Differential capacity of wild type promoter elements for binding and trans-activation by retinoic acid and thyroid hormone receptors

Abstract

Retinoic acid receptor (RAR) and thyroid hormone receptor (T3R) are structurally similar and can bind as homodimers or T3R-RAR heterodimers to a single synthetic DNA response element. The interaction of these two types of receptors with wild type elements, however, has not been systematically investigated. Promoter elements from genes regulated by retinoic acid (RA) or thyroid hormone (T3) were tested for response to T3 and RA in transient transfections in both JEG and COS cells. The elements were classified as primarily responsive to RA or to T3 or responsive to both ligands. Binding of highly purified RARα and T3Rα to the various elements was assessed using the gel shift assay. Those elements predominantly responsive to one ligand showed preferential binding to the appropriate receptor. A series of point mutations were introduced into the rat GH T3 response element to further define sequence requirements for response to both RA and T3. Down-mutations in any of the three hexamers (previously demonstrated to be required for full response to T3 and full binding of T3R) also decreased RA induction and RAR binding. However, only one of two sets of up-mutations for T3 response also increased RA induction, demonstrating differences in hexamer preference between RAR and T3R. Variation in spacing of the three hexamers did not influence RA vs. T3 induction or RAR vs. T3R binding according to the predictions of a simple hexamer spacing model. There was a strong correlation between the extent of T3R dimer binding and strength of T3 induction for a subset of elements studied in JEG cells (r = 0.97, P < 0.01) and a weaker but significant correlation in COS cells (r = 0.65, P < 0.05)). In contrast, RAR dimer binding by the wild type elements did not quantitatively correlate with RA induction in either JEG (r = 0.13, P > 0.05) or COS cells (r = 0.21, P > 0.05). These results suggests that RAR interacts with a heterodimer partnerfs) which influences binding site specificity, whereas T3R heterodimer partner(s) is less likely to alter binding site recognition. The observed difference in COS and JEG cells as well as the weak T3R binding-function relationship of the malic enzyme element, however, suggest that the influence of T3R heterodimer partner(s) on binding site specificity is likely to vary with cell type and the specific element tested.