Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
We have identified alternatively spliced isoforms of murine Pax-3 and Pax-7 which differ by the presence or absence of a single glutamine residue in a linker region which separates two distinct DNA-binding subdomains within the paired domain. By reverse transcription-PCR, these isoforms of Pax-3 and Pax-7 (Q+ and Q-) were detected at similar levels through multiple developmental stages in the early mouse embryo. DNA-binding studies using the Q+ and Q- isoforms of Pax-3 revealed that this alternative splicing event had no major effect on the ability of these isoforms to bind to an oligonucleotide specific for the Pax-3 homeodomain (P2) or to a paired domain recognition sequence (e5) that interacts primarily with the N-terminal subdomain of the paired domain. However, DNA-binding studies with sequences (P6CON and CD19-2/A) containing consensus elements for both the N-terminal and C-terminal subdomains revealed that the Q- isoform binds to these sequences with a two- to fivefold-higher affinity; further mutation of the GTCAC core N-terminal subdomain recognition motif of CD19-2/A generated binding sites with a high degree of specificity for the Q- isoform. These differences in DNA binding in vitro were also reflected in the enhanced ability of the Q- isoform to stimulate transcription of a reporter containing multiple copies of CD19-2/A upstream of the thymidine kinase basal promoter. In support of the observations made with these naturally occurring Pax-3 isoforms, introducing a glutamine residue at the analogous position in PAX6 caused a fivefold reduction in binding to P6CON and a complete loss of binding to CD19-2/A and to the C-terminal subdomain-specific probe 5aCON. These studies therefore provide direct evidence for a role for the paired-domain linker region in DNA target site selection, and they identify novel isoforms of Pax-3 and Pax-7 that have the potential to mediate distinct functions in the developing embryo.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vogan et al. (1996) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: