|
|
||||||||




* Department of Microbiology, College of Biological Sciences, and
Department of Molecular Virology, Immunology and Medical Genetics, College of Medicine and Public Health, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210; and
Department of Host Defense, Research Institute for Microbial Diseases, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
B and stimulating factor 1
elements within the proximal mouse Toll-like receptor 2 (TLR2) promoter
region are required for the transcriptional activation of TLR2
expression following infection with Mycobacterium avium.
In the present study, we found that a rapid increase in both DNase
I sensitivity and restriction enzyme accessibility at the TLR2
promoter region occurred following infection with M.
avium. Increase in restriction enzyme accessibility at the TLR2
promoter region covering the NF-
B and stimulating factor 1 elements
was associated with the induction of TLR2 expression at the mRNA level.
Furthermore, the increase in restriction enzyme accessibility at the
TLR2 promoter region did not appear to result from binding of NF-
B,
but rather depended on a TLR2-myeloid differentiation factor 88
signaling pathway. Together our results indicate that chromatin
remodeling occurs at TLR2 promoter region following infection with
M. avium, allowing the access of transcription factors
to initiate the transcription of TLR2. | Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
B activation by the IL-1R in mammalian
cells. Medzhitov et al. (4) cloned a human receptor,
homologous to Toll, which participates in activation of cells during
both innate and adaptive immune responses. Ten members of the human
Toll-like receptor
(TLR)3 family have
been identified (5). At least some of these are involved
in mediating NF-
B activation following the interaction of
macrophages with different bacterial pathogens or bacterial cell wall
components (6, 7, 8). TLR4 has been shown to mediate the
response of macrophages to LPS (9, 10). The
hyporesponsiveness of C3H/HeJ mice (Lpsd) to LPS
is the result of a missense mutation in TLR4 (11, 12).
TLR2 has been implicated in the activation of NF-
B following
interaction of macrophages with LPS, lipoarabinomannan from
mycobacterial species, and lipoteichoic acids from the cell walls of
Gram-positive bacteria (13, 14, 15, 16). We have previously
reported that the transcription of TLR2 promoter was induced following
infection of macrophages with Mycobacterium avium. We also
found that two NF-
B and stimulating factor 1 (Sp1) sites are
required for the full induction of TLR2 transcription following
infection with M. avium. Genes in eukaryotic cells are packed into chromatin. The primary repeating units of chromatin are nucleosomes (17). Formation of nucleosomes and other higher order chromatin structures can render the DNA inaccessible to transcription factors and RNA polymerases. The repressive chromatin structure must be remodeled to allow transcription to occur. Studies at the Saccharomyces cerevisiae Pho5, HIV, and murine mammary tumor virus (MMTV) promoters have indicated that nucleosomes contribute important regulatory functions for genes that are rapidly induced in response to extracellular signals. The Pho5 promoter is contained within positioned nucleosomes. Induction with low phosphate results in dephosphorylation of activator Pho4, which binds a DNase I-hypersensitive region flanked by the promoter, ultimately allowing DNA binding and the selective remodeling of four nucleosomes in the vicinity of the promoter (18, 19). Nucleosomes are positioned downstream of the start site of the nucleosome-free HIV-1 promoter (20). During T cell activation, transcription factors bind the promoter, leading to the remodeling of the downstream nucleosome and the initiation of the transcription. Finally, the glucocorticoid-inducible MMTV promoter is contained within a nucleosome array, with one nucleosome spanning the glucocorticoid receptor binding sites (21, 22). Addition of ligand selectively remodels this nucleosome via the interaction with a remodeling protein, BRG1, facilitating the binding of additional factors required for transcription (23).
A recent report by Weinmann et al. (24) further supports the hypothesis that nucleosome remodeling is important for inducible transcription in mammalian cells. High resolution micrococcal nuclease analyses revealed that a positioned nucleosome, nucleosome 1, spanned the IL-12 promoter, while three additional positioned nucleosomes were found further upstream. Upon activation, nucleosome 1 was rapidly and selectively remodeled in a protein synthesis-dependent manner. These results suggested that remodeling complexes are selectively targeted to a single, promoter-encompassing nucleosome.
