CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 100Genomics and Chromatin DynamicsChromatin Remodeling and CancerEpigenetics and DNA Methylation

Pioneer factors and ATP‐dependent chromatin remodeling factors interact dynamically: A new perspective: Multiple transcription factors can effect chromatin pioneer functions through dynamic interactions with ATP‐dependent chromatin remodeling factors

Open access
Swinstead, Erin E., Paakinaho, Ville, Presman, Diego M., Hager, Gordon L.·2016·BioEssays
DOI 10.1002/bies.201600137PMC PMC6319265
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Transcription factor (TF) signaling regulates gene transcription and requires a complex network of proteins. This network includes co‐activators, co‐repressors, multiple TFs, histone‐modifying complexes, and the basal transcription machinery. It has been widely appreciated that pioneer factors, such as FoxA1 and GATA1, play an important role in opening closed chromatin regions, thereby allowing binding of a secondary factor. In this review we will focus on a newly proposed model wherein multiple TFs, such as steroid receptors (SRs), can function in a pioneering role. This model, termed dynamic assisted loading, integrates data from widely divergent methodologies, including genome wide ChIP‐Seq, digital genomic footprinting, DHS‐Seq, live cell protein dynamics, and biochemical studies of ATP‐dependent remodeling complexes, to present a real time view of TF chromatin interactions. Under this view, many TFs can act as initiating factors for chromatin landscape programming. Furthermore, enhancer and promoter states are more accurately described as energy‐dependent, non‐equilibrium steady states.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/bies.201600137

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Dynamic assisted loading does not require a physical interaction between TFs, but is thought to rely on one TF activating the enhancer by recruiting chromatin remodeling and histone modifying enzymes to the enhancer, thereby making it more accessible to other TFs.

    “This effect, termed ‘dynamic assisted loading’, does not require a physical interaction between TFs, but is thought to rely on one TF activating the enhancer by recruiting chromatin remodeling and histone modifying enzymes to the enhancer, thereby making it more accessible to other TFs29.”

    From Synergistic gene expression during the acute phase response is characterized by transcription factor assisted loading (2017) · cites this paper as [29]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 82

  1. [1]Kornberg RD. 1974 Chromatin structure: a repeating unit of histones and DNA. Science 184: 868– 71. 4825889
  2. [2]van Holde KE. 1988 Chromatin. Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
  3. [6]Gualdi R, Bossard P, Zheng M, Hamada Y, 1996 Hepatic specification of the gut endoderm in vitro: cell signaling and transcriptional control. Genes Dev 10: 1670– 82. 8682297
  4. [7]Cirillo LA, McPherson CE, Bossard P, Stevens K, 1998 Binding of the winged-helix transcription factor HNF3 to a linker histone site on the nucleosome. EMBO J 17: 244– 54. 9427758 PMC1170375
  5. [8]Cirillo LA, Zaret KS. 1999 An early developmental transcription factor complex that is more stable on nucleosome core particles than on free DNA. Mol Cell 4: 961– 9. 10635321
  6. [9]Cirillo LA, Lin FR, Cuesta I, Friedman D, 2002 Opening of compacted chromatin by early developmental transcription factors HNF3 (FoxA) and GATA-4. Mol Cell 9: 279– 89. 11864602
  7. [10]Morisaki T, Muller WG, Golob N, Mazza D, 2014 Single-molecule analysis of transcription factor binding at transcription sites in live cells. Nat Commun 5: 4456. 25034201 PMC4144071
  8. [11]Swinstead Erin E, Miranda Tina B, Paakinaho V, Baek S, 2016 Steroid receptors reprogram FoxA1 occupancy through dynamic chromatin transitions. Cell 165: 593– 605. 27062924 PMC4842147
  9. [12]Sugo N, Morimatsu M, Arai Y, Kousoku Y, 2015 Single-molecule imaging reveals dynamics of CREB transcription factor bound to its target sequence. Sci Rep 5: 10662. 26039515 PMC4454023
  10. [13]Liu Z, Legant WR, Chen BC, Li L, 2014 3D imaging of Sox2 enhancer clusters in embryonic stem cells. Elife 3: e04236. 25537195 PMC4381973
  11. [15]Ballare C, Castellano G, Gaveglia L, Althammer S, 2012 Nucleosome-driven transcription factor binding and gene regulation. Mol Cell 49: 67– 79. 23177737
  12. [16]Li G, Margueron R, Hu G, Stokes D, 2010 Highly compacted chromatin formed in vitro reflects the dynamics of transcription activation in vivo. Mol Cell 38: 41– 53. 20385088 PMC3641559
  13. [17]Carroll JS, Liu XS, Brodsky AS, Li W, 2005 Chromosome-wide mapping of estrogen receptor binding reveals long-range regulation requiring the forkhead protein FoxA1. Cell 122: 33– 43. 16009131
  14. [18]Laganiere J, Deblois G, Lefebvre C, Bataille AR, 2005 Location analysis of estrogen receptor alpha target promoters reveals that FOXA1 defines a domain of the estrogen response. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102: 11651– 6. 16087863 PMC1183449
  15. [19]Carroll JS, Meyer CA, Song J, Li W, 2006 Genome-wide analysis of estrogen receptor binding sites. Nat Genet 38: 1289– 97. 17013392
  16. [20]Lupien M, Eeckhoute J, Meyer CA, Wang Q, 2008 FoxA1 translates epigenetic signatures into enhancer-driven lineage-specific transcription. Cell 132: 958– 70. 18358809 PMC2323438
  17. [21]Hurtado A, Holmes KA, Ross-Innes CS, Schmidt D, 2010 FOXA1 is a key determinant of estrogen receptor function and endocrine response. Nat Genet 43: 27– 33. 21151129 PMC3024537
  18. [22]Rigaud G, Roux J, Pictet R, Grange T. 1991 In vivo footprinting of rat TAT gene: dynamic interplay between the glucocorticoid receptor and a liver-specific factor. Cell 67: 977– 86. 1683601
  19. [23]Kong SL, Li G, Loh SL, Sung WK, 2011 Cellular reprogramming by the conjoint action of ERalpha, FOXA1, and GATA3 to a ligand-inducible growth state. Mol Syst Biol 7: 526. 21878914 PMC3202798
  20. [24]Caizzi L, Ferrero G, Cutrupi S, Cordero F, 2014 Genome-wide activity of unliganded estrogen receptor-alpha in breast cancer cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 111: 4892– 7. 24639548 PMC3977241
  21. [25]Eisen JA, Sweder KS, Hanawalt PC. 1995 Evolution of the SNF2 family of proteins: subfamilies with distinct sequences and functions. Nucleic Acids Res 23: 2715– 23. 7651832 PMC307096
  22. [26]Clapier CR, Cairns BR. 2009 The biology of chromatin remodeling complexes. Annu Rev Biochem 78: 273– 304. 19355820
  23. [27]Smith CL, Peterson CL. 2005 ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling. Curr Top Dev Biol 65: 115– 48. 15642381
  24. [28]Fairman-Williams ME, Guenther UP, Jankowsky E. 2010 SF1 and SF2 helicases: family matters. Curr Opin Struct Biol 20: 313– 24. 20456941 PMC2916977
  25. [29]Phelan ML, Sif S, Narlikar GJ, Kingston RE. 1999 Reconstitution of a core chromatin remodeling complex from SWI/SNF subunits. Mol Cell 3: 247– 53. 10078207
  26. [30]Wang W, Cote J, Xue Y, Zhou S, 1996 Purification and biochemical heterogeneity of the mammalian SWI-SNF complex. EMBO J 15: 5370– 82. 8895581 PMC452280
  27. [31]Wang W, Xue Y, Zhou S, Kuo A, 1996 Diversity and specialization of mammalian SWI/SNF complexes. Genes Dev 10: 2117– 30. 8804307
  28. [32]Eberharter A, Becker PB. 2004 ATP-dependent nucleosome remodelling: factors and functions. J Cell Sci 117: 3707– 11. 15286171
  29. [33]Fyodorov DV, Kadonaga JT. 2002 Dynamics of ATP-dependent chromatin assembly by ACF. Nature 418: 897– 900. 12192415
  30. [34]Goldmark JP, Fazzio TG, Estep PW, Church GM, 2000 The Isw2 chromatin remodeling complex represses early meiotic genes upon recruitment by Ume6p. Cell 103: 423– 33. 11081629
  31. [35]Langst G, Becker PB. 2001 Nucleosome mobilization and positioning by ISWI-containing chromatin-remodeling factors. J Cell Sci 114: 2561– 8. 11683384
  32. [36]Marfella CG, Imbalzano AN. 2007 The Chd family of chromatin remodelers. Mutat Res 618: 30– 40. 17350655 PMC1899158
  33. [37]Hall JA, Georgel PT. 2007 CHD proteins: a diverse family with strong ties. Biochem Cell Biol 85: 463– 76. 17713581
  34. [38]Woodage T, Basrai MA, Baxevanis AD, Hieter P, 1997 Characterization of the CHD family of proteins. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94: 11472– 7. 9326634 PMC23509
  35. [39]Stokes DG, Perry RP. 1995 DNA-binding and chromatin localization properties of CHD1. Mol Cell Biol 15: 2745– 53. 7739555 PMC230505
  36. [40]Bao Y, Shen X. 2007 INO80 subfamily of chromatin remodeling complexes. Mutat Res 618: 18– 29. 17316710 PMC2699258
  37. [42]Narlikar GJ, Sundaramoorthy R, Owen-Hughes T. 2013 Mechanisms and functions of ATP-dependent chromatin-remodeling enzymes. Cell 154: 490– 503. 23911317 PMC3781322
  38. [43]Morris SA, Baek S, Sung MH, John S, 2014 Overlapping chromatin remodeling systems collaborate genome-wide at dynamic chromatin transitions. Nat Struct Mol Biol 21: 73– 81. 24317492 PMC3947387
  39. [44]Erdel F, Schubert T, Marth C, Langst G, 2010 Human ISWI chromatin-remodeling complexes sample nucleosomes via transient binding reactions and become immobilized at active sites. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107: 19873– 8. 20974961 PMC2993390
  40. [45]de Dieuleveult M, Yen K, Hmitou I, Depaux A, 2016 Genome-wide nucleosome specificity and function of chromatin remodellers in ES cells. Nature 530: 113– 6. 26814966 PMC4871117
  41. [46]Takahashi K, Yamanaka S. 2006 Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult fibroblast cultures by defined factors. Cell 126: 663– 76. 16904174
  42. [47]Kidder BL, Palmer S, Knott JG. 2009 SWI/SNF-Brg1 regulates self-renewal and occupies core pluripotency-related genes in embryonic stem cells. Stem Cells 27: 317– 28. 19056910
  43. [49]Krishnakumar R, Chen AF, Pantovich MG, Danial M, 2016 FOXD3 regulates pluripotent stem cell potential by simultaneously initiating and repressing enhancer activity. Cell Stem Cell 18: 104– 17. 26748757 PMC4775235
  44. [50]Wang L, Du Y, Ward JM, Shimbo T, 2014 INO80 facilitates pluripotency gene activation in embryonic stem cell self-renewal, reprogramming, and blastocyst development. Cell Stem Cell 14: 575– 91. 24792115 PMC4154226
  45. [51]Fryer CJ, Nordeen SK, Archer TK. 1998 Antiprogestins mediate differential effects on glucocorticoid receptor remodeling of chromatin structure. J Biol Chem 273: 1175– 83. 9422784
  46. [52]Fryer CJ, Archer TK. 1998 Chromatin remodeling by the glucocorticoid receptor requires the BRG1 complex. Nature 393: 88– 91. 9590696
  47. [53]Ichinose H, Garnier JM, Chambon P, Losson R. 1997 Ligand-dependent interaction between the estrogen receptor and the human homologues of SWI2/SNF2. Gene 188: 95– 100. 9099865
  48. [54]Trotter KW, Archer TK. 2004 Reconstitution of glucocorticoid receptor-dependent transcription in vivo. Mol Cell Biol 24: 3347– 58. 15060156 PMC381687
  49. [55]Vicent GP, Zaurin R, Ballare C, Nacht AS, 2009 Erk signaling and chromatin remodeling in MMTV promoter activation by progestins. Nucl Recept Signal 7: e008. 20087429 PMC2807634
  50. [56]Perlmann T, Wrange O. 1988 Specific glucocorticoid receptor binding to DNA reconstituted in a nucleosome. EMBO J 7: 3073– 9. 2846275 PMC454694
  51. [57]Pina B, Bruggemeier U, Beato M. 1990 Nucleosome positioning modulates accessibility of regulatory proteins to the mouse mammary tumor virus promoter. Cell 60: 719– 31. 2155706
  52. [58]Venditti P, Di Croce L, Kauer M, Blank T, 1998 Assembly of MMTV promoter minichromosomes with positioned nucleosomes precludes NF1 access but not restriction enzyme cleavage. Nucleic Acids Res 26: 3657– 66. 9685480 PMC147780
  53. [59]Aoyagi S, Trotter KW, Archer TK. 2005 ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling complexes and their role in nuclear receptor-dependent transcription in vivo. Vitam Horm 70: 281– 307. 15727808
  54. [60]Belandia B, Orford RL, Hurst HC, Parker MG. 2002 Targeting of SWI/SNF chromatin remodelling complexes to estrogen-responsive genes. EMBO J 21: 4094– 103. 12145209 PMC126156
  55. [61]Lee HL, Archer TK. 1998 Prolonged glucocorticoid exposure dephosphorylates histone H1 and inactivates the MMTV promoter. EMBO J 17: 1454– 66. 9482742 PMC1170493
  56. [62]Johnson TA, Elbi C, Parekh BS, Hager GL, 2008 Chromatin remodeling complexes interact dynamically with a glucocorticoid receptor regulated promoter. Mol Biol Cell 19: 3308– 22. 18508913 PMC2488306
  57. [63]Hsiao PW, Fryer CJ, Trotter KW, Wang W, 2003 BAF60a mediates critical interactions between nuclear receptors and the BRG1 chromatin-remodeling complex for transactivation. Mol Cell Biol 23: 6210– 20. 12917342 PMC180928
  58. [64]Jeong KW, Lee YH, Stallcup MR. 2009 Recruitment of the SWI/SNF chromatin remodeling complex to steroid hormone-regulated promoters by nuclear receptor coactivator flightless-I. J Biol Chem 284: 29298– 309. 19720835 PMC2785560
  59. [65]Nie Z, Xue Y, Yang D, Zhou S, 2000 A specificity and targeting subunit of a human SWI/SNF family-related chromatin-remodeling complex. Mol Cell Biol 20: 8879– 88. 11073988 PMC86543
  60. [66]Inoue H, Furukawa T, Giannakopoulos S, Zhou S, 2002 Largest subunits of the human SWI/SNF chromatin-remodeling complex promote transcriptional activation by steroid hormone receptors. J Biol Chem 277: 41674– 85. 12200431
  61. [67]Nagaich AK, Walker DA, Wolford RG, Hager GL. 2004 Rapid periodic binding and displacement of the glucocorticoid receptor during chromatin remodeling. MolCell 14: 163– 74. 15099516
  62. [68]Li M, Hada A, Sen P, Olufemi L, 2015 Dynamic regulation of transcription factors by nucleosome remodeling. Elife 4: e06249. PMC4456607 26047462
  63. [69]Muchardt C, Yaniv M. 1993 A human homologue of Saccharomyces cerevisiae SNF2/SWI2 and Drosophila brm genes potentiates transcriptional activation by the glucocorticoid receptor. EMBO J 12: 4279– 90. 8223438 PMC413724
  64. [70]Erdel F, Krug J, Langst G, Rippe K. 2011 Targeting chromatin remodelers: signals and search mechanisms. Biochim Biophys Acta 1809: 497– 508. 21704204
  65. [71]Schnitzler G, Sif S, Kingston RE. 1998 Human SWI/SNF interconverts a nucleosome between its base state and a stable remodeled state. Cell 94: 17– 27. 9674423
  66. [72]Kassabov SR, Henry NM, Zofall M, Tsukiyama T, 2002 High-resolution mapping of changes in histone-DNA contacts of nucleosomes remodeled by ISW2. Mol Cell Biol 22: 7524– 34. 12370299 PMC135677
  67. [73]McKnight JN, Jenkins KR, Nodelman IM, Escobar T, 2011 Extranucleosomal DNA binding directs nucleosome sliding by Chd1. Mol Cell Biol 31: 4746– 59. 21969605 PMC3232923
  68. [74]Nagaich AK, Walker DA, Wolford RG, Hager GL. 2004 Rapid periodic binding and displacement of the glucocorticoid receptor during chromatin remodeling. Mol Cell 14: 163– 74. 15099516
  69. [75]Theodorou V, Stark R, Menon S, Carroll JS. 2012 GATA3 acts upstream of FOXA1 in mediating ESR1 binding by shaping enhancer accessibility. Genome Res 23: 12– 22. 23172872 PMC3530671
  70. [77]Sanalkumar R, Johnson KD, Gao X, Boyer ME, 2014 Mechanism governing a stem cell-generating cis-regulatory element. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 111: E1091– 100. 24616499 PMC3970491
  71. [79]Ramakrishnan V, Finch JT, raziano V, Lee PL, 1993 Crystal structure of globular domain of histone H5 and its implications for nucleosome binding. Nature 362: 219– 23. 8384699
  72. [80]Clark KL, Halay ED, Lai E, Burley SK. 1993 Co-crystal structure of the HNF-3/fork head DNA-recognition motif resembles histone H5. Nature 364: 412– 20. 8332212
  73. [81]Chaya D, Hayamizu T, Bustin M, Zaret KS. 2001 Transcription factor FoxA (HNF3) on a nucleosome at an enhancer complex in liver chromatin. J Biol Chem 276: 44385– 9. 11571307
  74. [82]Sekiya T, Muthurajan UM, Luger K, Tulin AV, 2009 Nucleosome-binding affinity as a primary determinant of the nuclear mobility of the pioneer transcription factor FoxA. Genes Dev 23: 804– 9. 19339686 PMC2666343
  75. [83]Mueller F, Stasevich TJ, Mazza D, McNally JG. 2013 Quantifying transcription factor kinetics: at work or at play? Crit Rev Biochem Mol Biol 48: 492– 514. 24025032
  76. [84]Stasevich TJ, McNally JG. 2011 Assembly of the transcription machinery: ordered and stable, random and dynamic, or both? Chromosoma 120: 533– 45. 22048163 PMC7380716
  77. [85]Mazza D, Abernathy A, Golob N, Morisaki T, 2012 A benchmark for chromatin binding measurements in live cells. Nucleic Acids Res 40: e119. 22844090 PMC3424588
  78. [86]Speil J, Baumgart E, Siebrasse JP, Veith R, 2011 Activated STAT1 transcription factors conduct distinct saltatory movements in the cell nucleus. Biophys J 101: 2592– 600. 22261046 PMC3297778
  79. [87]van Royen ME, van Cappellen WA, Geverts B, Schmidt T, 2014 Androgen receptor complexes probe DNA for recognition sequences by short random interactions. J Cell Sci 127: 1406– 16. 24481814
  80. [88]Izeddin I, Recamier V, Bosanac L, Cisse II, 2014 Single-molecule tracking in live cells reveals distinct target-search strategies of transcription factors in the nucleus. Elife 3: e02230. PMC4095940 24925319
  81. [89]Elf J, Li GW, Xie XS. 2007 Probing transcription factor dynamics at the single-molecule level in a living cell. Science 316: 1191– 4. 17525339 PMC2853898
  82. [90]White MD, Angiolini JF, Alvarez YD, Kaur G, 2016 Long-lived binding of Sox2 to DNA predicts cell fate in the four-cell mouse embryo. Cell 165: 75– 87. 27015308

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Swinstead, E. E., Paakinaho, V., Presman, D. M., & Hager, G. L.
Affiliations
National Institutes of Health (US)
Corresponding author
Hager, Gordon L.
ORCID
Venue
BioEssays
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-09-16
Volume
38
Issue
11
Pages
1150-1157
ISSN
  • 0265-9247 (ISSN-L)
  • 1521-1878
DOI
10.1002/bies.201600137
PMC
PMC6319265
OpenAlex
W2518972560
Cited by
100
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 2
FWCI
1.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
  • BioEssays (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • CONICET Digital (CONICET) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
Funders
Sigrid Jusélius Foundation
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Chromatin Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Chromatin Remodeling and Cancer
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Epigenetics and DNA Methylation
Keywords
pioneer factors, transcription factor binding, ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling, steroid hormone receptors, FOXA1, GATA-1, nonequilibrium steady states, chromatin accessibility, transcriptional coactivator, histone-modifying complexes, transcriptional regulation
MeSH terms
Adenosine Triphosphate, Animals, Enhancer Elements, Genetic, Humans, Models, Genetic, Promoter Regions, Genetic, Transcription Factors, Chromatin Assembly and Disassembly

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review