» Articles » PMID: 21178074

Electron Microscopy Studies on the Quaternary Structure of P53 Reveal Different Binding Modes for P53 Tetramers in Complex with DNA

Overview
Specialty Science
Date 2010 Dec 24
PMID 21178074
Citations 48
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The multidomain homotetrameric tumor suppressor p53 has two modes of binding dsDNA that are thought to be responsible for scanning and recognizing specific response elements (REs). The C termini bind nonspecifically to dsDNA. The four DNA-binding domains (DBDs) bind REs that have two symmetric 10 base-pair sequences. p53 bound to a 20-bp RE has the DBDs enveloping the DNA, which is in the center of the molecule surrounded by linker sequences to the tetramerization domain (Tet). We investigated by electron microscopy structures of p53 bound to DNA sequences consisting of a 20-bp RE with either 12 or 20 bp nonspecific extensions on either end. We found a variety of structures that give clues to recognition and scanning mechanisms. The 44- and 60-bp sequences gave rise to three and four classes of structures, respectively. One was similar to the known 20-bp structure, but the DBDs in the other classes were loosely arranged and incompatible with specific DNA recognition. Some of the complexes had density consistent with the C termini extending from Tet to the DNA, adjacent to the DBDs. Single-molecule fluorescence resonance energy transfer experiments detected the approach of the C termini towards the DBDs on addition of DNA. The structural data are consistent with p53 sliding along DNA via its C termini and the DNA-binding domains hopping on and off during searches for REs. The loose structures and posttranslational modifications account for the affinity of nonspecific DNA for p53 and point to a mechanism of enhancement of specificity by its binding to effector proteins.

Citing Articles

How does p53 work? Regulation by the intrinsically disordered domains.

Dyson H, Wright P Trends Biochem Sci. 2024; 50(1):9-17.

PMID: 39578215 PMC: 11698644. DOI: 10.1016/j.tibs.2024.10.009.


Navigating the complexity of p53-DNA binding: implications for cancer therapy.

Thayer K, Stetson S, Caballero F, Chiu C, Han I Biophys Rev. 2024; 16(4):479-496.

PMID: 39309126 PMC: 11415564. DOI: 10.1007/s12551-024-01207-4.


Exploring the Role of Globular Domain Locations on an Intrinsically Disordered Region of p53: A Molecular Dynamics Investigation.

Bakker M, Sorensen H, Skepo M J Chem Theory Comput. 2024; 20(3):1423-1433.

PMID: 38230670 PMC: 10867847. DOI: 10.1021/acs.jctc.3c00971.


Nonspecific vs. specific DNA binding free energetics of a transcription factor domain protein.

Al Masri C, Wan B, Yu J Biophys J. 2023; 122(22):4476-4487.

PMID: 37897044 PMC: 10722393. DOI: 10.1016/j.bpj.2023.10.025.


Structural assessment of the full-length wild-type tumor suppressor protein p53 by mass spectrometry-guided computational modeling.

Ianni A, Tuting C, Kipping M, Ihling C, Koppen J, Iacobucci C Sci Rep. 2023; 13(1):8497.

PMID: 37231156 PMC: 10213020. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-35437-5.


References
1.
Kastner B, Fischer N, Golas M, Sander B, Dube P, Boehringer D . GraFix: sample preparation for single-particle electron cryomicroscopy. Nat Methods. 2007; 5(1):53-5. DOI: 10.1038/nmeth1139. View

2.
Ahn J, Prives C . The C-terminus of p53: the more you learn the less you know. Nat Struct Biol. 2001; 8(9):730-2. DOI: 10.1038/nsb0901-730. View

3.
Scheres S, Melero R, Valle M, Carazo J . Averaging of electron subtomograms and random conical tilt reconstructions through likelihood optimization. Structure. 2009; 17(12):1563-1572. PMC: 2940245. DOI: 10.1016/j.str.2009.10.009. View

4.
Joerger A, Allen M, Fersht A . Crystal structure of a superstable mutant of human p53 core domain. Insights into the mechanism of rescuing oncogenic mutations. J Biol Chem. 2003; 279(2):1291-6. DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M309732200. View

5.
Chen Y, Dey R, Chen L . Crystal structure of the p53 core domain bound to a full consensus site as a self-assembled tetramer. Structure. 2010; 18(2):246-56. PMC: 2824536. DOI: 10.1016/j.str.2009.11.011. View