Interaction between Chromosomal Protein HMGB1 and DNA Studied by DNA-Melting Analysis

Chikhirzhina, Elena V.; Tatiana, Starkova J.; Polyanichko, Alexander M.

doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/387138

Journal of Spectroscopy

On this page

Abstract Introduction Experimental Results and Discussion Acknowledgments References Copyright Related Articles

Research Article | Open Access

Volume 2014 | Article ID 387138 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/387138

Interaction between Chromosomal Protein HMGB1 and DNA Studied by DNA-Melting Analysis

Elena V. Chikhirzhina,¹Starkova J. Tatiana,^1,2and Alexander M. Polyanichko^1,2

Academic Editor: Khalique Ahmed

Received27 Oct 2014

Accepted15 Dec 2014

Published28 Dec 2014

Abstract

Interaction of HMGB1 nonhistone chromosomal protein with DNA was studied using circular dichroism spectroscopy and thermal denaturation of DNA. Melting DNA in the complex was shown to be a biphasic process. The characteristic melting temperatures of unbound DNA and the DNA bound to HMGB1 in 0.25 mM EDTA solutions were found to be °C and °C, respectively. It was shown that the binding of the HMGB1 molecule affects the melting of the DNA region approximately 30 b.p. long.

1. Introduction

HMG-box proteins (HMGB) are the most abundant nonhistone chromosomal proteins. They belong to the superfamily of HMG proteins (high mobility group) [1–3]. One of the best known members of the HMGB family is HMGB1 protein. The amino acid sequence of the protein consists of three regions forming two DNA-binding domains (HMGB-domains A and B) and an unordered regulatory C-terminal domain [2, 4, 5]. HMGB-domains have a conservative L-shaped structure [4], in which DNA-binding activity is regulated by the C-terminal domain represented by 29 Asp/Glu amino acid residues, often referred to as the “acidic tail” [5–8]. Although the individual HMGB-domains consist predominantly of α-helical regions [4, 9, 10], their structure in the whole protein depends on the interactions with the acidic tail and may change considerably [6, 11].

HMGB-domains bind DNA in the minor groove, demonstrating specificity to the prebent DNA structures rather than to the particular sequences [2, 3, 5]. Moreover, HMGB-proteins themselves are able to induce bends of the double helix upon binding. Originally, structural organization of DNA in the chromatin was thought to be the major function of HMGB-proteins [12–15]. However, it was proved recently that these proteins perform numerous regulatory functions in cell nucleus [5, 16–18], in cytoplasm [19, 20], and even outside the cell [21–24].

In spite of extensive experimental data on the interaction of the HMGB-domains with short DNA fragments [5, 25–27], the exact mechanisms of the interactions between the full HMGB1 and DNA are not clear yet. However, it is these mechanisms that determine the diversity of functions performed by HMGB1. It was demonstrated that the mode of HMGB1-DNA interaction depends on the protein to DNA ratio [7, 8, 28–30]. Large supramolecular complexes were observed at high HMGB1/DNA ratios, which appeared due to increasing contribution of the protein-protein interactions [7, 8, 29, 30]. Earlier experimental data suggest that binding to DNA may induce different structural changes of the HMGB1 itself, depending on the particular DNA species; HMGB1 interacts with [31, 32]. In the present study we investigate the interaction between HMGB1 and DNA based on DNA-melting analysis.

2. Experimental

2.1. DNA-Protein Complexes

Nonhistone chromosomal protein HMGB1 (MW 26,500) was extracted from the nuclei of calf thymus as described earlier [29, 33]. The purity of the protein was tested with sodium dodecyl sulfate polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE). The protein concentration was determined by UV absorbance using extinction coefficients M⁻¹ cm⁻¹ [34]. Calf thymus DNA (type II) was purchased from Sigma-Aldrich and used without further purification. The DNA concentration was determined by measuring difference in absorbance at 290 and 270 nm () after hydrolysis in 6% HClO₄ [35]. The quality of the DNA was checked by measuring the increase of its absorbance at 260 nm after denaturation (hyperchromic effect).