To investigate whether the induction of TLR2 transcription also correlates with chromatin remodeling, we determined whether infection with M. avium resulted in an alteration in DNase 1 sensitivity or restriction enzyme accessibility. We found that infection with M. avium resulted in an increase in restriction enzyme accessibility and in sensitivity to digestion with DNase 1 within the TLR2 promoter. The chromatin change required TLR2 and myeloid differentiation factor 88 (MyD88), but not new protein synthesis. We interpret our findings as indicating that chromatin remodeling has occurred at the TLR2 promoter following infection with M. avium.
| Materials and Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The murine alveolar macrophage cell line AMJ2-C8 (ATCC CRL-2455) was a generous gift from M. J. Fenton (Boston University, Boston, MA). Another murine macrophage cell line P388D1 (CCL-46) was obtained from American Type Culture Collection (Manassas, VA). Cells were cultured in IMDM (Life Technologies, Grand Island, NY) supplemented with 10% FBS (HyClone Laboratories, Logan, UT), 1% penicillin, and streptomycin. The expression and regulation of TLR2 by AMJ2-C8 cells were the same as those previously described by us for J774.1 macrophage cell line (25).
Primary macrophages
C57BL/6 mice (Charles River Breeding Laboratories, Wilmington, MA) and TLR2-/- and MyD88-/- (generous gifts from S. Akira, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan) mice were injected i.p. with thioglycolate. Three days later, the peritoneal exudate cells were isolated and allowed to adhere to the tissue culture plates. After overnight incubation, the cells were washed with PBS before treatment. Monolayers were infected with M. avium (ATCC 35712) at an 8:1 bacteria-macrophage ratio for 30 min or specified times. Before use, the M. avium was grown in Middlebrook 7H9 broth cultures, aliquoted in 1-ml amounts, and stored frozen at -70°C. Each vial contained 2.5 x 108 CFU, as determined by plate count on 7H11 agar plates.
Preparation of nuclei
Cells grown to confluence were removed by scraping and centrifuged at 1500 rpm in a microcentrifuge. Cells were washed once with ice-cold PBS and centrifuged. The cell pellet was resuspended in ice-cold Nonidet P-40 lysis buffer (10 mM Tris, pH 7.4, 10 mM NaCl, 3 mM MgCl2, 0.5% Nonidet P-40, 0.15 mM spermine, and 0.5 mM spermidine) (17) and incubated on ice for 5 min. Nuclei were centrifuged at 1000 rpm, followed by washing in the respective digestion buffer (without CaCl2).
Nuclease digestions and isolation of genomic DNA
For DNase 1 hypersensitivity assay, cell nuclei were resuspended in buffer A (100 mM NaCl, 50 mM Tris, pH 8.0, 3 mM MgCl2, 0.15 mM spermine, and 0.5 mM spermidine) (17) supplemented with CaCl2 (1 mM). DNase 1 (at specified concentration) was added, and the reaction (total volume 100 µl) was incubated at 37°C for 2 min.
Micrococcal nuclease (MNase) digestion proceeded as described by Carey and Smale (17) with minor modifications. Briefly cell nuclei were resuspended in MNase digestion buffer (10 mM Tris, pH 7.4, 15 mM NaCl, 60 mM KCl, 0.15 mM spermine, and 0.5 mM spermidine) containing CaCl2 (1 mM). MNase (stock solution = 25 U/µl) was added, and the reaction mixture was incubated at room temperature for 2, 5, and 10 min. The reaction was terminated by addition of 80 µl MNase digestion buffer and 20 µl stop buffer (100 mM EDTA and 10 mM EGTA).
For restriction enzyme digestion, cell nuclei were washed in restriction enzyme buffer (10 mM Tris, pH 7.4, 50 mM NaCl, 10 mM MgCl2, 0.2 mM EDTA, 0.2 mM EGTA, 1 mM 2-ME, 0.15 mM spermine, and 0.5 mM spermidine) (24). Nuclei were resuspended in the specific buffer for restriction enzyme digestion (50 µl). Digestion reactions were initiated with 2 µl restriction enzyme and incubated at 37°C for 10 min.
After digestion with nucleases, the total volume of reaction was brought to 200 µl by adding ddH2O. The reaction was stopped, and genomic DNA was isolated using the DNeasy Tissue kit from Qiagen (Valencia, CA), according to the manufacturers instructions.
Southern blot
Purified genomic DNA (1525 µg) was incubated overnight at 37°C with an excess of resriction enzyme SSP1. The DNA was then cleaned by phenol-chloroform extraction and analyzed on a 1% agarose gel, followed by transfer and hybridization with a [32P]dCTP-radiolabeled probe specific for the TLR2 promoter. The prehybridization and hybridization process was done within 3 h using the Stratagene (La Jolla, CA) QuickHyb hybridization buffer, according to the manufacturers instruction. Films were exposed for 218 h before development.
Nuclear extracts and EMSA
Nuclear extracts were prepared as described by Hussain et al.
(26). Protein concentration was determined by the
bicinchoninic acid protein assay (Pierce, Rockford, IL). Nuclear
extracts were either assayed immediately or stored at -70°C until
further use. The oligonucleotide used in the EMSA was: NF-
B
5'-ACACCTGGGGAATTCCCACACG-3'. Oligonucleotide was end labeled
with [
-32P]ATP using T4 polynucleotide
kinase. The binding reactions were conducted using the gel shift assay
core system from Promega (Madison, WI). Binding reactions contained
25 µg nuclear extract and 20,000 cpm radiolabeled oligonucleotide
in 10 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.5, 1 mM MgCl2, 0.5 mM
EDTA, 0.5 mM DTT, 50 mM NaCl, 1 µg poly(dI:dC), and 4% glycerol.
Binding reactions were electrophoresed at 4°C in 5% native
polyacrylamide gels using 0.5x Tris-borate buffer, followed by
autoradiography.
RNase protection assay
Total RNA was extracted using the RNAqueous kit (Ambion, Austin, TX). RNase protection assays (RPA) were performed using reagents from BD PharMingen (San Diego, CA), as previously described (27). Probe templates for mouse TLR2 and GAPDH were made in this laboratory and have been previously described (27). A total of 10 µg RNA was used for each RPA. Reactions were run on 6% polyacrylamide/8 M urea sequencing gels, followed by autoradiography.
Transient transfection
A total of 1 µg plasmid expressing NF-
B p65 was transfected
into C8 cells with 4 µl lipofectamine plus 6 µl lipofectamine.
After 24 h, the cell nuclei were isolated for restriction enzyme
accessibility determination or RNA was isolated for RPA. The
transfection has been proved effective when a luciferase reporter gene
was used (25). To measure luciferase activity, 15 ng
pCMV-NF-
B p65 or pCMV alone was cotransfected into C8 cells with 0.2
µg 326-bp TLR2 promoter-driven luciferase reporter. Forty-eight hours
after transfection, the cells were lysed and luciferase was measured,
as described before (25).
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
To investigate the active element in TLR2 promoter region, DNase 1
hypersensitivity of the chromosomal region covering TLR2 gene was
measured. The results in Fig. 1
show that
a band appeared when cells were infected with M. avium. The
size of this band is consistent with it being the part of the TLR2
promoter region that includes the NF-
B and Sp1 elements. The DNA was
completely digested by DNase 1 within 8 min in the M.
avium-infected cells.
|
|
|
Increased restriction enzyme accessibility occurs before
activation of some genes. To test whether an increase in restriction
enzyme accessibility correlates with the activation of TLR2, we
compared the expression of TLR2 at the mRNA level in two different
macrophage cell lines, P388D1 and C8. C8 cells express a relatively
high level of TLR2, while TLR2 mRNA was not detectable in P388D1 cells
under the same conditions (Fig. 4
A). The chromatin from P388D1
cells was much more resistant to digestion with EcoRI and
HaeII than the chromatin from C8 cells (Fig. 4
B).
Furthermore, infection with M. avium induced TLR2 at mRNA
level in C8 cells, but failed to do so in P388D1 cells (Fig. 4
A). Infection with M. avium led to an increase
in restriction enzyme sensitivity of the chromatin from C8 cells, but
not P388D1 cells (Fig. 4
B).
|
B binding
The EcoRI cuts the NF-
B binding site, which is
necessary for the induction of TLR2 transcription by LPS stimulation or
infection with M. avium (25, 28). To
investigate the role of NF-
B in increasing the restriction enzyme
accessibility of TLR2 promoter region covering NF-
B site and Sp1
sites, two approaches were used. First, we tested whether the
overexpression of NF-
B p65 can result in the increased restriction
enzyme accessibility at TLR2 promoter. Overexpression of NF-
B p65
induced the 326-bp TLR2 promoter-driven luciferase expression (Fig. 5
A), but failed to increase
the sensitivity to EcoRI and HaeII of the
endogenous TLR2 promoter (Fig. 5
B). Additionally,
overexpression of NF-
B p65 did not lead to an induction of
endogenous TLR2 expression (Fig. 5
C). Another approach was
to determine whether blocking of NF-
B binding to TLR2 promoter can
abolish the increased restriction enzyme accessibility following
infection with M. avium. Pyrrolidine dithiocarbamate
(PDTC), an antioxidant, has been reported to block the binding
of NF-
B to numerous genes (29). The results in Fig. 6
A show that PDTC blocked the
binding of NF-
B to the TLR2 promoter. PDTC also suppressed the
induction of TLR2 following infection. However, it failed to block the
increase in restriction enzyme accessibility following infection with
M. avium (Fig. 6
B).
|
|
|
Activation of macrophages upon infection with M. avium
requires the activation of TLR2 signaling pathways. This signaling
pathway also requires the participation of an adapter protein, MyD88.
To determine whether the TLR2-MyD88 signaling is essential for the
increase in the restriction enzyme accessibility within the TLR2
promoter in response to M. avium infection, peritoneal
macrophages from TLR2-/- mice and
MyD88-/- mice and the control C57BL/6 mice were
analyzed. As a control, we also analyzed the response of macrophages
from TLR2-/- mice following stimulation with
LPS. The results in Fig. 8
show that
restriction enzyme accessibility did not increase in macrophages from
TLR2-/- mice and
MyD88-/- mice following infection with M.
avium. In a parallel experiment, restriction enzyme accessibility
increased in macrophages from the wild-type C57BL/6 mice following
infection with M. avium. Restriction enzyme accessibility
also increased in macrophages from TLR2-/-
treated with LPS. These results suggest that the increase in
restriction enzyme accessibility of the TLR2 promoter following
M. avium infection appears to require the TLR2-MyD88
signaling pathway. The ability of LPS stimulation to induce the
restriction enzyme accessibility at TLR2 promoter region in cells from
TLR2-/- mice (Fig. 8
B, lanes
3 and 4) rules out the possibility that the failure of
M. avium infection to increase the restriction enzyme
accessibility at TLR2 promoter was due to the changes of TLR2 gene
locus in TLR2-/- mice. The promoter region of
the TLR2-/- mice is intact
(30).
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
B and Sp1 elements were required for the induction of TLR2
transcription following infection (25). In this study, we
found an inducible DNase 1-hypersensitive site around the NF-
B site
of TLR2 promoter following infection with M. avium,
indicating that this region may undergo chromatin remodeling. By
determining the restriction enzyme accessibility, we were able to map
the site that undergoes chromatin remodeling to the elements in which
NF-
B and Sp1 bind. This observation supports our previous results
using a transient transfection system: both NF-
B and SP1 elements
are required for the full induction of the TLR2 promoter. Although the
restriction enzyme accessibility increased at NF-
B and Sp1 site
after infection, the inefficient cleavage at EcoI 109 site
may indicate that this region is not undergoing a chromatin remodeling
following infection. Not all promoters are assembled into nucleosomes and remodeled during transcriptional activation. Only the first nucleosome was remodeled during activation of both the IL-12 and the MMTV promoters (24). In contrast, analysis of Pho5 and HIV-1 promoters showed that at least one binding site for an inducible activator was in a nucleosome-free region (18, 20). To determine whether the TLR2 promoter region is incorporated into nucleosomes before activation, the sensitivity of chromatin, including TLR2 promoter region, to MNase was determined. The appearance of a DNA ladder after digestion with MNase indicates that the TLR2 promoter is assembled into a nucleosome array.
The regulation of gene expression in mammalian cells is not only
restricted to the control of transcriptional, posttranscriptional,
translational, or posttranslational events. Chromatin remodeling is
another target for controlling the gene expression. Chromatin
remodeling has been shown to be important for IL-4 gene activation
(31). We observed that an increase in restriction enzyme
accessibility following infection with M. avium, within the
TLR2 promoter, correlated with the induction of TLR2 expression. P388D1
cells express almost no detectable levels of TLR2 mRNA. The chromatin
from these cells was more resistant to restriction enzyme digestion. In
contrast, C8 cells expressed a relatively high level of TLR2, and its
chromatin was easily digested by the restriction enzymes. The
restriction enzyme accessibility assays shown in Figs. 4
b,
6c, 7, and 8 appear to indicate that there may be additional
cleavage sites for HaeII and EcoRI. However, the
probe used for these studies encompassed nucleotides -292 to +32,
i.e., the region containing the restriction sites for both
EcoRI and HaeII (see Fig. 2
). In contrast, the
probe used to detect the increase in restriction enzyme accessibility
for the experiments shown in Figs. 2
and 5
was remote from this site
and between restriction sites PstI and SSP1, as shown in
Fig. 2
. Therefore, only one nuclear cleavage fragment was apparent
following restriction enzyme digestion. In contrast, two nuclear
cleavage fragments are visible when the probe spanning both the
EcoRI and HaeII sites was used because it
overlaps both cleavage fragments.
Overexpression of NF-
B p65 led to an increased transcription of a
TLR2 promoter-driven luciferase reporter vector cotransfected into
P388D1 cells (our unpublished results). However, infection of P388D1
cells with M. avium did not induce TLR2 expression, or
chromatin remodeling at TLR2 promoter. These cells may be defective in
the signaling pathway, which is necessary for the chromatin remodeling
to occur at the TLR2 promoter region, thus preventing the promoter
region from being accessible for the transcription factors.
Chromatin remodeling occurred within GM-CSF promoter, and it is
dependent upon an intact NF-
B and Sp1 elements (32).
NF-
B and Sp1 have also been shown to be associated with chromatin
remodeling of the HIV long terminal repeat promoter (33).
In the present study, the role of NF-
B in chromatin remodeling was
investigated. Overexpression of NF-
B p65 did not increase
restriction enzyme accessibility. Thus, activation of NF-
B alone is
not sufficient to lead to the chromatin remodeling within the TLR2
promoter region. In contrast, we have previously reported that
overexpression of NF-
B p65 alone was sufficient to activate a TLR2
promoter-driven reporter construct transiently transfected into
macrophage cell lines (25). Transiently transfected
plasmids are not assembled into chromatin; thus, the activation of
transcription of the reporter construct is not dependent upon chromatin
remodeling. In the present study, exogenous NF-
B failed to increase
the restriction enzyme accessibility of the endogenous TLR2 promoter;
neither did it induce the expression of endogenous TLR2.
NF-
B did not appear to be necessary for the chromatin remodeling.
PDTC inhibited the binding of NF-
B to TLR2 promoter and also
suppressed the induction of TLR2 at the mRNA level following infection,
while it did not have any effect on the chromatin remodeling. Taken
together, these results suggest that the chromatin remodeling within
TLR2 promoter following infection with M. avium is NF-
B
independent. Alternatively, chromatin remodeling may occur before the
binding of NF-
B to TLR2 promoter. Similarly, chromatin remodeling at
IL-12 p40 promoter, following LPS stimulation, did not require NF-
B
(34).
The activation of TLR2 signaling involves TLR2-MyD88-NF-
B-dependent
pathways (30, 35). Recently, other pathways were reported
to become activated following TLR2 activation (36). The
increase in restriction enzyme accessibility within the TLR2 promoter
following infection was TLR2-MyD88 dependent and did not require new
protein synthesis. Because NF-
B is neither sufficient nor necessary
for the chromatin remodeling of TLR2 promoter, different signals may
mediate the chromatin remodeling of TLR2 promoter following infection
with M. avium.
Our results demonstrate that the TLR2 promoter region becomes more
susceptible for DNase I or restriction enzyme digestion following
infection with M. avium. The increase in sensitivity to
DNase I or restriction enzymes digestion correlated with induction of
TLR2 expression. Both M. avium (TLR2 agonist) and LPS (TLR4
agonist) that induce TLR2 expression resulted in an increase in
restriction enzyme accessibility. The increased restriction enzyme
accessibility induced following infection with M. avium was
TLR2-MyD88 dependent, but not NF-
B dependent. Thus, we propose that
chromatin remodeling occurs within TLR2 promoter following infection
with M. avium. The chromatin remodeling may occur before
binding of NF-
B to TLR promoter through TLR2-MyD88 pathway, thus
allowing transcription factor NF-
B to interact with TLR2 promoter to
initiate transcription.
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
| Footnotes |
|---|
2 Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Bruce S. Zwilling, Department of Microbiology, 484 W. 12th Avenue, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210. E-mail address: zwilling.1{at}osu.edu ![]()
3 Abbreviations used in this paper: TLR, Toll-like receptor; MMTV, murine mammary tumor virus; MNase, micrococcal nuclease; MyD88, myeloid differentiation factor 88; PDTC, pyrrolidine dithiocarbamate; RPA, RNase protection assay; Sp1, stimulating factor 1. ![]()
Received for publication November 16, 2001. Accepted for publication May 10, 2002.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
B and Sp1 elements are necessary for the maximal transcription of Toll-like receptor 2 induced by Mycobacterium avium. J. Immunol. 167:6924.
Janus kinase-STAT signaling and gene induction by down-regulation of the IFN-
receptor. J. Immunol. 163:2041.
B and STAT5 play important roles in the regulation of mouse Toll-like receptor 2 gene expression. J. Immunol. 166:4516.
B (NF-
B) activation, prevents apoptosis in human promyelocytic leukemia HL-60 cells and thymocytes. Biochem. Pharmacol. 48:1883.[Medline]
B/Sp1 region is essential for chromatin remodeling and correct transcription of a human granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor transgene. J. Immunol. 167:302.
B-mediated chromatin reconfiguration and transcriptional activation of the HIV-1 enhancer in vitro. Genes Dev. 10:37.This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
N. K. Phulwani, N. Esen, M. Md. Syed, and T. Kielian TLR2 Expression in Astrocytes Is Induced by TNF-{alpha}- and NF-{kappa}B-Dependent Pathways J. Immunol., September 15, 2008; 181(6): 3841 - 3849. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. M. Johnson and R. I. Tapping Microbial Products Stimulate Human Toll-like Receptor 2 Expression through Histone Modification Surrounding a Proximal NF-{kappa}B-binding Site J. Biol. Chem., October 26, 2007; 282(43): 31197 - 31205. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. E. Butler, D. H. Francis, J. Freeling, P. Weber, and A. M. Krieg Antibody Repertoire Development in Fetal and Neonatal Piglets. IX. Three Pathogen-Associated Molecular Patterns Act Synergistically to Allow Germfree Piglets to Respond to Type 2 Thymus-Independent and Thymus-Dependent Antigens J. Immunol., November 15, 2005; 175(10): 6772 - 6785. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. Xing, D. C. Wilkerson, C. N. Mayhew, E. J. Lubert, H. S. Skaggs, M. L. Goodson, Y. Hong, O.-K. Park-Sarge, and K. D. Sarge Mechanism of hsp70i Gene Bookmarking Science, January 21, 2005; 307(5708): 421 - 423. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Hongkuan Fan and J. A. Cook Review: Molecular mechanisms of endotoxin tolerance Innate Immunity, April 1, 2004; 10(2): 71 - 84. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |