Cargando…

What matters for lac repressor search in vivo—sliding, hopping, intersegment transfer, crowding on DNA or recognition?

We have investigated which aspects of transcription factor DNA interactions are most important to account for the recent in vivo search time measurements for the dimeric lac repressor. We find the best agreement for a sliding model where non-specific binding to DNA is improbable at first contact and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mahmutovic, Anel, Berg, Otto G., Elf, Johan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4402528/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25779051
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkv207
_version_ 1782367270351142912
author Mahmutovic, Anel
Berg, Otto G.
Elf, Johan
author_facet Mahmutovic, Anel
Berg, Otto G.
Elf, Johan
author_sort Mahmutovic, Anel
collection PubMed
description We have investigated which aspects of transcription factor DNA interactions are most important to account for the recent in vivo search time measurements for the dimeric lac repressor. We find the best agreement for a sliding model where non-specific binding to DNA is improbable at first contact and the sliding LacI protein binds at high probability when reaching the specific O(sym) operator. We also find that the contribution of hopping to the overall search speed is negligible although physically unavoidable. The parameters that give the best fit reveal sliding distances, including hopping, close to what has been proposed in the past, i.e. ∼40 bp, but with an unexpectedly high 1D diffusion constant on non-specific DNA sequences. Including a mechanism of inter-segment transfer between distant DNA segments does not bring down the 1D diffusion to the expected fraction of the in vitro value. This suggests a mechanism where transcription factors can slide less hindered in vivo than what is given by a simple viscosity scaling argument or that a modification of the model is needed. For example, the estimated diffusion rate constant would be consistent with the expectation if parts of the chromosome, away from the operator site, were inaccessible for searching.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4402528
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44025282015-04-29 What matters for lac repressor search in vivo—sliding, hopping, intersegment transfer, crowding on DNA or recognition? Mahmutovic, Anel Berg, Otto G. Elf, Johan Nucleic Acids Res Computational Biology We have investigated which aspects of transcription factor DNA interactions are most important to account for the recent in vivo search time measurements for the dimeric lac repressor. We find the best agreement for a sliding model where non-specific binding to DNA is improbable at first contact and the sliding LacI protein binds at high probability when reaching the specific O(sym) operator. We also find that the contribution of hopping to the overall search speed is negligible although physically unavoidable. The parameters that give the best fit reveal sliding distances, including hopping, close to what has been proposed in the past, i.e. ∼40 bp, but with an unexpectedly high 1D diffusion constant on non-specific DNA sequences. Including a mechanism of inter-segment transfer between distant DNA segments does not bring down the 1D diffusion to the expected fraction of the in vitro value. This suggests a mechanism where transcription factors can slide less hindered in vivo than what is given by a simple viscosity scaling argument or that a modification of the model is needed. For example, the estimated diffusion rate constant would be consistent with the expectation if parts of the chromosome, away from the operator site, were inaccessible for searching. Oxford University Press 2015-04-20 2015-03-16 /pmc/articles/PMC4402528/ /pubmed/25779051 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkv207 Text en © The Author(s) 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Nucleic Acids Research. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Computational Biology
Mahmutovic, Anel
Berg, Otto G.
Elf, Johan
What matters for lac repressor search in vivo—sliding, hopping, intersegment transfer, crowding on DNA or recognition?
title What matters for lac repressor search in vivo—sliding, hopping, intersegment transfer, crowding on DNA or recognition?
title_full What matters for lac repressor search in vivo—sliding, hopping, intersegment transfer, crowding on DNA or recognition?
title_fullStr What matters for lac repressor search in vivo—sliding, hopping, intersegment transfer, crowding on DNA or recognition?
title_full_unstemmed What matters for lac repressor search in vivo—sliding, hopping, intersegment transfer, crowding on DNA or recognition?
title_short What matters for lac repressor search in vivo—sliding, hopping, intersegment transfer, crowding on DNA or recognition?
title_sort what matters for lac repressor search in vivo—sliding, hopping, intersegment transfer, crowding on dna or recognition?
topic Computational Biology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4402528/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25779051
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkv207
work_keys_str_mv AT mahmutovicanel whatmattersforlacrepressorsearchinvivoslidinghoppingintersegmenttransfercrowdingondnaorrecognition
AT bergottog whatmattersforlacrepressorsearchinvivoslidinghoppingintersegmenttransfercrowdingondnaorrecognition
AT elfjohan whatmattersforlacrepressorsearchinvivoslidinghoppingintersegmenttransfercrowdingondnaorrecognition