Protein-DNA complexes were prepared by direct mixing of equal volumes of DNA and protein solutions of appropriate concentrations, to obtain desired input protein to DNA ratio (w/w) in the complex. The HMGB1/DNA ratio varied from 0 to 0.5. The final concentration of DNA in solutions was 30 μg/mL. All solutions contained 0.25 mM EDTA and 0.2 mM NaCl.

2.2. Spectroscopy

Absorbance spectra were recorded with Specord M 40 spectrophotometer (Karl Zeiss, Germany) in temperature controlled quartz cells with 1 cm optical path length.

CD spectra were recorded with Mark V dichrograph (Jobin-Yvon, France) in a temperature controlled quartz cell with 1 cm optical path length. The spectra of each sample were recorded in the region between 200 and 320 nm in a 1 nm step mode. The signal was averaged for 1000 readings with 1 msec intervals at each wavelength. The presented spectra are the average of three sequential runs. Circular dichroism is represented by values, the difference between absorbance of left and right circularly polarized light by a sample. The CD instrument was calibrated using D-10-camphorsulfonic acid.

2.3. DNA-Melting Analysis

Melting of DNA and proteins was achieved by gradually heating a sample from 20 to 95°C. DNA-melting curves were obtained by measuring optical density at 260 nm or circular dichroism at 275 nm . The melting curves of the protein samples were obtained by measuring circular dichroism at 222 nm . Normalized melting curves for DNA samples were obtained using the equation below: where and are the minimal and maximal values of the optical density at 260 nm, corresponding to the native and melted states of the DNA in the samples. The first derivative of the melting curves was deconvoluted using Gaussian profiles.

The melting of DNA-protein complexes was characterized using melting temperature , which was determined as the position of the maximum of the first derivative of the melting curve. The hyperchromic effect was quantified according to the equation

3. Results and Discussion

The DNA molecule is a polyanion at physiological conditions. Decreasing ionic strength of the solution leads to the destabilization of the double helix resulting in lowering the melting temperature of DNA. To reduce the effect of ionic strength and to achieve better separation of the peaks on the derivative melting curve we studied the DNA melting in the complexes with HMGB1 in solutions containing 0.25 mM EDTA and 0.2 mM NaCl [36]. The concentration of DNA in all samples was 30 μg/mL. The melted DNA in all complexes demonstrated the same level of hyperchromicity at 260 nm as the pure DNA (Figure 1).

The first derivative of the pure DNA-melting curve in unbound state has a characteristic single-peak profile (Figure 1). This peak is attributed to the melting of DNA and the position of peak’s maximum provides the value of DNA-melting temperature . For the DNA in solutions of 0.25 mM EDTA/0.2 mM NaCl the melting temperature was found to be °C (Figure 1). When the protein is added to the system the first derivative of the melting curve demonstrates a different profile having two separate peaks (Figure 2) revealing a biphasic process. One of these peaks still has the maximum at approximately 44°C () and thus can be attributed to the melting of unbound DNA. The other one is shifted towards the higher temperatures and indicates the presence of some fraction of DNA with melting temperature of ~62°C (). As it was shown earlier [36–40] the second peak can be attributed to the melting of DNA regions bound to the protein. Thus, interaction of DNA with HMGB1 results in stabilization of the double helix in the vicinity of HMGB1 binding site.

Thermal stability of the complexes was also studied using circular dichroism spectroscopy (Figure 3). CD spectroscopy is suitable for monitoring conformational changes both in DNA and in the protein during the helix-to-coil transition. Analysis of the changes in DNA CD during the melting gives the melting temperature equal to , which is in agreement with absorption spectroscopy data. The melting curve of the pure HMGB1 (Figure 4) gives the protein melting temperature of ~42°C. Similar dependence for the DNA-protein complex at gives slightly higher melting temperatures at approximately 47°C which might reflect increasing melting temperature of the protein in the complex or/and superposition with the DNA-melting transition (Figure 4). It is interesting to note that the conformational changes in the protein are essentially completed by 60°C. The first derivative of the melting curves of the complexes (Figure 2) shows that the second melting peaks rise at the temperatures higher than 60°C. Since these second peaks correspond to the melting of DNA bound to the protein, we may conclude that the melting of the bound DNA follows the conformational transition in the protein, which in turn most likely induces changes in the DNA-binding properties of the HMGB1.

