity
site, site 3.
DNA bending by EBNA1 bound to one or multiple sites. The results of Fig. 3A indicated that EMSA could be used to gain information about the architecture of DS complexes with multiple sites bound by EBNA1. An initial step was to investigate the bending of DS DNA with EBNA1 bound to one or both sites of an active pair using a circular permutation assay (35). The basis for the assay is that a bend in DNA will reduce electrophoretic mobility the most when it is at the center of a linear fragment, whereas the closer the bend is to an end, the less effect it will have.
A 288-bp DNA spanning DS (with sites 1 and 2 deleted) and containing several unique restriction sites was cloned in a plasmid in tandem duplication (Fig. 4B). Six restriction enzymes were used to cut out six different DNA templates, all having the same length and DNA sequence but in circular permutation, with the EBNA1 sites positioned from one end to the other. These were compared by EMSA using limiting amounts of EBNA1 N
407 (Fig. 4A). Without EBNA1 bound, the permuted fragments all migrated at about the same
rate, indicating that the DNA segment does not have an intrinsic bend.
The complexes with one site bound and two sites bound both revealed one
obvious bend.
|
Changing the helical phase between two EBNA1-induced bends. With 10.5 bp per average turn of B form DNA (26), the 21-bp spacing between the centers of the EBNA1 binding sites of a functional pair is expected to place the two protein dimers in helical phase. This places both DNA bends in the same geometric plane, which makes the bend angles directly additive, giving twice the bend. (Of course, interactions between adjacent bound EBNA1 dimers could affect the bending.) Inserting 5 bp between the sites changes the helical phase by about 180 degrees, causing the two bends to cancel each other in a zigzag. Inserting 10 bp changes the phase very little, allowing the two bends to add directly, giving the greatest net bend. Insertions of intermediate sizes reduce net bending intermediately. This is the basis for helical phase analysis of DNA bending (35).
The results from EMSA of the spacing mutants, shown in Fig. 3, are in general agreement with considerations of phasing but do not fit as well when the EBNA1 binding sites are brought closer together. Inserting or deleting 2 bp, for example, should have the same effect on phasing, only with opposite rotation, and would affect net bending to the same extent if neither helical twist nor bending angles were affected by crowding. However, as is apparent from the graph of Fig. 3B, deletion of 1 bp reduced bending by more than the insertion of 2 bp, while deletion of 2 bp reduced bending by nearly as much as the insertion of 5 bp. This suggests that, when the EBNA1 dimers are brought too close together, less bending is possible, which is consistent with structural data (5). The reduced bending implies an altered interaction between EBNA1 and its binding sites which would account for the lower binding affinity. It is of interest that the insertion of 10 bp between sites 3 and 4 caused the relative electrophoretic mobility of the complex with both sites bound to increase slightly but reproducibly, by about 6% (Fig. 3). About one-half of this increase is expected because the 10-bp insertion moved the center of net bending 5 bp farther away from the center of the DNA fragment. If the inserted 10 bp do not make an exact helical turn, this should also contribute slightly to less overall bending and higher mobility. With these factors taken into account, it appears that DNA bending at sites 3 and 4 when the sites are close together in their functional arrangement is similar to DNA bending when the sites are separated by an additional helical turn.Bending of DS DNA by EBNA1 binding to up to four sites.
When
limiting amounts of the EBNA1 DNA-binding domain are allowed to bind to
the entire DS, complexes with five different mobilities are observed,
as shown in Fig. 5A, lane 2, rather than four, as would be expected without considering DNA bending and phasing.
The explanation is that, when two sites are bound, two different
amounts of net bending are possible, depending on whether the two sites
are within an active pair, and thus are in helical phase, or not. Only
one amount of net bending is possible when only one site is bound, when
only one site is not bound, or when all four sites are bound. An
experiment using point mutations to prevent binding to specific sites,
shown in Fig. 5B, revealed that the complex called 2 IP (for in phase)
contains the complexes formed when the sites of an active pair, 1 and 2 or 3 and 4, are both occupied. Other combinations of two sites, where
one site is from each functional half of DS (primarily 1 and 4, the two stronger sites), are responsible for the complex called 2 OP (out of
phase). 2 OP migrates faster than 2 IP because 33 bp separates the
centers of sites 2 and 3, which means that sites 1 and 4 (or 2 and 3 or
1 and 3 or 2 and 4) are out of phase by about 1.5 bp or about 50° of
rotation, causing the two DNA bends to be less than fully additive.
|
4 > 2
3, as indicated by previous studies (3, 16, 33). Some previous notions about the cooperativity of binding (16, 33) were also confirmed. For example, with site 1 inactive, as seen in lane 3 of Fig. 5A, the 2 IP complex involves sites 3 and 4 while the predominant 2 OP complex involves sites 2 and 4. (The 2 OP complex involving the two weaker sites, 2 and
3, should have migrated separately, like the complex involving sites 1 and 4 in the adjacent lane, but was not detected.) Comparing the
intensities of the two complexes reveals the preference of EBNA1 for
binding to site 3 over site 2 when site 4 is occupied. Similarly, with
site 4 inactive, as seen in lane 6, EBNA1 preferred site 2 over site 3 once EBNA1 had occupied site 1. This reveals the degree to which the
affinity of binding to each of the weaker sites is increased by the
presence of EBNA1 at the neighboring stronger site. In addition, with
all binding sites active, the two 2 IP complexes together were roughly
equal in abundance to the predominant 2 OP complex, involving sites 1 and 4, as seen, for example, in lane 2 of Fig. 5A. This indicates that
once EBNA1 has bound to one of the stronger sites, 1 or 4, it then
binds to the neighboring weaker site, 2 or 3, about as well as it does to the distant stronger site. This also indicates that binding to site
1 or 4 is not helped very much by the presence of EBNA1 at the
neighboring weaker site.
| |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The oriP replicator, DS, appears to function through cellular initiation factors ORC and MCM (9, 10, 28), but it is completely dependent on EBV-encoded protein EBNA1 for activity. It is clear from this study that the replicator requires two EBNA1 binding sites that are spaced exactly 21 bp apart, center to center, implying that an exact structure must be formed by two adjacent EBNA1 dimers bound to DNA. The two EBNA1 dimers, adjacent on the DNA and in helical phase, bend the DNA substantially, so it is possible that EBNA1 performs an architectural role, shaping the DNA to facilitate an association with cellular factors. It is also conceivable that the large DNA bend is itself important. Alternatively, the DNA bend might simply allow two EBNA1 dimers to form a particular structure, which is then able to recruit ORC and associated replication factors.
The one complicating factor with this conclusion is that each functional pair of EBNA1 binding sites at DS contains one site of relatively low affinity, to which binding by EBNA1 is aided by the presence of EBNA1 at the adjacent, higher-affinity site (16, 33). This cooperative binding to the weaker sites is mediated, at least in part, by interactions between the DNA-binding domains of adjacent EBNA1 dimers, as shown in this study and previously (33). The crystal structure that was derived for the EBNA1 DNA-binding domain bound to DNA revealed that EBNA1 DNA-binding domains should be in close contact when bound to adjacent DS sites (5). As would be expected, this cooperative interaction was found to require correct spacing between the sites (Fig. 3). In contrast, in a study using full-length EBNA1, the cooperativity of binding to the weaker sites was not noticeably diminished by increasing the distance between adjacent sites by 10 bp or, even more surprisingly, by 5 bp (16). Presumably, this longer-range cooperativity arises from the interactions between the presumably flexible amino-terminal domains of EBNA1, which have been shown to mediate DNA looping between EBNA1 molecules bound to the two components of oriP (12, 31). Based on this, our 1- or 2-bp insertions between the EBNA1 sites of a functional pair might not be expected to result in a loss of EBNA1 binding to the weaker sites in vivo, but this cannot be assured.
To address this issue, we converted site 3 to a high-affinity site by mutating 2 bp. While this enabled EBNA1 to bind to the strengthened site 3 independently of its distance from site 4, replication still required the correct spacing (data not shown). This is consistent with there being a need for two EBNA1 dimers to form a specific structure. However, this issue cannot be resolved entirely without knowing how these mutations affect the binding of EBNA1 to sites 3 and 4 in vivo.
In 1996 and 1998 the crystal structure for the EBNA1 DNA-binding domain bound to its consensus recognition sequence was reported by Bochkarev et al. (5, 6). The DNA structure was described as a distorted B form wrapping smoothly around the protein, but a value for the net angle of bending around the protein dimer was not given. In discussing how EBNA1 dimers might interact at adjacent DS sites, the authors presented a model depicting DNA bent around the EBNA1 dimers and proposed that the DNA might need to "unbend" in the middle. However, to our knowledge it has not been stated in a publication that EBNA1 induces DNA to bend when it binds until now, so DNA bending by EBNA1 has remained largely unappreciated. For example, in a 1998 publication it was noted that EBNA1 binding to DS gives complexes with five different electrophoretic mobilities instead of four, corresponding to the four binding sites, and it was suggested that a fifth EBNA1 dimer might join the EBNA1-DS complex (41). Of course, the five distinct mobilities are simply a consequence of DNA bending at the sites of binding and the helical phasing between the bends (see Results).
The data presented in this report show that EBNA1 bends DNA in solution, confirming this aspect of the crystal structure. In addition, while we did not examine bending at each EBNA1 binding site at DS individually, the results indicated that EBNA1 induces bending at all sites to a similar extent. It is of interest that EBNA1 appeared to bend DNA at sites 3 and 4 to similar extents whether the two sites had their proper spacing or were separated by an additional 10 bp. This indicates that the inferred interaction between the EBNA1 dimers at adjacent DS sites does not change the DNA conformation to any great extent. It is also interesting that EBNA1 was still able to bind to sites 3 and 4 simultaneously when the sites were brought closer together by 1 or 2 bp. The binding was unstable and resulted in less bending, suggesting a collision between the adjacent dimers, but the fact that binding could be detected indicates that some flexibility of the EBNA1-DNA structure is possible despite a cost in binding energy.
The angle by which proteins induce DNA to bend can be estimated from
the electrophoretic mobility of the complex through polyacrylamide gels
using the equation of Thompson and Landy, µM
/µE = cos
/2, where
µM and µE are the
relative mobilities with the bend placed in the middle of the DNA
fragment or at the end, respectively, and
is the angle of bending
(34). This equation gave bending angles of 55° for EBNA1
bound to site 4 and 88° for EBNA1 bound to sites 3 and 4 using the
results of Fig. 3C, which were obtained with a 4% polyacrylamide gel.
The calculation is expected to underestimate the angle, particularly for the complex with both sites bound because the bend can only be
placed near the end, not at it, so the effect of the bend cannot be
eliminated from µE. Another problem is that we
found that the ratio
µM/µE decreased as
the concentration of polyacrylamide in the gel was increased, giving
calculated angles of 64° and 104° with 6% polyacrylamide and 76°
and 112° with 8% polyacrylamide for the complexes with one site or
both sites bound, respectively. Further work might reveal the reason for this effect, in which case a comparison to DNA standards with known
angles of bending could give a reasonable estimate of the angle of
bending induced by EBNA1 in solution. The DNA-binding domain of the E2
protein of bovine papillomavirus, which has a structure very similar to
that of the EBNA1 core DNA-binding domain, was found to bend DNA by
50° in a cocrystal structure (17).
While one functional pair of EBNA1 binding sites at DS supports plasmid replication, the entire DS is needed for its full efficiency (38). The two functional pairs of EBNA1 binding sites at DS are out of helical phase with each other by 1.5 bp, assuming a helical pitch of 10.5 bp per turn, or 51° out of phase rotationally. If DNA bends 100° around each functional pair of EBNA1 dimers, this would mean that the flanking DNA helices would enter and leave the EBNA1-DS complex at an angle of about 70°. Consistent with this, Frappier and O'Donnell observed that complexes formed between EBNA1 and DS in vitro appeared as a small ball by electron microscopy, with the two arms of DNA protruding from the same side of the complex at an angle of 71° ± 45° to each other (12).
It is a common feature of DNA replication origins that their initiator proteins assemble into larger complexes with the origin DNA bent or wrapped around them. This was first noted for the O protein at the bacteriophage lambda origin and for the dnaA protein at oriC of E. coli, which participate in the initial unwinding of DNA for replication (8). The simian virus 40 initiator protein T antigen first binds to four close sites at the viral replication origin before additional molecules join to assemble into double hexamers that function as DNA helicases, with DNA bending in this case induced adjacent to the sites of T-antigen recognition (7, 29). At the replication origin of the distantly related bovine papillomavirus, cooperative DNA binding involving the T-antigen homolog, E1, and a second protein, E2, produces a sharp DNA bend (15). At replication origins of yeast chromosomes, DNA may wrap around the six-subunit origin recognition complex, ORC (20), which recruits other proteins to initiate replication.
It has been speculated that in some cases the bending of DNA at replication origins might facilitate DNA unwinding. But the most common principle might be a need for origin DNA to interact with a large complex of proteins, which DNA bending will often facilitate. This is the simplest explanation for the requirement for an exact spacing between two EBNA1 sites at the replicator of oriP; a specific structure involving two DNA-bound EBNA1 dimers might be needed to recruit ORC and associated replication initiation factors.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
We thank David Mackey and Bill Sugden for the generous gift of
EBNA1 N
407 protein, Janet Hearing for providing numerous
oriP mutants, and Gerald Koudelka for advice on DNA
bending. Sarah Camiolo constructed most of the plasmids with the
spacing mutations.
This work was supported by NIH grants CA43122 to J.L.Y. and CA16056 to the Biopolymer Facility of Roswell Park Cancer Institute.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of Cancer Genetics, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY 14263. Phone: (716) 845-8964. Fax: (716) 845-1698. E-mail: john.yates{at}roswellpark.org.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. |
Adams, A.
1987.
Replication of latent Epstein-Barr virus genomes in Raji cells.
J. Virol.
61:1743-1746 |
| 2. | Aiyar, A., C. Tyree, and B. Sugden. 1998. The plasmid replicon of EBV consists of multiple cis-acting elements that facilitate DNA synthesis by the cell and a viral maintenance element. EMBO J. 17:6394-6403[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 3. |
Ambinder, R. F.,
W. A. Shah,
D. R. Rawlins,
G. S. Hayward, and S. D. Hayward.
1990.
Definition of the sequence requirements for binding of the EBNA-1 protein to its palindromic target sites in Epstein-Barr virus DNA.
J. Virol.
64:2369-2379 |
| 4. | Blow, J. J., and R. A. Laskey. 1988. A role for the nuclear envelope in controlling DNA replication within the cell cycle. Nature 332:546-548[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 5. | Bochkarev, A., J. A. Barwell, R. A. Pfuetzner, E. Bochkareva, L. Frappier, and A. M. Edwards. 1996. Crystal structure of the DNA-binding domain of the Epstein-Barr virus origin-binding protein, EBNA1, bound to DNA. Cell 84:791-800[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 6. | Bochkarev, A., E. Bochkareva, L. Frappier, and A. M. Edwards. 1998. The 2.2 A structure of a permanganate-sensitive DNA site bound by the Epstein-Barr virus origin binding protein, EBNA1. J. Mol. Biol. 284:1273-1278[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 7. |
Borowiec, J. A.,
F. B. Dean,
P. A. Bullock, and J. Hurwitz.
1990.
Binding and unwinding how T antigen engages the SV40 origin of DNA replication.
Cell
60:181-184[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 8. | Bramhill, D., and A. Kornberg. 1988. A model for initiation at origins of DNA replication. Cell 54:915-918[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 9. |
Chaudhuri, B.,
H. Xu,
I. Todorov,
A. Dutta, and J. Yates.
2001.
Human DNA replication initiation factors, ORC and MCM, associate with oriP of Epstein-Barr virus.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
98:10085-10089 |
| 10. | Dhar, S. K., K. Yoshida, Y. Machida, P. Kaira, B. Chaudhuri, J. A. Wohlschlegel, M. Leffak, J. Yates, and A. Dutta. Replication from oriP of Epstein-Barr virus requires human ORC and is inhibited by geminin. Cell 106:287-296. |
| 11. | Edwards, A. M., A. Bochkarev, and L. Frappier. 1998. Origin DNA-binding proteins. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 8:49-53[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 12. |
Frappier, L., and M. O'Donnell.
1991.
Epstein-Barr nuclear antigen 1 mediates a DNA loop within the latent replication origin of Epstein-Barr virus.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
88:10875-10879 |
| 13. |
Frappier, L., and M. O'Donnell.
1991.
Overproduction, purification, and characterization of EBNA1, the origin binding protein of Epstein-Barr virus.
J. Biol. Chem.
266:7819-7826 |
| 14. | Gahn, T. A., and C. L. Schildkraut. 1989. The Epstein-Barr virus origin of plasmid replication, oriP, contains both the initiation and termination sites of DNA replication. Cell 58:527-535[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 15. | Gillitzer, E., G. Chen, and A. Stenlund. 2000. Separate domains in E1 and E2 proteins serve architectural and productive roles for cooperative DNA binding. EMBO J. 19:3069-3079[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 16. |
Harrison, S.,
K. Fisenne, and J. Hearing.
1994.
Sequence requirements of the Epstein-Barr virus latent origin of DNA replication.
J. Virol.
68:1913-1925 |
| 17. | Hegde, R. S., S. R. Grossman, L. A. Laimins, and P. B. Sigler. 1992. Crystal structure at 1.7 Å of the bovine papillomavirus-1 E2 DNA-binding domain bound to its DNA target. Nature 359:505-512[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 18. |
Hung, S. C.,
M. S. Kang, and E. Kieff.
2001.
Maintenance of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) oriP-based episomes requires EBV-encoded nuclear antigen-1 chromosome-binding domains, which can be replaced by high-mobility group-I or histone H1.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
98:1865-1870 |
| 19. |
Krysan, P. J.,
S. B. Haase, and M. P. Calos.
1989.
Isolation of human sequences that replicate autonomously in human cells.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
9:1026-1033 |
| 20. | Lee, D. G., and S. P. Bell. 1997. Architecture of the yeast origin recognition complex bound to origins of DNA replication. Mol. Cell. Biol. 17:7159-7168[Abstract]. |
| 21. | Lipford, J. R., and S. P. Bell. 2001. Nucleosomes positioned by ORC facilitate the initiation of DNA replication. Mol. Cell 7:21-30[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 22. |
Lupton, S., and A. J. Levine.
1985.
Mapping genetic elements of Epstein-Barr virus that facilitate extrachromosomal persistence of Epstein-Barr virus-derived plasmids in human cells.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
5:2533-2542 |
| 23. | Mackey, D., T. Middleton, and B. Sugden. 1995. Multiple regions within EBNA1 can link DNAs. J. Virol. 69:6199-6208[Abstract]. |
| 24. |
Marechal, V.,
A. Dehee,
R. Chikhi-Brachet,
T. Piolot,
M. Coppey-Moisan, and J. C. Nicolas.
1999.
Mapping EBNA-1 domains involved in binding to metaphase chromosomes.
J. Virol.
73:4385-4392 |
| 25. |
Middleton, T., and B. Sugden.
1992.
EBNA1 can link the enhancer element to the initiator element of the Epstein-Barr virus plasmid origin of DNA replication.
J. Virol.
66:489-495 |
| 26. | Peck, L. J., and J. C. Wang. 1981. Sequence dependence of the helical repeat of DNA in solution. Nature 292:375-378[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 27. |
Reisman, D.,
J. Yates, and B. Sugden.
1985.
A putative origin of replication of plasmids derived from Epstein-Barr virus is composed of two cis-acting components.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
5:1822-1832 |
| 28. | Schepers, A., M. Ritzi, K. Bousset, E. Kremmer, J. L. Yates, J. Harwood, J. F. X. Diffley, and W. Hammerschmidt. Human origin recognition complex binds to the region of the latent origin of DNA replication of Epstein-Barr virus. EMBO J. 20:4588-4602. |
| 29. | SenGupta, D. J., and J. A. Borowiec. 1994. Strand and face: the topography of interactions between the SV40 origin of replication and T-antigen during the initiation of replication. EMBO J. 13:982-992[Medline]. |
| 30. | Simpson, K., A. McGuigan, and C. Huxley. 1996. Stable episomal maintenance of yeast artificial chromosomes in human cells. Mol. Cell. Biol. 16:5117-5126[Abstract]. |
| 31. |
Su, W.,
T. Middleton,
B. Sugden, and H. Echols.
1991.
DNA looping between the origin of replication of Epstein-Barr virus and its enhancer site: stabilization of an origin complex with Epstein-Barr nuclear antigen 1.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
88:10870-10874 |
| 32. |
Sugden, B.,
K. Marsh, and J. Yates.
1985.
A vector that replicates as a plasmid and can be efficiently selected in B-lymphoblasts transformed by Epstein-Barr virus.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
5:410-413 |
| 33. | Summers, H., J. A. Barwell, R. A. Pfuetzner, A. M. Edwards, and L. Frappier. 1996. Cooperative assembly of EBNA1 on the Epstein-Barr virus latent origin of replication. J. Virol. 70:1228-1231[Abstract]. |
| 34. |
Thompson, J. F., and A. Landy.
1988.
Empirical estimation of protein-induced DNA bending angles: applications to lambda site-specific recombination complexes.
Nucleic Acids Res.
16:9687-9705 |
| 35. | Wu, H. M., and D. M. Crothers. 1984. The locus of sequence-directed and protein-induced DNA bending. Nature 308:509-513[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 36. |
Wysokenski, D. A., and J. L. Yates.
1989.
Multiple EBNA1-binding sites are required to form an EBNA1-dependent enhancer and to activate a minimal replicative origin within oriP of Epstein-Barr virus.
J. Virol.
63:2657-2666 |
| 37. |
Yates, J.,
N. Warren,
D. Reisman, and B. Sugden.
1984.
A cis-acting element from the Epstein-Barr viral genome that permits stable replication of recombinant plasmids in latently infected cells.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
81:3806-3810 |
| 38. |
Yates, J. L.,
S. M. Camiolo, and J. M. Bashaw.
2000.
The minimal replicator of Epstein-Barr virus oriP.
J. Virol.
74:4512-4522 |
| 39. |
Yates, J. L., and N. Guan.
1991.
Epstein-Barr virus-derived plasmids replicate only once per cell cycle and are not amplified after entry into cells.
J. Virol.
65:483-488 |
| 40. | Yates, J. L., N. Warren, and B. Sugden. 1985. Stable replication of plasmids derived from Epstein-Barr virus in various mammalian cells. Nature 313:812-815[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 41. |
Zhang, D.,
L. Frappier,
E. Gibbs,
J. Hurwitz, and M. O'Donnell.
1998.
Human RPA (hSSB) interacts with EBNA1, the latent origin binding protein of Epstein-Barr virus.
Nucleic Acids Res.
26:631-637 |
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»