Strong physical constraints on sequence-specific target location by proteins on DNA molecules

Sequence-specific binding to DNA in the presence of competing non-sequence-specific ligands is a problem faced by proteins in all organisms. It is akin to the problem of parking a truck at a loading bay by the side of a road in the presence of cars parked at random along the road. Cars even partially covering the loading bay prevent correct parking of the truck. Similarly on DNA, non-specific ligands interfere with the binding and function of sequence-specific proteins. We derive a formula for the probability that the loading bay is free from parked cars. The probability depends on the size of the loading bay and allows an estimation of the size of the footprint on the DNA of the sequence-specific protein by assaying protein binding or function in the presence of increasing concentrations of non-specific ligand. Assaying for function gives an ‘activity footprint’; the minimum length of DNA required for function rather than the more commonly measured physical footprint. Assaying the complex type I restriction enzyme, EcoKI, gives an activity footprint of ∼66 bp for ATP hydrolysis and 300 bp for the DNA cleavage function which is intimately linked with translocation of DNA by EcoKI. Furthermore, considering the coverage of chromosomal DNA by proteins in vivo, our theory shows that the search for a specific DNA sequence is very difficult; most sites are obscured by parked cars. This effectively rules out any significant role in target location for mechanisms invoking one-dimensional, linear diffusion along DNA.

[1]  J. Ladbury,et al.  StpA protein from Escherichia coli condenses supercoiled DNA in preference to linear DNA and protects it from digestion by DNase I and EcoKI , 2005, Nucleic acids research.

[2]  S. Halford,et al.  Measurement of the contributions of 1D and 3D pathways to the translocation of a protein along DNA. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[3]  M. Kampmann.  Facilitated diffusion in chromatin lattices: mechanistic diversity and regulatory potential , 2005, Molecular microbiology.

[4]  D. Dryden,et al.  Continuous assays for DNA translocation using fluorescent triplex dissociation: application to type I restriction endonucleases. , 2005, Journal of molecular biology.

[5]  Huan‐Xiang Zhou.  A model for the mediation of processivity of DNA-targeting proteins by nonspecific binding: dependence on DNA length and presence of obstacles. , 2005, Biophysical journal.

[6]  D. Dryden.  Reeling in the bases , 2004, Nature Structural &Molecular Biology.

[7]  J. Widom,et al.  Nucleosomes facilitate their own invasion , 2004, Nature Structural &Molecular Biology.

[8]  Tom Misteli,et al.  Global Nature of Dynamic Protein-Chromatin Interactions In Vivo: Three-Dimensional Genome Scanning and Dynamic Interaction Networks of Chromatin Proteins , 2004, Molecular and Cellular Biology.

[9]  K. Firman,et al.  Cellular localization of Type I restriction-modification enzymes is family dependent. , 2004, Biochemical and biophysical research communications.

[10]  J. Marko,et al.  How do site-specific DNA-binding proteins find their targets? , 2004, Nucleic acids research.

[11]  Andrew Flaus,et al.  Mechanisms for ATP-dependent chromatin remodelling: farewell to the tuna-can octamer? , 2004, Current opinion in genetics & development.

[12]  L. Mirny,et al.  Kinetics of protein-DNA interaction: facilitated target location in sequence-dependent potential. , 2004, Biophysical journal.

[13]  N. Murray,et al.  Is modification sufficient to protect a bacterial chromosome from a resident restriction endonuclease? , 2003, Molecular microbiology.

[14]  A. Minsky.  Structural aspects of DNA repair: the role of restricted diffusion , 2003, Molecular microbiology.

[15]  J. T. Kadonaga,et al.  Chromatin assembly by DNA-translocating motors , 2003, Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology.

[16]  E. Gerner,et al.  Polyamine-dependent gene expression , 2003, Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences CMLS.

[17]  T. Owen-Hughes,et al.  Evidence for DNA Translocation by the ISWI Chromatin-Remodeling Enzyme , 2003, Molecular and Cellular Biology.

[18]  M. Record,et al.  Analytic binding isotherms describing competitive interactions of a protein ligand with specific and nonspecific sites on the same DNA oligomer. , 2001, Biophysical journal.

[19]  A. Jeltsch,et al.  Structure and function of type II restriction endonucleases. , 2001, Nucleic acids research.

[20]  T Misteli,et al.  Protein dynamics: implications for nuclear architecture and gene expression. , 2001, Science.

[21]  N. Murray,et al.  The proteolytic control of restriction activity in Escherichia coli K‐12 , 2001, Molecular microbiology.

[22]  Akira Ishihama,et al.  Two types of localization of the DNA‐binding proteins within the Escherichia coli nucleoid , 2000, Genes to cells : devoted to molecular & cellular mechanisms.

[23]  N. Murray.  Type I Restriction Systems: Sophisticated Molecular Machines (a Legacy of Bertani and Weigle) , 2000, Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews.

[24]  T. Bickle,et al.  DNA supercoiling during ATP-dependent DNA translocation by the type I restriction enzyme EcoAI. , 2000, Journal of molecular biology.

[25]  S. Ueda,et al.  Growth Phase-Dependent Variation in Protein Composition of the Escherichia coli Nucleoid , 1999, Journal of bacteriology.

[26]  N. Murray,et al.  The DNA translocation and ATPase activities of restriction-deficient mutants of Eco KI. , 1999, Journal of molecular biology.

[27]  N. Murray,et al.  Regulation of endonuclease activity by proteolysis prevents breakage of unmodified bacterial chromosomes by type I restriction enzymes. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[28]  P. Viot,et al.  From car parking to protein adsorption: an overview of sequential adsorption processes , 1999, cond-mat/9906428.

[29]  A S Perelson,et al.  Steric effects on multivalent ligand-receptor binding: exclusion of ligand sites by bound cell surface receptors. , 1999, Biophysical journal.

[30]  N. Shimamoto,et al.  One-dimensional Diffusion of Proteins along DNA , 1999, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[31]  T. Bickle,et al.  DNA translocation blockage, a general mechanism of cleavage site selection by type I restriction enzymes , 1999, The EMBO journal.

[32]  A. Mehta,et al.  Single-molecule biomechanics with optical methods. , 1999, Science.

[33]  D. Dryden,et al.  Sequence-specific DNA binding by EcoKI, a type IA DNA restriction enzyme. , 1998, Journal of molecular biology.

[34]  K. Firman,et al.  Protein-Protein and Protein-DNA Interactions in the Type I. Restriction Endonuclease R.EcoR124I , 1998, Biological chemistry.

[35]  S. Nordeen,et al.  DNA Intersegment Transfer, How Steroid Receptors Search for A Target Site* , 1997, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[36]  Nicholas R Cozzarelli,et al.  Comparison of recombination in vitro and in E. coli cells: Measure of the effective concentr ation of DNA in vivo , 1995, Cell.

[37]  E. Kellenberger,et al.  The bacterial nucleoid revisited. , 1994, Microbiological reviews.

[38]  James W. Evans,et al.  Random and cooperative sequential adsorption , 1993 .

[39]  A. Wolfe,et al.  Use of binding site neighbor-effect parameters to evaluate the interactions between adjacent ligands on a linear lattice. Effects on ligand-lattice association. , 1992, Journal of molecular biology.

[40]  A. Clarke,et al.  EcoRV restriction endonuclease binds all DNA sequences with equal affinity. , 1991, Biochemistry.

[41]  D. Pettijohn,et al.  Introduction of proteins into living bacterial cells: distribution of labeled HU protein in Escherichia coli , 1991, Journal of bacteriology.

[42]  F. Studier,et al.  Model for how type I restriction enzymes select cleavage sites in DNA. , 1988, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[43]  K. Drlica,et al.  Histonelike proteins of bacteria. , 1987, Microbiological reviews.

[44]  Y. Chen.  Binding of n-mers to one-dimensional lattices with longer than close-contact interactions. , 1987, Biophysical chemistry.

[45]  H. Westerhoff,et al.  Co-operativity and enzymatic activity in polymer-activated enzymes. A one-dimensional piggy-back binding model and its application to the DNA-dependent ATPase of DNA gyrase. , 1986, Journal of molecular biology.

[46]  D. Pettijohn,et al.  Structure and properties of the bacterial nucleoid , 1982, Cell.

[47]  P. V. von Hippel,et al.  Diffusion-driven mechanisms of protein translocation on nucleic acids. 2. The Escherichia coli repressor--operator interaction: equilibrium measurements. , 1981, Biochemistry.

[48]  P. V. von Hippel,et al.  Diffusion-driven mechanisms of protein translocation on nucleic acids. 1. Models and theory. , 1981, Biochemistry.

[49]  M. Takahashi,et al.  Non-specific interactions of CRP from E. coli with native and denatured DNAs: control of binding by cAMP and cGMP and by cation concentration. , 1979, Nucleic acids research.

[50]  P. V. von Hippel,et al.  Theoretical aspects of DNA-protein interactions: co-operative and non-co-operative binding of large ligands to a one-dimensional homogeneous lattice. , 1974, Journal of molecular biology.

[51]  A. Riggs,et al.  The lac repressor-operator interaction. 3. Kinetic studies. , 1970, Journal of molecular biology.

[52]  A. Riggs,et al.  The lac represser-operator interaction , 1970 .

[53]  T. Su,et al.  Alleviation of restriction by DNA condensation and non-specific DNA binding ligands. , 2004, Nucleic acids research.

[54]  J. Jost,et al.  Approaches to characterize protein-DNA interactions in vivo. , 1993, Critical reviews in eukaryotic gene expression.

[55]  Saluz Hp,et al.  Approaches to characterize protein-DNA interactions in vivo. , 1993 .

[56]  F. Neidhardt,et al.  Physiology of the bacterial cell : a molecular approach , 1990 .

[57]  J. Mitchison.  Cell Biology , 1964, Nature.

[58]  P. V. von Hippel,et al.  Facilitated Target Location in Biological Systems* , 2022 .

[59]  A. D. Rick.  The Zac Repressor-Operator Interaction III . ? Kinetic Studies , 2022 .