| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Center for Animal Biotechnology and Genomics (J.G.W.F., T.E.S., F.W.B.) and Departments of Animal Science (T.E.S., F.W.B.) and Veterinary Physiology and Pharmacology (S.H.S., F.W.B.), Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843
Address all correspondence and requests for reprints to: Fuller W. Bazer, Center for Animal Biotechnology and Genomics, 442 Kleberg Center, 2471 TAMU, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843-2471. E-mail: fbazer{at}cvm.tamu.edu.
 |
Abstract |
|---|
 Top Abstract IntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
(IFNT) from the conceptus to uterine endometrial luminal epithelia (LE) that prevents release of luteolytic prostaglandin F2
pulses. In cyclic and pregnant ewes, progesterone down-regulates progesterone receptor (PGR) gene expression in LE. In cyclic ewes, loss of PGR allows for increases in estrogen receptor (ESR1) and then oxytocin receptor (OXTR) gene expression followed by oxytocin-induced prostaglandin F2 pulses. In pregnant ewes, IFNT inhibits transcription of the ESR1 gene, which presumably inhibits OXTR gene transcription. Alternatively, IFNT may directly inhibit OXTR gene transcription. The 5' promoter/enhancer region of the ovine OXTR gene was cloned and found to contain predicted binding sites for activator protein 1, SP1, and PGR, but not for ESR1. Deletion analysis showed that the basal promoter activity was dependent on the region from –144 to –4 bp that contained only SP1 sites. IFNT did not affect activity of the OXTR promoter. In cells transfected with ESR1, E2, and ICI 182,780 increased promoter activity due to GC-rich SP1 binding sites at positions –104 and –64. Mutation analyses showed that the proximal SP1 sites mediated ESR1 action as well as basal activity of the promoter. In response to progesterone, progesterone receptor B also increased OXTR promoter activity. SP1 protein was constitutively expressed and abundant in the LE of the ovine uterus. These results support the hypothesis that the antiluteolytic effects of IFNT are mediated by direct inhibition or silencing of ESR1 gene transcription, thereby precluding ESR1/SP1 from stimulating OXTR gene transcription. |
Introduction |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
(PGF) in a pulsatile manner to induce luteolysis during late diestrus. The luteolytic pulses of PGF are produced by the endometrial luminal epithelium (LE) and superficial ductal glandular epithelium (sGE) and are generated by oxytocin binding to oxytocin receptors (OXTR) on those epithelia (3, 4, 5, 6). Endometrial epithelial expression of OXTR is regulated primarily by receptors for progesterone [progesterone receptor (PGR)] and estrogen [estrogen receptor (ESR1)] (7, 8, 9). During proestrus and estrus (d –3 to 0), estrogen from ovarian follicles increases ESR1, PGR, and OXTR expression. During diestrus (d 3–15), progesterone levels increase and act via PGR to "block" expression of ESR1 and OXTR in LE and glandular epithelium (GE) between d 5 and 11 after onset of estrus (10, 11, 12). However, continuous exposure of the uterus to progesterone down-regulates expression of PGR in LE/sGE after d 11 and GE after d 13, allowing for rapid increases in expression of ESR1 on d 12–13 and then OXTR on d 14 in those epithelia (9, 10, 13, 14). ESR1, presumably activated by estrogen from ovarian follicles or possibly growth factors from the stroma, stimulates transcription of the OXTR gene in the ovine endometrium (15, 16, 17, 18). Oxytocin, secreted from as early as d 9 from posterior pituitary and/or the CL, binds to OXTR to induce pulsatile release of luteolytic PGF between d 14–16 (3). In response to four to five luteolytic pulses of PGF over a 25-h period, the CL undergoes functional and structural regression. The systemic loss in progesterone between d 15–16 allows the ewe to return to estrus, complete the 17-d estrous cycle, and experience another opportunity to mate and establish pregnancy.
Interferon (IFNT), the pregnancy recognition signal in ruminants, is expressed by conceptus trophectoderm between d 10 and 21 of gestation (19) and acts in a paracrine antiluteolytic manner on the endometrial LE and sGE to inhibit OXTR gene expression (10, 13, 20). IFNT does not inhibit basal production of PGF, which is higher in pregnant than cyclic ewes, and the conceptus and IFNT do not decrease expression of PTGS2 [prostaglandin-endoperoxide synthase 2 (prostaglandin G/H synthase and cyclooxygenase)], the rate-limiting enzyme in prostaglandin production, in endometrial epithelia of pregnant ewes (5, 21). The antiluteolytic effects of IFNT to inhibit OXTR gene expression in the endometrial LE and sGE have been hypothesized to involve: 1) direct stabilization of epithelial PGR expression that, in turn, extends progesterone inhibition of ESR1 and OXTR expression; 2) direct inhibition or silencing of ESR1 gene transcription that, in turn, indirectly inhibits OXTR gene expression; and 3) direct inhibition of OXTR gene transcription. IFNT does not inhibit PGR loss in the endometrial epithelia (12, 16), but rather appears to indirectly inhibit OXTR gene transcription by silencing ESR1 gene transcription in the endometrial LE (15, 16, 22). Indeed, the 2.7-kb 5' promoter/enhancer region of the ovine ESR1 gene was found to contain four interferon regulatory factor elements (IRFEs) and one interferon-stimulated response element (ISRE) that were functional in binding interferon regulatory factor (IRF)2 (23). IRF2 is a transcriptional repressor that is expressed specifically in the endometrial LE and sGE of the ovine uterus and increases in expression from d 10–16 of pregnant but not cyclic ewes (24). In transfection assays, IFNT inhibited transcriptional activity of the ovine ESR1 promoter, and analyses of sequential 5'-deletion mutants of the ovine ESR1 promoter indicated that the effects of IFNT may be mediated by IRFEs as well as other elements (23). Physiological evidence indicates that estrogen stimulates OXTR gene expression and that IFNT does not directly inhibit OXTR gene expression in the sheep uterus (15, 25). Direct effects of estrogen and IFNT on the ovine OXTR gene have not been studied previously, because the gene had not been cloned. The bovine OXTR gene promoter region was cloned and found to contain an IRFE, ESR1 response element (ERE) half sites, and SP1 sites, and could be transactivated by estrogen if cells were cotransfected with ESR1 and steroid receptor coactivator 1 (26). Curiously, IRF2 overexpression increased activity of the bovine OXTR promoter, but a direct effect of IFNT on promoter activity was not reported. In all mammals, estrogen is considered a key regulator of OXTR gene expression; however, all of the studied OXTR genes lack a complete ERE, suggesting estrogen induction of OXTR gene transcription may be indirect rather than due to direct ESR1/ERE interactions (27).
Our working hypothesis is that estrogen acts indirectly to regulate OXTR gene expression in the endometrium of the ovine uterus and that the antiluteolytic effects of IFNT are manifest on silencing or inhibition of ESR1 gene transcription in LE and sGE subsequent to PGR down-regulation, which then precludes the ability of estrogen or perhaps growth factors to activate ESR1 and stimulate OXTR gene expression. These actions of IFNT prevent formation of OXTR and abrogate uterine release of luteolytic pulses of PGF (4, 8, 23, 28). The objective of the present studies was to determine if estrogen and/or IFNT regulate OXTR promoter activity. The promoter region of the ovine OXTR gene was cloned, sequenced, and analyzed for functional cis-elements mediating effects of steroid hormones and IFNT. Relevant findings are that IFNT does not affect OXTR promoter activity nor inhibit estrogen induction of OXTR promoter activity. Two GC-rich SP1 binding sites, located within 140 bp of the translational start site, regulated basal activity of the promoter as well as hormonal responsiveness to 17ß-estradiol (E2), ICI 182,780, and progesterone. Thus, estrogen regulation of ovine OXTR promoter activity involves ESR1/SP1 interactions.
|
Materials and Methods |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Cloning of the 5' upstream region and luciferase constructs
A 273-bp DNA fragment of the 5' end of the coding region of the ovine OXTR gene was PCR amplified in 25-µl reactions containing 40 ng ovine genomic DNA (a gift from Dr. C. Gill, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX), PCR Optimized Buffer N (Invitrogen), 125 µM dNTPs, 2.5 µM forward primer (5'-GGAGGCGGTCAACGGGAG-3'), 2.5 µM reverse primer (5'-CGTGATGTCCCACAGAAGC-3'), and 1 U AmpliTaq polymerase using an Eppendorf Mastercycler thermocycler with conditions of: 1) 94 C for 5 min; 2) 94 C for 30 sec, 53 C for 30 sec, and 72 C for 30 sec for 35 cycles; and 3) 72 C for 7 min. The product was cloned into pCRII Dual using the TA Cloning kit (Invitrogen). The cloned 273-bp OXTR fragment was excised with EcoRI, random prime labeled with [-32P]dCTP, and used to screen an ovine 
genomic library cloned in Bluestar (Novagen, Madison, WI), which was kindly provided by Dr. J. C. DeMartini (Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO). A recombinant pBluestar phagemid DNA, containing approximately 9.8 kb of ovine genomic DNA, was excised from plaque-purified isolates by Cre-Lox excision according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Physical mapping, Southern blotting with the 273-bp OXTR probe, and sequencing with T7 and T3 primers and several OXTR-specific primers were done to identify the OXTR coding and upstream sequences in the clone. The 5' terminus of the coding sequence and the contiguous upstream sequences were sequenced on both strands by the dideoxy chain termination method. The OXTR upstream region was immediately adjacent to the NotI site in the vector multiple cloning site. The upstream region was excised as an 826-bp fragment using the vector NotI and a NotI site at –4 relative to the ATG (+1) of the OXTR coding sequences and cloned in pCRII Dual in both orientations as determined by physical mapping of the unique BglII site at –144. The OXTR(–830/–4) upstream region then was directionally subcloned into the luciferase vector pGL3Basic (Promega). Computer-assisted prediction of transcription factor binding sites in the promoter sequence was performed with TESS (Transcription Element Search System) using TRANSFAC version 4.0 (30) and MatInspector using Matrix Family Library Version 2.4 (Genomatix, Munich, Germany) (31).
Truncations of the upstream region at approximately 100-bp intervals were made by PCR amplification in 50-µl reactions containing 1 ng pCRII-OXTR(–830/–4), 25 mM TAPS (N-[Tris(hydroxymethyl)methyl]-3-aminopropane-sulfonic acid, pH 9.3 at room temperature), 50 mM KCl, 2 mM MgCl2, 200 µM dNTPs, 0.2 µM each forward primer (Table 1
), 0.2 µM T7 primer as reverse primer, and 1.25 U ExTaq in a Perkin-Elmer 9700 thermocycler using conditions of: 1) 94 C for 2 min; 2) 94 C for 1 min, 50 C for 1 min, 72 C for 1 min for 30 cycles; and 3) 72 C for 10 min. The truncated PCR products were cloned into pCRII Dual, physically mapped to determine orientation, and directionally subcloned into the pGL3Basic vector. The OXTR(–144/–4) LUC truncated clone was made by digestion of OXTR(–220/–4) LUC plasmid DNA with BglII, reinserting the BglII (–144/–4) fragment into the luciferase vector, and physically mapping the construct to confirm proper orientation. Point mutations were introduced into the SP1 sites at –104 and –64 of the OXTR(–220/–4) truncated pCRII subclone by PCR-directed mutagenesis using the primers listed in Table 1 and Vent Taq polymerase and ExTaq (31). A OXTR(–220/–4) pCRII clone containing an introduced mutation at the –64 SP1 site was used as the template for the construction of OXTR–220 constructs with mutated SP1 sites at both –104 and –64. Mutated DNAs were confirmed by sequencing, and fragments containing only the desired point mutations were directionally subcloned into the luciferase vector as described above.
|
EMSA
Double-stranded oligonucleotide primers listed in Table 1
were end-labeled to high specific activity with [
-32P]ATP and T4 DNA kinase by standard methods. Purified SP1 protein (54 ng/reaction) was incubated in 10 µl reactions containing 4% glycerol, 1 mM MgCl2, 0.5 mM EDTA, 50 mM NaCl, 10 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.5), 0.5 mM DTT, 0.05 mg/ml poly(dI-dC) at room temperature for 15 min. A 100-fold excess of unlabeled specific or nonspecific competitor oligonucleotides was included in some reactions. The nonspecific competitor was a 22-nt oligonucleotide with the same base composition as the SP1 consensus oligonucleotide to minimize charge differences, but having a different sequence (Table 1). Radiolabeled probes (10 fmol per reaction) were added to reactions that were incubated at room temperature for an additional 15 min. Binding reactions were electrophoresed in 5% native polyacrylamide gels in 1x TBE. Imaging of dried gels was done with a Molecular Dynamics Typhoon phosphorimager.
Immunohistochemistry
Mature crossbred Suffolk ewes (Ovis aries) were observed daily for estrus in the presence of vasectomized rams and used in experiments only after they had exhibited at least two estrous cycles of normal duration (16–18 d). All experimental and surgical procedures were in compliance with the Guide for the Care and Use of Agriculture Animals and approved by the University Laboratory Animal Care and Use Committee of Texas A&M University.
At estrus (d 0), ewes were mated to either an intact or vasectomized ram as described previously (34) and then hysterectomized (n = 5 ewes per day) on either d 10, 12, 14, or 16 of the estrous cycle or d 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, or 20 of pregnancy. Pregnancy was confirmed on d 10–16 after mating by the presence of a morphologically normal conceptus(es) in the uterus. At hysterectomy, several sections (
0.5 cm) from the mid-portion of each uterine horn ipsilateral to the CL were fixed in fresh 4% paraformaldehyde in PBS (pH 7.2). After 24 h, fixed tissues were changed to 70% ethanol for 24 h and then dehydrated and embedded in Paraplast-Plus (Oxford Labware, St. Louis, MO). In monovulatory pregnant ewes, uterine tissue samples were marked as either contralateral or ipsilateral to the ovary bearing the CL. No tissues from the contralateral uterine horn were used for study.
Immunoreactive SP1 proteins were localized in cross-sections (5 µm) of the uterus using a rabbit polyclonal antibody to human SP1 (catalog SC-59; Santa Cruz Biotechnology Inc., Santa Cruz, CA) at a final working concentration of 0.1 µg/ml and a VectaStain Rabbit IgG Elite ABC kit (Vector Laboratories, Burlingame, CA) using methods described previously (35). Antigen retrieval using boiling citrate buffer was performed as described previously (35, 36). The chromagen used for peroxidase localization was 3,3'-diaminobenzidine tetrahydrochloride from Sigma Chemical Co. (St. Louis, MO). Negative controls were performed in which the primary antibody was substituted with the same concentration of purified normal rabbit IgG from Sigma Chemical Co. Multiple tissue sections from each ewe were processed as sets within an experiment. Sections were not counterstained before affixing coverslips. Representative photomicrographs of uterine tissues were taken using a Nikon Eclipse 1000 photomicroscope (Nikon Instruments Inc., Lewisville, TX) fitted with a Nikon DXM1200 digital camera. Digital images were captured and assembled using Adobe Photoshop (Adobe Systems, Seattle, WA).
Statistical analyses
The effects of steroid hormones, ICI 182,780, or IFNT on the activity of promoter reporter constructs in transient transfection assays were analyzed by least squares ANOVA using the General Linear Models procedure of the Statistical Analysis System (Cary, NC). A P value of 0.10 or less was considered statistically significant. Unless denoted, data are reported as mean with SD. Effects of treatment were determined using orthogonal or nonorthogonal contrasts using the PDIFF option of General Linear Models.
|
Results |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
ovine genomic library by conventional screening. Southern blotting, physical mapping, and sequence analysis with several OXTR-specific primers revealed that the clone contained a 1059-bp region that included the 5' end of the coding sequence of the ovine OXTR gene contiguous to 830 nt of upstream sequence. The 1059-bp clone was sequenced in both directions and deposited into GenBank (accession AY163261). Sequence comparisons of the ovine upstream region with the previously characterized Bos taurus OXTR promoter region and adjacent coding regions (GenBank AF100633) indicated that the two sequences were 91% identical. Although the coding sequence displayed high homology with the OXTR cDNA from other species (human, dog, pig, gorilla, rat, mouse, chicken), the promoter region had very little or no homology to those of other species except for bovine.
Bioinformatic analyses found that the ovine OXTR promoter region contained multiple putative binding sites for the transcription factors SP1 and activator protein 1 (AP-1), which regulates target genes by steroid hormone receptors (see Refs.37 and 38 for review). Putative nonconsensus SP1 sites were found at –748, –543, and –444 relative to the translational start site (ATG +1) in addition to consensus sites at –104 and –64 (Fig. 1). The putative –64 SP1 binding site is identical to the consensus SP1 binding motif (5'-CCCCGCCCC-3', sense strand). The –104 putative binding site (5'-CCCCACCCCGCCCC-3', sense strand) also contains a consensus binding motif that is immediately adjacent to and overlaps a sequence that resembles a nonconsensus SP1 binding site (5'-CCCCACCCC-3') (Fig. 1). Nonconsensus SP1 sites having the sequence 5'-CCCCACCCC-3' have been reported for the long terminal repeats of the human endogenous retrovirus H family of human retrovirus-like elements (39). Alternatively, part of the sequence of the OXTR –104 SP1 site may contain a CACCC box at the 5' end. The CACCC elements bind SP1 and related Sp/Kruppel-like factor transcription factors (40) and are involved in regulation of both basal (41) and induced levels of transcription in other systems (42). A consensus AP-1 binding site at –680 and nonconsensus AP-1 sites at –574, –329, and –221 were identified, which also mediate hormone actions (38). No full progesterone response elements (PREs) were found, but several putative PRE half sites were detected at –639, –486, –477, and –187. No full EREs or ERE half sites were found by computer-assisted analysis of the ovine OXTR upstream region. Furthermore, elements mediating effects of type I or II IFNs or STATs, including ISRE, IRFE, or activation sites (GAS) (43), were also not found by bioinformatic analyses.
|
In 2fTGH cells transfected with the OXTR(–830/–4) construct and ESR1wt, E2 (10–8 M) increased (P < 0.01) luciferase activity, and this induction was not affected (P > 0.10) by IFNT treatment (Fig. 2). Treatment with IFNT lowered (P < 0.05) the basal activity of the ovine OXTR promoter; however, the fold induction by E2 was the same in untreated and IFNT-treated cells. Similar results were obtained using U3A cells (data not shown). The basal activity of several promoter-reporter constructs appears to be nonspecifically affected by IFNT, presumably due to effects on cell metabolism due to induction of an antiviral state (data not shown). These results indicate that IFNT does not inhibit E2-induced transactivation in cells transfected with OXTR promoter-derived constructs.
|
and 4). The full-length OXTR(–830/–4)-LUC construct had considerably lower basal activity compared (P < 0.01) to all other 5'-deletion constructs. Basal activity of the OXTR(–340/–4) construct was approximately 1.5-fold greater (P < 0.05) than the OXTR(–220/–4) construct containing the minimal promoter.
|
|
) or ESR1IIc (Fig. 4B), a DNA binding domain mutant derived from ESR1wt, and treated with vehicle as a control or 10–8 M E2 for 24 h. In cells transfected with ESR1wt, E2 treatment increased (P < 0.05) activity of the OXTR(–830/–4) promoter-LUC construct as well as all 5' deletions (Fig. 3A). Similarly, E2 treatment increased (P < 0.01) activity of all OXTR promoter-reporter constructs in cells cotransfected with ESR1IIc (Fig. 4A). The fold increase in OXTR promoter activity was consistently greater in cells transfected with ESR1IIc than ESR1wt. Dose response studies found that E2 at a concentration of greater than 10–9 M increased activity of the full-length OXTR(–830/–4) promoter as well as the minimal OXTR(–220/–4) promoter in cells cotransfected with ESR1wt (Fig. 3B) or ESR1IIc (Fig. 4B). These results indicate that cis elements in the minimal promoter (–220/–4) are sufficient to mediate ligand-activated ESR1 effects. Furthermore, ESR1 induction of the OXTR promoter does not require DNA binding, suggesting protein-protein interactions through another transcription factor. Estrogen induces activity of many genes with GC-rich promoters in breast cancer cells transfected with ESR1 or ESR1IIc, even though the genes have no EREs in their promoters (see Refs.37 and 47).
ICI 182,780 is a pure antiestrogen that inhibits liganded ESR1 from transactivating estrogen-responsive genes containing an ERE(s) (48). However, ICI can exhibit partial agonist activity in some cells and induce ESR1 activation of some estrogen-responsive genes containing consensus GC-rich motifs in the promoter (49). To examine the effects of E2 and ICI 182,780 on ovine OXTR promoter activity, 2fTGH and U3A cells were cotransfected with ESR1wt or ESR1IIc and OXTR(–830/–4)-LUC, OXTR(–220/–4)-LUC, 3xERE-TATA-LUC, or 3xSP1-LUC reporters. Cells were then treated for 24 h with E2 (10–8 M) or ICI 182,780 (10–6 M). In 2fTGH cells, E2 stimulated (P < 0.01) activity of the OXTR reporters in cells transfected with ESR1wt or ESR1IIc (Fig. 5). E2 also induced (P < 0.01) activity of 3xERE-TATA-LUC in cells cotransfected with ESR1wt but not ESR1IIc, consistent with the requirement for DNA bound ESR1. ICI stimulated (P < 0.01) OXTR promoter activity in cells cotransfected with ESR1wt and ESR1IIc. As expected, ICI did not affect activity of the 3xERE-TATA-LUC in 2fTGH cells cotransfected with ESR1IIc. Both E2 and ICI stimulated (P < 0.01) activity of the 3xSP1-LUC reporter in 2fTGH cells transfected with either ESR1wt or ESR1IIc. These results are consistent with E2 and ICI activation of ovine OXTR promoter activity through an ESR1/SP1-mediated pathway as previously observed for several hormone-responsive genes with GC-rich promoters (see Refs.37 and 47).
|
). The functionality of the SP1 elements was determined by EMSA using recombinant human SP1 protein (Fig. 6). As illustrated in Fig. 6A, the predicted SP1 binding site at –64 in the OXTR promoter bound SP1 protein (lane 6). As a positive control, SP1 protein-DNA binding was observed with an oligonucleotide containing a consensus SP1 binding site (lane 2). SP1 binding to the –64 OXTR oligonucleotide was specific, because it was competitively decreased by incubation with a 100-fold excess of unlabeled SP1 consensus oligonucleotide (lane 5) or the unlabeled –64 OXTR oligonucleotide itself (lane 3). Mutation of two critical C residues in the –64 OXTR oligonucleotide rendered it unable to bind SP1 protein (lane 7) or compete for binding of SP1 protein to the wild-type –64 OXTR oligonucleotide (lane 4). In other experiments, 100-fold excess of unlabeled wt –64 OXTR oligonucleotide prevented binding of SP1 protein to the consensus SP1 oligonucleotide, whereas the mutant –64 OXTR oligonucleotide was unable to compete (data not shown). These results demonstrate that the ovine OXTR gene promoter contains a high affinity SP1 binding site at position –64.
|
, the GC-rich sites at –104 in the ovine OXTR promoter also bound SP1 protein (lane 2) in EMSAs. Incubation with a 100-fold excess of the wild-type –104 OXTR oligonucleotide (lane 3) or consensus SP1 oligonucleotide (lane 4), but not a nonspecific oligonucleotide (lane 5), competitively decreased SP1 protein binding to the radiolabeled –104 OXTR oligonucleotide. The sequence of the –104 SP1 binding site in the OXTR promoter contains a 5' nonconsensus GC-rich SP1 binding site adjacent to a 3' consensus site (Fig. 1). Mutation of the 3' consensus GC-rich site prevented SP1 protein binding (mut1) (lane 6), whereas mutation of the 5' nonconsensus binding site in the –104 OXTR oligonucleotide (mut2) did not affect SP1 binding (lane 7). Furthermore, SP1 binding was not observed when both the 5' and 3' predicted SP1 elements were mutated together (mut4) (lane 8). Collectively, EMSA results indicate that two GC-rich sites in the ovine OXTR promoter at –64 and –104 bp bind SP1 protein.
To determine whether the GC-rich sites at –104 and –64 are critical for responsiveness to ESR1, these sites in the –220 OXTR-LUC reporter construct were mutated (see Fig. 1). Due to the complex structure of the –104 SP1 element, mutation of either the 5' nonconsensus SP1 site or the 3' consensus SP1 element was performed, because it could alter the integrity of the overlapping site and affect the ability of the –104 sequence to bind SP1. Therefore, in addition to mutations of the –104 site tested in initial gel shift analyses, some C
A transversions that mutated either the consensus or nonconsensus portion of the site, without altering the other overlapping moiety, were also introduced. The oligonucleotides used to create the mutations were tested initially for their ability to bind SP1 protein by EMSA (Fig. 7). Mutation of the 5' nonconsensus site did not affect SP1 binding regardless of whether the overlapping 3' consensus portion remained wild-type (mut3; lane 5) or was slightly altered (mut2; lane 4). Mutation of the 3' consensus sequence alone (mut1, lane 3) substantially reduced SP1 binding compared with the wild-type –104 OXTR oligonucleotide (lane 2), but did not eliminate binding entirely. Mutation of both 5' and 3' sites (mut4) completely prevented SP1 binding (lane 6). In competition experiments (Fig. 7B), excess unlabeled wt –104 oligonucleotide and the mut1, mut2, and mut3 oligonucleotides reduced or prevented SP1 binding to the radiolabeled wt –104 oligonucleotide (lanes 6, 7, and 8). As expected, competition with the fully mutated mut4 oligonucleotide did not affect SP1 binding to the radiolabeled –104 OXTR wt oligonucleotide (lane 9). Collectively, these results indicate that SP1 binding to the –104 OXTR sequence depends primarily on the 3' consensus GC-rich element. However, the 5' nonconsensus GC-rich element appears to weakly bind SP1 protein, suggesting that the two overlapping motifs at –104 may act cooperatively to bind SP1.
|
). Wild-type or mutant OXTR(–220/–4) promoter-reporter constructs were cotransfected with ESR1IIc into 2fTGH cells and left unstimulated or treated with E2 (10–8 M). Mutation of either the 5' nonconsensus site (constructs 2 and 3), the 3' consensus site (construct 4), or both sites (construct 5) at –104 reduced (P < 0.05) basal luciferase expression in unstimulated cells by 25–40% compared with the wild-type reporter (construct 1) depending on the location of the mutation. Mutation of the –64 SP1 site reduced (P < 0.01) basal luciferase expression to very low levels, regardless of whether the –104 site was wt (construct 6), double mutated (constructs 7 and 9), or point mutated (construct 8). Indeed, basal luciferase levels of the –64 SP1 mutants were about 10% of wild-type parental levels. Mutation of the 5' consensus SP1 site or both the nonconsensus and consensus sites at –104 and the –64 SP1 site (construct 10) further reduced (P < 0.10) basal activity to about 2% of activity observed for the wt construct.
|
). Mutation of both sites at position –104 further reduced stimulation by estradiol, and this was consistent with the EMSA data suggesting that both the left and right moieties are involved in binding SP1 protein. However, mutation of the –64 SP1 site decreased (P < 0.10) stimulation by estradiol, regardless of whether the –104 SP1 site was wt or mutated. Overall, these results suggest that both the –104 and –64 SP1 sites in the proximal OXTR promoter regulates basal levels of OXTR gene transcription, and that both SP1 binding sites, especially the consensus sequences, regulate E2 stimulation of OXTR gene expression.
Progesterone stimulates OXTR promoter activity
During metestrus and estrus in cyclic ewes, PGR return to the OXTR-expressing endometrial epithelia as systemic progesterone declines to undetectable levels (9, 10, 12, 13, 14). The prevailing theory is that PGR do not directly inhibit OXTR gene expression, but rather the progesterone block to OXTR formation is indirect via progesterone inhibition of ESR1 expression (4, 8, 28). To determine whether the OXTR promoter is regulated by PGR, 2fTGH cells were cotransfected with human PGR-B and OXTR promoter-LUC constructs and then treated with R5020 (10–8 M), a nonmetabolizable form of progesterone (Fig. 9). As observed previously, basal activity of the OXTR promoter constructs increased (P < 0.05) by deletion of the region from –830 to –711. Treatment with R5020 stimulated (P < 0.05) the activity of all OXTR promoter-reporter constructs. Next, the same experiment was repeated with the reporter constructs and PGR-B, but cells were treated with a range of R5020 doses. Dose-dependent effects of R5020 (10–14–10–5 M) on activity of the –830 and –220 OXTR promoter constructs were observed in 2fTGH cells cotransfected with PGR-B, with concentrations as low as 10–10 M R5020 stimulated transactivation in cells transfected with OXTR constructs (data not shown).
|
). Deletion of the AP-1 site and PRE half site did not affect (P > 0.10) the stimulatory effects of E2 and R5020 on OXTR promoter activity. These results indicate that the SP1 binding sites at –104 and –64 are the only cis elements required for basal activity of the OXTR promoter and its responsiveness to stimulation by ligand-activated ESR1 and PGR-B.
|
). Immunoreactive SP1 protein was observed in all endometrial cell types of uteri from ewes on d 10–16 of the cycle and d 10–20 of pregnancy. Although all endometrial cell types expressed SP1 protein, it was most abundant in the endometrial LE and GE. No differences in SP1 protein abundance were detected between the endometrial cells of cyclic and pregnant ewes or between LE of intercaruncular and caruncular areas of the endometrium (data not shown). In pregnant ewes, SP1 protein was also detected in conceptus trophectoderm.
|
|
Discussion |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
In every studied mammal, estrogen is considered a key regulator of OXTR gene expression (27). Similarly in sheep, in vivo administration of estrogen increases OXTR mRNA and the number of oxytocin binding sites in the endometrium (15, 16, 22, 62). The classical pathway for estrogen regulation of target genes involves ligand-activated ESR1/ERE interactions or ERE half sites (37, 47). In the rat OXTR gene, a palindromic ERE was identified about 4 kb upstream of the transcriptional start site (52). This sequence was hormone-responsive in transfection studies in human MCF-7 breast cancer cells, but only when the 3.3-kb fragment between the ERE and the basal promoter of the rat OXTR gene was truncated. In the wild-type construct, this ERE was not activated by estrogen. However, the human OXTR gene does not have a palindromic ERE in the area comparable to that of the rat gene (27). Therefore, estrogen induction of ovine OXTR gene transcription may be indirect rather than due to direct ESR1/ERE interactions.
The present study found that an estrogen agonist (E2) and antagonist (ICI 182,780) transactivated the ovine OXTR promoter in cells transfected with ESR1. Deletion and mutation analyses found that induction of ovine OXTR promoter activity by E2-activated ESR1 is dependent on GC-rich SP1 binding sites at –104 and –64 in the minimal promoter, and basal activity of this promoter is also regulated by the same GC-rich SP1 elements adjacent to the translational start site of the OXTR gene. One caveat of the present studies is that human fibrosarcoma cells were used for transfection assays instead of an ovine endometrial epithelial cell line the endogenous expresses the OXTR gene. Indeed, the GC-rich motifs in several gene promoters are cis-acting elements for an increasing number of ligand-activated nuclear and orphan receptors that interact with SP1 and related proteins (see Refs.37 and 47). In the present study, SP1 transcription factor was constitutively expressed in nearly all cell types of the endometrium from both cyclic and pregnant ewes and was particularly abundant in LE and sGE. Therefore, the primary determinant of OXTR gene regulation in the endometrial epithelia is expression of the ESR1 gene. Administration of estrogen on d 11 or 12 postestrus induces structural and functional luteolysis in cyclic ewes with the following temporal events: 1) increase ESR1 mRNA and protein in endometrial epithelia between 12–24 h; 2) moderate increase in endometrial OXTR density between 12–36 h; 3) large increase in OXTR density between 36–48 h; 4) a decline in concentrations of progesterone in plasma after 36 h; and 5) decrease in CL weight by 48 h (15, 17). Similar temporospatial alterations in ESR1 and OXTR gene expression occur in the endometrium of cyclic ewes between d 12–16 postestrus (9, 10, 12). Although exogenous estrogen can clearly elicit development of the endometrial luteolytic mechanism and induce OXTR promoter activity, the precise physiological role of estrogen in the luteolytic mechanism in vivo during a natural estrous cycle has not been adequately investigated. Estrogen may not be needed to increase OXTR gene expression, because ESR1 can be activated in a ligand-dependent manner by estrogens or a ligand-independent manner by growth factors (63), such as IGF-I and IGF-II that are abundant in the ovine endometrial stroma (64). Furthermore, ICI 182,780, a pure antiestrogen, will not be useful for in vivo investigations, because it activated ESR1 and induced OXTR promoter activity in the present study. Similarly, the antiestrogens 4'-hydroxytamoxifen (4-OHT) and ICI 182,780 activate reporter gene activity in cells transfected with constructs containing GC-rich promoters with SP1 and SP3 binding sites (65). In addition to the OXTR, many other endometrial genes that are regulated by hormone and orphan receptors are likely to involve SP1 and related transcription factors.
Development of the endometrial luteolytic mechanism and uterine release of luteolytic pulses of PGF occur in the presence of high circulating levels of progesterone. However, the endometrial epithelia are not responsive to receptor-dependent actions of progesterone, because they are PGR-negative between d 11–15 of the estrous cycle. As progesterone levels decrease and estrogen levels increase during proestrus (d 15–17), PGR protein returns to the endometrial epithelia of the ovine uterus (10, 12). In the present study, PGR also increased activity of the ovine OXTR promoter through GC-rich SP1 sites rather than the AP-1 site or PRE half sites also present in the promoter of the OXTR gene. Progestin-dependent regulation of OXTR through GC-rich sites is not unprecedented becausePGR/SP1 activation of glycodelin A and CDKN1A (cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 1A or p21) in endometrial and breast cancer cells, respectively, is also due to specific GC-rich SP1 binding sites in their promoters (66, 67). Indeed, uterine OXTR mRNA and protein increases in the endometrial epithelia and stroma after d 15 and is maximal at estrus, which is coincident with PGR mRNA and protein as well as SP1 expression in the same cells (10, 12, 13). Therefore, the progesterone block to OXTR formation must be due to inhibition of ESR1 gene transcription via direct or indirect actions that does not involve SP1.
In the present study, IFNT did not affect OXTR promoter activity or E2 induction of OXTR promoter activity. These results were consistent with the lack of classical interferon regulatory elements (ISRE, IRFE, or GAS) in the ovine OXTR promoter and the lack of IRF1 and IRF2 effects on OXTR promoter activity in transient transfection assays. Collectively, results of the present and previous studies continue to support our theory that the antiluteolytic effects of IFNT from the conceptus are to inhibit or silence ESR1 gene transcription, which in turn precludes ESR1 stimulation of OXTR gene transcription and, therefore, oxytocin-induced release of luteolytic pulses of PGF by uterine epithelia. Future experiments are needed to address how progesterone down-regulates PGR gene expression, what factors critically regulate PGR inhibition of ESR1 gene transcription in the endometrial epithelia of the uterus, and if SP1 and related transcription factors regulate other endometrial genes in the ovine uterus.
|
Acknowledgments |
|---|
|
Footnotes |
|---|
First Published Online October 27, 2005
Abbreviations: AP-1, Activator protein 1; CL, corpus luteum; E3, 17ß-estradiol; ERE, ESR1 response element; ESR1, estrogen receptor ; FBS, fetal bovine serum; GAS, activation site; GE, glandular epithelium; IFNT, interferon ; IRF, interferon regulatory factor; IRFE, interferon regulatory factor element; ISRE, interferon-stimulated response element; LE, luminal epithelium; OXTR, oxytocin receptor; PGF, prostaglandin F2; PGR, progesterone receptor; PGR-B, progesterone receptor B form; PRE, progesterone response element; sGE, superficial ductal glandular epithelium.
Received September 1, 2005.
Accepted for publication October 19, 2005.
|
References |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
-Interferon: pregnancy recognition signal in ruminants. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 213:215–229[CrossRef][Medline] from the ovine uterus during luteolysis and its abrogation in early pregnancy. Anim Reprod Sci 7:31–55[CrossRef] inhibits estrogen receptor up-regulation and estrogen-induced luteolysis in cyclic ewes. Endocrinology 136:4932–4944[Abstract] regulates expression of endometrial receptors for estrogen and oxytocin but not progesterone. Biol Reprod 53:732–745[Abstract] secretion in sheep. J Reprod Fertil 79:457–467 on expression of cyclooxygenase two (COX-2) in ovine endometrium. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 1:58[CrossRef][Medline] suppresses transcription of the estrogen receptor and oxytocin receptor genes in the ovine endometrium. Endocrinology 137:1144–1147[Abstract] promoter and functional regulation by ovine interferon-. Endocrinology 142:2879–2887 interferon to obtain mutations in the signaling pathway. Mol Cell Biol 9:4605–4612 by Pichia pastoris. J Interferon Cytokine Res 16:119–126[Medline] and Sp3 proteins. J Biol Chem 275:22769–227791 gene expression: role of estrogen receptor-Sp1 complex. Mol Endocrinol 12:882–890 (IFN) regulation of IFN-stimulated gene expression in cell lines lacking specific IFN-signaling components. Endocrinology 142:1786–1794 regulation of IRF-1. Biol Reprod 66:393–400 independent of signal transducer and activator of transcription 1. Endocrinology 144:5203–5214 (ER) required for ER/Sp1-mediated activation of GC-rich promoters by estrogens and antiestrogens in breast cancer cells. Mol Endocrinol 17:804–817/ß binding site involved in the induction of oxytocin receptor gene expression in human breast cells, potentiation by c-Fos/c-Jun. Endocrinology 140:2268–2279 and progesterone on oestrogen-stimulated expression of receptors for oestrogen, progesterone and oxytocin in the endometrium of ovariectomized ewes. Reprod Fertil Dev 8:843–853[CrossRef][Medline]/ß)-dependent activation at GC-rich (Sp1) promoter elements. J Biol Chem 275:5379–5387This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  J. Wong and C. S. Weickert Transcriptional Interaction of an Estrogen Receptor Splice Variant and ErbB4 Suggests Convergence in Gene Susceptibility Pathways in Schizophrenia J. Biol. Chem., July 10, 2009; 284(28): 18824 - 18832. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 W. Yan, J. Chen, A. A Wiley, B. D Crean-Harris, F. F Bartol, and C. A Bagnell Relaxin (RLX) and estrogen affect estrogen receptor {alpha}, vascular endothelial growth factor, and RLX receptor expression in the neonatal porcine uterus and cervix Reproduction, May 1, 2008; 135(5): 705 - 712. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 F. Stormshak and C. V. Bishop BOARD-INVITED REVIEW: Estrogen and progesterone signaling: Genomic and nongenomic actions in domestic ruminants J Anim Sci, February 1, 2008; 86(2): 299 - 315. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. Li, D. Mitchell, J. Luo, Z. Yi, S.-G. Cho, J. Guo, X. Li, G. Ning, X. Wu, and M. Liu Estrogen Regulates KiSS1 Gene Expression through Estrogen Receptor {alpha} and SP Protein Complexes Endocrinology, October 1, 2007; 148(10): 4821 - 4828. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Kundu, A. Alioua, E. Stefani, and L. Toro Regulation of Mouse Slo Gene Expression: MULTIPLE PROMOTERS, TRANSCRIPTION START SITES, AND GENOMIC ACTION OF ESTROGEN J. Biol. Chem., September 14, 2007; 282(37): 27478 - 27492. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. M. Joyce, R. C. Burghardt, R. D. Geisert, J. R. Burghardt, R. N. Hooper, J. W. Ross, M. D. Ashworth, and G. A. Johnson Pig Conceptuses Secrete Estrogen and Interferons to Differentially Regulate Uterine STAT1 in a Temporal and Cell Type-Specific Manner Endocrinology, September 1, 2007; 148(9): 4420 - 4431. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. M. Joyce, J. R. Burghardt, R. C. Burghardt, R. N. Hooper, L. A. Jaeger, T. E. Spencer, F. W. Bazer, and G. A. Johnson Pig Conceptuses Increase Uterine Interferon-Regulatory Factor 1 (IRF1), but Restrict Expression to Stroma Through Estrogen-Induced IRF2 in Luminal Epithelium Biol Reprod, August 1, 2007; 77(2): 292 - 302. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. Tang, Z. Zhang, S. L. Tan, M.-H. E. Tang, A. P. Kumar, S. K. Ramadoss, and V. B. Bajic KBERG: KnowledgeBase for Estrogen Responsive Genes Nucleic Acids Res., January 12, 2007; 35(suppl_1): D732 - D736. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Song, F. W Bazer, and T. E Spencer Pregnancy and interferon tau regulate RSAD2 and IFIH1 expression in the ovine uterus Reproduction, January 1, 2007; 133(1): 285 - 295. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. M. Kershaw, R. J. Scaramuzzi, M. R. McGowan, C. P.D. Wheeler-Jones, and M. Khalid The Expression of Prostaglandin Endoperoxide Synthase 2 Messenger RNA and the Proportion of Smooth Muscle and Collagen in the Sheep Cervix During the Estrous Cycle Biol Reprod, January 1, 2007; 76(1): 124 - 129. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Song, T. E. Spencer, and F. W. Bazer Progesterone and Interferon-{tau} Regulate Cystatin C in the Endometrium Endocrinology, July 1, 2006; 147(7): 3478 - 3483. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Endocrinology | Endocrine Reviews | J. Clin. End. & Metab. |
| Molecular Endocrinology | Recent Prog. Horm. Res. | All Endocrine Journals |
