Abstract

Transcription by RNA Polymerase II (Pol II) is initiated by the hierarchical assembly of the Pre-Initiation Complex onto promoter DNA. Decades of research have shown that the TATA-box binding protein (TBP) is essential for Pol II loading and initiation. Here, we report instead that acute depletion of TBP in mouse embryonic stem cells has no global effect on ongoing Pol II transcription. In contrast, acute TBP depletion severely impairs RNA Polymerase III initiation. Furthermore, Pol II transcriptional induction occurs normally upon TBP depletion. This TBP-independent transcription mechanism is not due to a functional redundancy with the TBP paralog TRF2, though TRF2 also binds to promoters of transcribed genes. Rather, we show that the TFIID complex can form and, despite having reduced TAF4 and TFIIA binding when TBP is depleted, the Pol II machinery is sufficiently robust in sustaining TBP-independent transcription.

Data availability

All sequencing data have been deposited in Gene Expression Omnibus (Accession number GSE172401). All mass spectrometry data have been deposited to ProteomeExchange (PXD034171) through MassIVE (MSV000089562). All other data are available in the manuscript or in the supplementary materials.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. James ZJ Kwan

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Thomas F Nguyen

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Anuli C Uzozie

    Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Marek A Budzynski

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Jieying Cui

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Joseph MC Lee

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Filip Van Petegem

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Philipp F Lange

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1171-5864
  9. Sheila S Teves

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
    For correspondence
    sheila.teves@ubc.ca
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1220-2414

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research (PJT-162289)

  • Filip Van Petegem

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (RGPIN-2020-06106)

  • Sheila S Teves

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Copyright

© 2023, Kwan et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 2,760
    views
  • 396
    downloads
  • 8
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. James ZJ Kwan
  2. Thomas F Nguyen
  3. Anuli C Uzozie
  4. Marek A Budzynski
  5. Jieying Cui
  6. Joseph MC Lee
  7. Filip Van Petegem
  8. Philipp F Lange
  9. Sheila S Teves
(2023)
RNA Polymerase II transcription independent of TBP
eLife 12:e83810.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.83810

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.83810

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    Bethany M Bartlett, Yatendra Kumar ... Wendy A Bickmore
    Research Article Updated

    During oncogene-induced senescence there are striking changes in the organisation of heterochromatin in the nucleus. This is accompanied by activation of a pro-inflammatory gene expression programme – the senescence-associated secretory phenotype (SASP) – driven by transcription factors such as NF-κB. The relationship between heterochromatin re-organisation and the SASP has been unclear. Here, we show that TPR, a protein of the nuclear pore complex basket required for heterochromatin re-organisation during senescence, is also required for the very early activation of NF-κB signalling during the stress-response phase of oncogene-induced senescence. This is prior to activation of the SASP and occurs without affecting NF-κB nuclear import. We show that TPR is required for the activation of innate immune signalling at these early stages of senescence and we link this to the formation of heterochromatin-enriched cytoplasmic chromatin fragments thought to bleb off from the nuclear periphery. We show that HMGA1 is also required for cytoplasmic chromatin fragment formation. Together these data suggest that re-organisation of heterochromatin is involved in altered structural integrity of the nuclear periphery during senescence, and that this can lead to activation of cytoplasmic nucleic acid sensing, NF-κB signalling, and activation of the SASP.

    1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    2. Evolutionary Biology
    Timothy Fuqua, Yiqiao Sun, Andreas Wagner
    Research Article

    Gene regulation is essential for life and controlled by regulatory DNA. Mutations can modify the activity of regulatory DNA, and also create new regulatory DNA, a process called regulatory emergence. Non-regulatory and regulatory DNA contain motifs to which transcription factors may bind. In prokaryotes, gene expression requires a stretch of DNA called a promoter, which contains two motifs called –10 and –35 boxes. However, these motifs may occur in both promoters and non-promoter DNA in multiple copies. They have been implicated in some studies to improve promoter activity, and in others to repress it. Here, we ask whether the presence of such motifs in different genetic sequences influences promoter evolution and emergence. To understand whether and how promoter motifs influence promoter emergence and evolution, we start from 50 ‘promoter islands’, DNA sequences enriched with –10 and –35 boxes. We mutagenize these starting ‘parent’ sequences, and measure gene expression driven by 240,000 of the resulting mutants. We find that the probability that mutations create an active promoter varies more than 200-fold, and is not correlated with the number of promoter motifs. For parent sequences without promoter activity, mutations created over 1500 new –10 and –35 boxes at unique positions in the library, but only ~0.3% of these resulted in de-novo promoter activity. Only ~13% of all –10 and –35 boxes contribute to de-novo promoter activity. For parent sequences with promoter activity, mutations created new –10 and –35 boxes in 11 specific positions that partially overlap with preexisting ones to modulate expression. We also find that –10 and –35 boxes do not repress promoter activity. Overall, our work demonstrates how promoter motifs influence promoter emergence and evolution. It has implications for predicting and understanding regulatory evolution, de novo genes, and phenotypic evolution.