Nonspecific Protein-DNA Binding Is Widespread in the Yeast Genome

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Pol II Docking and Pausing at Growth and Stress Genes in C. elegans
Advertisements

Xiaoshu Chen, Jianzhi Zhang  Cell Systems 
Small Peptide Binding Stiffens the Ubiquitin-like Protein SUMO1
Molecular Analysis of the Interaction between Staphylococcal Virulence Factor Sbi-IV and Complement C3d  Ronald D. Gorham, Wilson Rodriguez, Dimitrios.
Ining Jou, Murugappan Muthukumar  Biophysical Journal 
Matan Goldshtein, David B. Lukatsky  Biophysical Journal 
Volume 103, Issue 5, Pages (September 2012)
Peter J. Mulligan, Yi-Ju Chen, Rob Phillips, Andrew J. Spakowitz 
Pei-Chen Peng, Md. Abul Hassan Samee, Saurabh Sinha 
Volume 10, Issue 7, Pages (July 2017)
Volume 113, Issue 9, Pages (November 2017)
Volume 112, Issue 7, Pages (April 2017)
Volume 98, Issue 7, Pages (April 2010)
Volume 94, Issue 12, Pages (June 2008)
Volume 44, Issue 3, Pages (November 2011)
Michael J. Knight, Serena Dillon, Lina Jarutyte, Risto A. Kauppinen 
The Binding Affinity of Ff Gene 5 Protein Depends on the Nearest-Neighbor Composition of the ssDNA Substrate  Tung-Chung Mou, Carla W. Gray, Donald M.
SAGA Is a General Cofactor for RNA Polymerase II Transcription
A Model of H-NS Mediated Compaction of Bacterial DNA
Looping Probabilities in Model Interphase Chromosomes
One-Dimensional Brownian Motion of Charged Nanoparticles along Microtubules: A Model System for Weak Binding Interactions  Itsushi Minoura, Eisaku Katayama,
Impulse Control: Temporal Dynamics in Gene Transcription
Volume 102, Issue 11, Pages (June 2012)
Volume 111, Issue 2, Pages (July 2016)
Volume 83, Issue 5, Pages (November 2002)
Volume 154, Issue 1, Pages (July 2013)
Divergent Whole-Genome Methylation Maps of Human and Chimpanzee Brains Reveal Epigenetic Basis of Human Regulatory Evolution  Jia Zeng, Genevieve Konopka,
Volume 96, Issue 2, Pages (January 2009)
Mechanism of the αβ Conformational Change in F1-ATPase after ATP Hydrolysis: Free- Energy Simulations  Yuko Ito, Mitsunori Ikeguchi  Biophysical Journal 
Brittny C. Davis, Jodian A. Brown, Ian F. Thorpe  Biophysical Journal 
Volume 5, Issue 4, Pages e4 (October 2017)
Volume 14, Issue 7, Pages (February 2016)
Xiao-Han Li, Elizabeth Rhoades  Biophysical Journal 
Volume 26, Issue 1, Pages (April 2007)
Volume 41, Issue 4, Pages (February 2011)
Noise Underlies Switching Behavior of the Bacterial Flagellum
Cell Optical Density and Molecular Composition Revealed by Simultaneous Multimodal Label-Free Imaging  Nicolas Pavillon, Alison J. Hobro, Nicholas I.
Volume 20, Issue 2, Pages (February 2012)
Volume 128, Issue 6, Pages (March 2007)
Volume 44, Issue 3, Pages (November 2011)
Pol II Docking and Pausing at Growth and Stress Genes in C. elegans
Volume 136, Issue 2, Pages (January 2009)
Stefano Di Talia, Eric F. Wieschaus  Developmental Cell 
Volume 106, Issue 6, Pages (March 2014)
Volume 47, Issue 2, Pages (July 2012)
Volume 96, Issue 5, Pages (March 2009)
Volume 132, Issue 6, Pages (March 2008)
Teuta Pilizota, Joshua W. Shaevitz  Biophysical Journal 
Dissecting DNA-Histone Interactions in the Nucleosome by Molecular Dynamics Simulations of DNA Unwrapping  Ramona Ettig, Nick Kepper, Rene Stehr, Gero.
Ariel Afek, Itamar Sela, Noa Musa-Lempel, David B. Lukatsky 
Cholesterol Modulates the Dimer Interface of the β2-Adrenergic Receptor via Cholesterol Occupancy Sites  Xavier Prasanna, Amitabha Chattopadhyay, Durba.
Dynamics of Active Semiflexible Polymers
Volume 111, Issue 10, Pages (November 2016)
Volume 97, Issue 9, Pages (November 2009)
Doxorubicin Enhances Nucleosome Turnover around Promoters
Volume 22, Issue 2, Pages (April 2006)
The Selectivity of K+ Ion Channels: Testing the Hypotheses
Ining Jou, Murugappan Muthukumar  Biophysical Journal 
Christina Bergonzo, Thomas E. Cheatham  Biophysical Journal 
Nevra Ozer, Celia A. Schiffer, Turkan Haliloglu  Biophysical Journal 
John E. Pickard, Klaus Ley  Biophysical Journal 
Inherent Force-Dependent Properties of β-Cardiac Myosin Contribute to the Force- Velocity Relationship of Cardiac Muscle  Michael J. Greenberg, Henry Shuman,
Volume 84, Issue 4, Pages (April 2003)
Yongli Zhang, Junyi Jiao, Aleksander A. Rebane  Biophysical Journal 
Small Peptide Binding Stiffens the Ubiquitin-like Protein SUMO1
Shayantani Mukherjee, Sean M. Law, Michael Feig  Biophysical Journal 
Joana Pinto Vieira, Julien Racle, Vassily Hatzimanikatis 
A Model of H-NS Mediated Compaction of Bacterial DNA
George D. Dickinson, Ian Parker  Biophysical Journal 
Evolution of Specificity in Protein-Protein Interactions
Presentation transcript:

Nonspecific Protein-DNA Binding Is Widespread in the Yeast Genome Ariel Afek, David B. Lukatsky  Biophysical Journal  Volume 102, Issue 8, Pages 1881-1888 (April 2012) DOI: 10.1016/j.bpj.2012.03.044 Copyright © 2012 Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 1 (A) Average free energy of nonspecific TF-DNA binding per bp, 〈Δf〉=〈〈ΔF〉TF〉seq/M, computed within the interval (−384,384) for the two groups of genes selected according to the experimentally measured average TF occupancy in the TSS region: 10% highest TF occupancy in the TSS region (red) and 10% lowest TF occupancy in the TSS region (blue). Each group contains 496 genes. Horizontal bar, marked TSS, on the x axis, shows the corresponding region where the TF occupancy was measured. (B) Similar to (A), but the two groups of genes are selected according to the experimentally measured average TF occupancy in the UAS region. Horizontal bar, marked UAS, on the x axis, shows the corresponding region where the TF occupancy was measured. (C) Correlation between the minimal value of the free energy of nonspecific TF-DNA binding within the TSS regions, Δfmin=min(〈ΔF〉TF)/M, and the average TF occupancy within this region. Genes were binned into 10 bins according to the value of the average TF occupancy. Each point in the graph corresponds to the average, 〈Δfmin〉, for the genes in a given bin plotted as a function of the experimentally measured average TF occupancy for the genes in this bin. (D) Analogous to (C), but for 〈Δfmin〉 computed within the UAS regions, plotted versus the average TF occupancy measured within the UAS regions, as described in C. Biophysical Journal 2012 102, 1881-1888DOI: (10.1016/j.bpj.2012.03.044) Copyright © 2012 Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 2 (A and B) Number of promoter regions (TSSs and UASs) (black) and coding regions (ORFs) (red) occupied by the number of regulators (i.e., TFs) indicated along the x axis, as computed using the model of nonspecific TF-DNA binding (A) and experimental data from (1). (B) This corresponds to Fig. 2 A of (1). In the computational prediction we assumed that a given genomic region is occupied by a given TF if the minimal free energy of nonspecific TF-DNA binding (within this genomic region) is less than the cutoff value of −1kBT, and we used 250 TFs in the computation (Materials and Methods). To compute error bars, we divided all genes into four subgroups, and computed the corresponding occupancy separately for each subgroup. The error bars are defined as one standard deviation of the occupancy between the subgroups. Inset in each panel shows the occupancy for the entire set of ∼5000 genes. (C and D) Analogous to the insets in A and B, but with the cumulative TF occupancy computed separately for TSSs and UASs. We used M = 8 for the TF length in all our calculation of the free energy. Biophysical Journal 2012 102, 1881-1888DOI: (10.1016/j.bpj.2012.03.044) Copyright © 2012 Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 3 (A) Average free energy of nonspecific TF-DNA binding per bp, 〈Δf〉, computed within the interval (−384,384) for the highly confident SAGA-dominated and TFIID-dominated groups of genes, respectively. There are 40 SAGA-dominated, TATA-containing genes and 178 TFIID-dominated, TATA-less, nonribosomal protein genes, respectively (these highly confident groups are taken from (1)). (B) Average free energy of nonspecific TF-DNA binding per bp, 〈Δf〉, computed within the interval (−384,384) for the high and low transcriptional plasticity genes, respectively. There are 732 genes in each group. To compute error bars, we divided each group of genes into five arbitrary subgroups, computed 〈Δf〉 in each of the subgroups, and computed the standard deviation of 〈Δf〉 between the subgroups. Error bars correspond to one standard deviation. Biophysical Journal 2012 102, 1881-1888DOI: (10.1016/j.bpj.2012.03.044) Copyright © 2012 Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 4 (A) Correlation between the minimal value of the free energy of nonspecific TF-DNA binding in the promoter region, within the interval (−150,0), Δfmin=ΔFmin/M, and the average value of gene expression within this region. All ∼5000 genes were binned into 25 bins according to the level of gene expression. Each point in the graph corresponds to the average, 〈Δfmin〉, for the genes in a given bin plotted as a function of the experimentally measured average level of gene expression for the genes in this bin. (B) Correlation between the computed number of nonspecific TFBNs within the interval (−150,0), and the level of gene expression. A given genomic coordinate is assigned to belong to nonspecific TFBN, if the average free energy of nonspecific TF-DNA binding per nucleotide is smaller than a given cutoff value, Δf<−0.25kBT. (C) Correlation between the number of specific TFBSs and the gene expression. The information about specific TFBSs is taken from (33). (D) Correlation between the number of specific TFBSs and the number nonspecific TFBNs. The binning in B–D is preformed as in A. Biophysical Journal 2012 102, 1881-1888DOI: (10.1016/j.bpj.2012.03.044) Copyright © 2012 Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 5 Analysis of experimental results from (1): Correlation between the average TF occupancy and the level of gene expression for TSS (A), UAS (B), and ORF (C) regions, respectively. Genes were binned into 25 bins according to the level of gene expression. Each point in the graph corresponds to the average, experimental TF occupancy for the genes in a given bin plotted as a function of the experimentally measured, average level of gene expression for the genes in this bin. Correlation between the computed, average value of the minimal free energy of nonspecific TF-DNA binding, 〈Δfmin〉, and the level of gene expression for TSS (D), UAS (E), and ORF (F) regions, respectively. The binning is performed as explained previously. Biophysical Journal 2012 102, 1881-1888DOI: (10.1016/j.bpj.2012.03.044) Copyright © 2012 Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions