13.07.2015 Views

The Genom of Homo sapiens.pdf

The Genom of Homo sapiens.pdf

The Genom of Homo sapiens.pdf

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

136 HAMILTON ET AL.Figure 6. Diagrammatic example <strong>of</strong> the potential dramatic effects <strong>of</strong> zinc-finger motif gain or loss on the DNA sequence recognition<strong>of</strong> a hypothetical “code.” (A) Loss <strong>of</strong> a finger from the middle <strong>of</strong> the array affects several other fingers on one side <strong>of</strong> it, causing a“frameshift”-like disruption <strong>of</strong> any colinear amino acid-nucleotide recognition code and potentially reducing binding affinity for itsoriginal target. Note that a deletion on the ends <strong>of</strong> the array (not shown) may not have had as much effect on binding this target (butthe remaining fingers may have alternate functions which would be disrupted). (B) <strong>The</strong> same mutant protein shown with an increasedaffinity for a different target DNA sequence. This is one proposed way in which duplicated zinc-finger genes may find a role that allowsthem to be retained by selection.1997; Laity et al. 2000), so a change in the code <strong>of</strong> a singlefinger may have wider effects on protein function.However, the gain or loss <strong>of</strong> whole fingers may havemuch greater potential to drive paralog divergence by alteringarrangement <strong>of</strong> the KZNF motifs and interruptingthe matched geometries <strong>of</strong> fingers and nucleotides atbinding sites (Fig. 6). Considering the mode <strong>of</strong> interactionbetween DNA and KZNF domains, recombinationbetween the adjacent finger-repeat structures may providean unusually rapid path to functional divergence forKZNF proteins, producing more dramatic alterations inDNA-binding structure than could possibly be generatedthrough any other type <strong>of</strong> single mutational event.How might such changes in finger organization affectthe function <strong>of</strong> KZNF proteins? Experiments in which differentfingers <strong>of</strong> specific proteins are mutated using recombinantDNA techniques <strong>of</strong>ten produce proteins withaltered DNA-binding specificity (see, e.g., Isalan et al.1997; Ohlsson et al 2001; Hennemann et al. 2003; Mascleet al. 2003). However, several lines <strong>of</strong> data have suggestedthat all fingers in a polydactyl protein do not contributeequally to DNA binding (Filippova et al. 1996; Obata etal. 1999; Quitschke et al. 2000; Ohlsson et al. 2001;Daniel et al. 2002; Peng et al. 2002; Hennemann et al.2003). Longer or shorter versions <strong>of</strong> a duplicated KZNFarray in which the core-binding set <strong>of</strong> fingers is retainedmay potentially bind the same gene targets with alteredstabilities or specificities. Such subtly altered TF proteinsmay be useful in fine-tuning gene regulation; e.g., in differenttissues or at specific times in development. Indeed,one set <strong>of</strong> rodent-specific KK duplicates has recently beenshown to be involved in regulation <strong>of</strong> different genes in agender-specific manner in mice (Krebs et al. 2003).<strong>The</strong> functional impact <strong>of</strong> deletions or duplications <strong>of</strong>finger motifs from the middle <strong>of</strong> a KZNF array has notbeen studied extensively and is therefore a matter <strong>of</strong> conjecture.<strong>The</strong> answer may be complex, depending on details<strong>of</strong> structure and function <strong>of</strong> a particular KZNF domain.Internal rearrangements <strong>of</strong> finger motifs may havea dramatic effect on DNA binding, analogous to a“frameshift” in the target-recognition code. If such a disruptionoccurs within a core set <strong>of</strong> fingers, KZNF motifson one side or the other <strong>of</strong> the change could be mismatchedto the DNA sequence (Fig. 6). However, internalduplications and deletions may also generate novelDNA-binding arrays with affinities for new target sites;by opening new opportunities for gene regulation, evenradical changes in KZNF array structure might sometimesbe adaptive. Finally, not all changes in the physicalcenter <strong>of</strong> an array need be disruptive; it is possible thatwhen core subsets <strong>of</strong> fingers at either end <strong>of</strong> a long or dividedarray bind different targets (Morris et al. 1994), aduplication or deletion between these subsets may be allowedwith little effect.<strong>The</strong> importance <strong>of</strong> individual fingers may also shiftover evolutionary time in coordination with mutations inthe target sequence. For example, human and chickenvariants <strong>of</strong> the highly conserved 11-finger KZNF protein,CTCF, use different (but overlapping) sets <strong>of</strong> fingersto bind the diverging promoter sequences <strong>of</strong> the tar-

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!