The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Synergistic binding of the Vibrio fischeri LuxR transcriptional activator domain and RNA polymerase to the lux promoter region.
Open accessAbstract
LuxR, the Vibrio fischeri luminescence gene (lux) activator, is the best-studied member of a family of bacterial transcription factors required for cell density-dependent expression of specific genes involved in associations with eukaryotic hosts. Neither LuxR nor any other LuxR homolog has been shown to bind DNA directly. We have purified the LuxR C-terminal transcriptional activator domain from extracts of recombinant Escherichia coli in which this polypeptide was expressed. The purified polypeptide by itself binds to lux regulatory DNA upstream of the lux box, a 20-bp palindrome that is required for LuxR activity in vivo, but it does not bind to the lux box. However, the LuxR C-terminal domain together with RNA polymerase protects a region including the lux box and the lux operon promoter from DNase I cleavage. There is very little protection of the lux operon promoter region from DNase I digestion in the presence of RNA polymerase alone. Apparently, there is a synergistic binding of the LuxR C-terminal domain and RNA polymerase to the promoter region. The upstream binding region for the purified polypeptide encompasses a binding site for cAMP receptor protein (CRP). Under some conditions, CRP binding can block the binding of the LuxR C-terminal domain to the upstream binding region, and it can also block the synergistic binding of the LuxR C-terminal domain and RNA polymerase to the lux box and luminescence gene promoter region. This description of DNA binding by the LuxR C-terminal domain should lead to an understanding of the molecular interactions of the LuxR family of transcriptional activators with regulatory DNA.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Quorum sensing signal-response systems in Gram-negative bacteria
Papenfort, K., & Bassler, B. L. (2016) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/nrmicro.2016.89 · Cited by 2,256
Cell-to-Cell Signaling and Pseudomonas aeruginosa Infections
Van Delden, C., & Iglewski, B. H. (1998) · Emerging Infectious Diseases · doi:10.3201/eid0404.980405 · Cited by 745
Holden, M. T. G., Ram Chhabra, S., De Nys, R., Stead, P., Bainton, N. J., Hill, P. J., Manefield, M., Kumar, N., Labatte, M., England, D., et al. (1999) · Molecular Microbiology · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2958.1999.01577.x · Cited by 579
Structure of a bacterial quorum-sensing transcription factor complexed with pheromone and DNA
Zhang, R.-G., Pappas, K. M., Brace, J. L., Miller, P. C., Oulmassov, T., Molyneaux, J. M., Anderson, J. C., Bashkin, J. K., Winans, S. C., & Joachimiak, A. (2002) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature00833 · Cited by 444
Quorum sensing as a population-density-dependent determinant of bacterial physiology
Swift, S., Allan Downie, J., Whitehead, N. A., Barnard, A. M. L., Salmond, G. P. C., & Williams, P. (2001) · Advances in Microbial Physiology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2911(01)45005-3 · Cited by 276
Metadata
- Authors
- Stevens, A. M., Dolan, K. M., & Greenberg, E. P.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 1994-12-20
- Volume
- 91
- Issue
- 26
- Pages
- 12619-12623
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W1969638357
- Cited by
- 240
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 2.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Synergistic binding of the Vibrio fischeri LuxR transcriptional activator domain and RNA polymerase to the lux promoter region. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.91.26.12619
- The paper
- Stevens, A. M., Dolan, K. M., & Greenberg, E. P. (1994). Synergistic binding of the Vibrio fischeri LuxR transcriptional activator domain and RNA polymerase to the lux promoter region. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.91.26.12619
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.