Assuming that the area under the graph of the first derivative of the melting curve is proportional to the concentration of the DNA in the sample [36–40], we may conclude that the area under each of the two peaks is proportional to the amount of unbound and bound DNA in the system, respectively. The areas under the individual peaks change upon the protein binding revealing that increasing the protein to DNA ratio in the complex results in decreasing amount of unbound DNA and increasing the amount of DNA regions bound to the protein (Figure 2). Based on the comparison of the areas under these two peaks we have estimated the fraction of DNA base pairs participating in binding to HMGB1 depending on the input protein to DNA ratio (Figure 5). The fraction of DNA base pairs with higher melting temperature as a function of input protein to DNA ratio shows linear increase with increasing . Such a linear dependence indicates that in the whole range of the studied protein to DNA ratios the binding of a single HMGB1 molecule stabilizes approximately the same number of the DNA base pairs (b.p.). To estimate the size of this region we can estimate the ratio of the number of the b.p. bound to the protein to the number of the protein molecules in the system : where is the fraction of the bound DNA, is the total number of DNA b.p. in the sample, is the molar mass of DNA b.p. (660 Da) or HMGB1 (26.5 kDa), respectively, is the protein to DNA ratio (w/w), and is the slope of the graph, equal to ~0.8 (Figure 5).

Hence, the simple calculations give the estimate of the size of the stabilized DNA region equal to approximately 30 b.p., which is about twice bigger than the HMGB1 binding site determined earlier [7, 28–30, 41, 42].

Thus we may conclude that despite the considerable deformation of the double helix HMGB1 stabilizes the base pairing in DNA in the vicinity of the binding site, which is manifested by 20°C increase in melting temperature. Binding of the HMGB1 stabilizes approximately 30 b.p., which is about twice bigger than the binding site of a single HMGB-domain.

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to the Russian Foundation for Basic Researches for a financial support (Grant 12-08-01134) and the Government of Saint Petersburg.

References

S. S. Ner, “HMGs everywhere,” Current Biology, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 208–210, 1992.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Bustin, “Regulation of DNA-dependent activities by the functional motifs of the high-mobility-group chromosomal proteins,” Molecular and Cellular Biology, vol. 19, no. 8, pp. 5237–5246, 1999.
View at: Google Scholar
E. Chikhirzhina, G. Chikhirzhina, and A. Polyanichko, “Chromatin structure: the role of ‘linker’ proteins,” Biomedical Spectroscopy and Imaging, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 345–358, 2014.
View at: Google Scholar
C. M. Read, P. D. Cary, C. Crane-Robinson, P. C. Driscoll, and D. G. Norman, “Solution structure of a DNA-binding domain from HMG1,” Nucleic Acids Research, vol. 21, no. 15, pp. 3427–3436, 1993.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Štros, “HMGB proteins: interactions with DNA and chromatin,” Biochimica et Biophysica Acta—Gene Regulatory Mechanisms, vol. 1799, no. 1-2, pp. 101–113, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Stott, M. Watson, F. S. Howe, J. G. Grossmann, and J. O. Thomas, “Tail-mediated collapse of HMGB1 is dynamic and occurs via differential binding of the acidic tail to the A and B domains,” Journal of Molecular Biology, vol. 403, no. 5, pp. 706–722, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. M. Polyanichko, Z. V. Leonenko, D. Cramb, H. Wieser, V. I. Vorob'ev, and E. V. Chikhirzhina, “Visualization of DNA complexes with HMGB1 and its C-truncated form HMGB1(A+B),” Biophysics, vol. 53, no. 3, pp. 202–206, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Chikhirzhina, A. Polyanichko, Z. Leonenko, H. Wieser, and V. Vorob'Ev, “C-terminal domain of nonhistone protein HMGB1 as a modulator of HMGB1-DNA structural interactions,” Spectroscopy, vol. 24, no. 3-4, pp. 361–366, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. M. Weir, P. J. Kraulis, C. S. Hill, A. R. C. Raine, E. D. Laue, and J. O. Thomas, “Structure of the HMG box motif in the B-domain of HMG1,” EMBO Journal, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 1311–1319, 1993.
View at: Google Scholar
Y. Xu, W. Yang, J. Wu, and Y. Shi, “Solution structure of the first HMG box domain in human upstream binding factor,” Biochemistry, vol. 41, no. 17, pp. 5415–5420, 2002.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. L. Privalov, I. Jelesarov, C. M. Read, A. I. Dragan, and C. Crane-Robinson, “The energetics of HMG box interactions with DNA: thermodynamics of the DNA binding of the HMG box from mouse Sox-5,” Journal of Molecular Biology, vol. 294, no. 4, pp. 997–1013, 1999.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Bustin and R. Reeves, “High-mobility-group chromosomal proteins: architectural components that facilitate chromatin function,” Progress in Nucleic Acid Research and Molecular Biology, vol. 54, pp. 35–100, 1996.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Grosschedl, K. Giese, and J. Pagel, “HMG domain proteins: architectural elements in the assembly of nucleoprotein structures,” Trends in Genetics, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 94–100, 1994.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. J. Love, X. Li, D. A. Case, K. Giese, R. Grosschedl, and P. E. Wright, “Structural basis for DNA bending by the architectural transcription factor LEF-1,” Nature, vol. 376, no. 6543, pp. 791–795, 1995.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. O. Thomas and A. A. Travers, “HMG1 and 2, and related “architectural” DNA-binding proteins,” Trends in Biochemical Sciences, vol. 26, pp. 167–174, 2001.
View at: Google Scholar
J. M. Song, S. Hwang, W. Wong et al., “The DNA architectural protein HMGB1 facilitates RTA-mediated viral gene expression in gamma-2 herpesviruses,” Journal of Virology, vol. 78, no. 23, pp. 12940–12950, 2004.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Liu, R. Prasad, and S. H. Wilson, “HMGB1: roles in base excision repair and related function,” Biochimica et Biophysica Acta—Gene Regulatory Mechanisms, vol. 1799, no. 1-2, pp. 119–130, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Ueda and M. Yoshida, “HMGB proteins and transcriptional regulation,” Biochimica et Biophysica Acta—Gene Regulatory Mechanisms, vol. 1799, no. 1-2, pp. 114–118, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Rauvala and A. Rouhiainen, “Physiological and pathophysiological outcomes of the interactions of HMGB1 with cell surface receptors,” Biochimica et Biophysica Acta—Gene Regulatory Mechanisms, vol. 1799, no. 1-2, pp. 164–170, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Tang, R. Kang, H. J. Zeh III, and M. T. Lotze, “High-mobility group box 1 and cancer,” Biochimica et Biophysica Acta: Gene Regulatory Mechanisms, vol. 1799, no. 1-2, pp. 131–140, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Guazzi, A. Strangio, A. T. Franzi, and M. E. Bianchi, “HMGB1, an architectural chromatin protein and extracellular signalling factor, has a spatially and temporally restricted expression pattern in mouse brain,” Gene Expression Patterns, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 29–33, 2003.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Yang, P. Tewary, G. de la Rosa, F. Wei, and J. J. Oppenheim, “The alarmin functions of high-mobility group proteins,” Biochimica et Biophysica Acta—Gene Regulatory Mechanisms, vol. 1799, no. 1-2, pp. 157–163, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Yang and K. J. Tracey, “Targeting HMGB1 in inflammation,” Biochimica et Biophysica Acta, vol. 1799, no. 1-2, pp. 149–156, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Palumbo, M. Sampaolesi, F. De Marchis et al., “Extracellular HMGB1, a signal of tissue damage, induces mesoangioblast migration and proliferation,” The Journal of Cell Biology, vol. 164, no. 3, pp. 441–449, 2004.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Gelasco and S. J. Lippard, “NMR solution structure of a DNA dodecamer duplex containing a cis- diammineplatinum(II) d(GpG) intrastrand cross-link, the major adduct of the anticancer drug cisplatin,” Biochemistry, vol. 37, no. 26, pp. 9230–9239, 1998.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. van Beest, D. Dooijes, M. van de Wetering et al., “Sequence-specific high mobility group box factors recognize 10–12-base pair minor groove motifs,” The Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 275, no. 35, pp. 27266–27273, 2000.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Stott, G. S. F. Tang, K.-B. Lee, and J. O. Thomas, “Structure of a complex of tandem HMG boxes and DNA,” Journal of Molecular Biology, vol. 360, no. 1, pp. 90–104, 2006.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. M. Polianichko, S. G. Davydenko, E. V. Chikhirzhina, and V. I. Vorob'ev, “Interaction of superhelical DNA with the nonhistone protein HMG1,” Tsitologiia, vol. 42, no. 8, pp. 787–793, 2000.
View at: Google Scholar
E. V. Chikhirzhina, A. M. Polyanichko, A. N. Skvortsov, E. I. Kostyleva, C. Houssier, and V. I. Vorob'ev, “HMG1 domains: the victims of the circumstances,” Molecular Biology, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 412–418, 2002.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. M. Polyanichko, E. V. Chikhirzhina, A. N. Skvortsov et al., “The HMG1 ta(i)le,” Journal of Biomolecular Structure and Dynamics, vol. 19, pp. 1053–1062, 2002.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Y. Rodionova, E. V. Chikhirzhina, V. I. Vorob'yov, and A. M. Polyanichko, “Changes in the secondary structure of HMGB1 protein bonded to DNA,” Journal of Structural Chemistry, vol. 50, no. 5, pp. 976–981, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. M. Polyanichko, T. J. Rodionova, V. I. Vorob'ev, and E. V. Chikhirzhina, “Conformational properties of nuclear protein HMGB1 and specificity of its interaction with DNA,” Cell and Tissue Biology, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 114–119, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. M. Polyanichko, E. V. Chikhirzhina, V. V. Andrushchenko, V. I. Vorob'ev, and H. Wieser, “The effect of manganese(II) on the structure of DNA/HMGB1/H1 complexes: electronic and vibrational circular dichroism studies,” Biopolymers, vol. 83, no. 2, pp. 182–192, 2006.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. N. Pace, F. Vajdos, L. Fee, G. Grimsley, and T. Gray, “How to measure and predict the molar absorption coefficient of a protein,” Protein Science, vol. 4, no. 11, pp. 2411–2423, 1995.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. S. Spirin, “Spectrophotometric determination of total nucleic acids,” Biokhimiia, vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 656–662, 1958.
View at: Google Scholar
E. I. Ramm, G. S. Ivanov, V. I. Vorob'ev, S. N. Kadura, and S. N. Khrapunov, “Structure of illexine I2 and its complexes with DNA,” Molekulyarnaya Biologiya, vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 1590–1599, 1987.
View at: Google Scholar
R. M. Santella and H. Jei Li, “Interaction between poly(L-Lysine48, L-Histidine52) and DNA,” Biopolymers, vol. 16, no. 9, pp. 1879–1894, 1977.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. E. Olins, “Interaction of lysine-rich histones and DNA,” Journal of Molecular Biology, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 439–460, 1969.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. V. Chikhirzhina, T. Y. Starkova, E. I. Kostyleva, G. I. Chikhirzhina, V. I. Vorobiev, and A. M. Polyanichko, “Interaction of DNA with sperm-specific histones of the H1 family,” Cell and Tissue Biology, vol. 5, no. 6, pp. 536–542, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Chikhirzhina, T. Starkova, E. Kostyleva, and A. Polyanichko, “Spectroscopic study of the interaction of DNA with the linker histone H1 from starfish sperm reveals mechanisms of the formation of supercondensed sperm chromatin,” Spectroscopy, vol. 27, no. 5-6, pp. 433–440, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. C. Murphy, V. B. Zhurkin, J. M. Louis, G. Cornilescu, and G. M. Clore, “Structural basis for SRY-dependent 46-X,Y sex reversal: modulation of DNA bending by a naturally occurring point mutation,” Journal of Molecular Biology, vol. 312, no. 3, pp. 481–499, 2001.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. E. A. Churchill, A. Changela, L. K. Dow, and A. J. Krieg, “Interactions of high mobility group box proteins with DNA and chromatin,” Methods in Enzymology, vol. 304, pp. 99–133, 1999.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright

Copyright © 2014 Elena V. Chikhirzhina et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

PDF Download Citation

Download other formats

Order printed copies

Views

1130

Downloads

909

Citations