![]() | ![]() |
Formats:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2007 RNA Society Ligand binding and gene control characteristics of tandem riboswitches in Bacillus anthracis
1Department of Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut 06520, USA 2Department of Molecular Biophysics and Biochemistry, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut 06520, USA 3Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut 06520, USA
Reprint requests to: Ronald R. Breaker, Department of Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology, Yale University, 266 Whitney Avenue, KBT 506, New Haven, CT 06520-8103, USA; e-mail: ronald.breaker/at/yale.edu; fax: (203) 432-0753. Received November 25, 2006; Accepted December 22, 2006. This article has been cited by other articles in PMC.Abstract Most riboswitches are composed of a single metabolite-binding aptamer and a single expression platform that function together to regulate genes in response to changing metabolite concentrations. In rare instances, two aptamers or sometimes two complete riboswitches reside adjacent to each other in untranslated regions (UTRs) of mRNAs. We have examined an example of a tandem riboswitch in the Gram-positive bacterium Bacillus anthracis that includes two complete riboswitches for thiamine pyrophosphate (TPP). Unlike other complex riboswitch systems described recently, tandem TPP riboswitches do not exhibit cooperative ligand binding and do not detect two different types of metabolites. In contrast, both riboswitches respond independently to TPP and are predicted to function in concert to mimic the more “digital” gene control outcome observed when two aptamers bind ligands cooperatively. Our findings further demonstrate that simple gene control elements made only of RNA can be assembled in different architectures to yield more complex gene control outcomes. Keywords: aptamer, metabolite-binding RNA, thiamine pyrophosphate, transcription termination INTRODUCTION Many bacteria make extensive use of ligand-binding RNAs called riboswitches (Nahvi et al. 2002) to sense the concentrations of important metabolites and to control genes that are important for metabolite biosynthesis and transport (Mandal and Breaker 2004; Soukup and Soukup 2004; Winkler and Breaker 2005). An exceptionally widespread class of riboswitches forms a highly conserved structure that selectively binds thiamine pyrophosphate (TPP) (Mironov et al. 2002; Winkler et al. 2002b). TPP-specific aptamers form two distinct pockets that separately bind the HMP (4-amino-5-hydroxymethyl-2-methylpyrimidine) and pyrophosphate moieties of the coenzyme (Edwards and Ferré-D'Amaré 2006; Serganov et al. 2006; Thore et al. 2006). The thiazole moiety of TPP bridges these two domains of the aptamer, which aids in stabilizing the overall RNA fold. The structural changes brought about by ligand binding to the aptamer are harnessed by the adjoining expression platform to alter transcription or translation of the downstream open reading frame (ORF). The structural requirements for ligand binding by RNA place a strong selective pressure for riboswitches to remain conserved in nucleotide sequence and structure throughout evolution. Most riboswitch aptamers remain so well conserved that their nucleotide sequences and secondary structure features are used as distinguishing characteristics for each riboswitch class. The conserved features can be used to create bioinformatics search algorithms that identify additional members of riboswitch classes from rapidly increasing collections of genomic DNA sequences (e.g., Vitreschak et al. 2002, 2003; Sudarsan et al. 2003a; Barrick et al. 2004; Nahvi et al. 2004; Corbino et al. 2005). As a result, numerous bacterial TPP riboswitches (Miranda-Rios et al. 2001; Rodionov et al. 2002; Winkler et al. 2002b) have been discovered, and several TPP riboswitch candidates also have been identified in archaeans and eukaryotes (Kubodera et al. 2003; Sudarsan et al. 2003a, 2005; Yamauchi et al. 2005). It has been observed that some riboswitch aptamers occur in tandem within the same mRNA (Mandal et al. 2004; Sudarsan et al. 2006), including some TPP aptamers (Fig. 1A
Another tandem arrangement of aptamers occurs in the 5′ UTR of the Bacillus clausii metE mRNA (Fig. 1C In the current study, we have examined the characteristics of another tandem arrangement of aptamers that is exhibited by some TPP riboswitches (Rodionov et al. 2004; Sudarsan et al. 2006), some candidate riboswitches (Sudarsan et al. 2006), and numerous T-box RNAs (Gutierrez-Preciado et al. 2005). The tandem architecture of these RNAs suggests that the two aptamers sense the same compound and that each aptamer is associated with its own expression platform (Fig. 1D RESULTS Molecular components of tandem TPP riboswitches from B. anthracis
We have used various bioinformatics strategies including filtered covariance model searches (Corbino et al. 2005; Weinberg and Ruzzo 2006) to identify numerous new representatives of known riboswitch classes (e.g., Sudarsan et al. 2003a; Barrick et al. 2004; Nahvi et al. 2004; Corbino et al. 2005). These algorithms rank each “hit” by assessing its similarity to a consensus sequence and structure for riboswitch aptamers established by comparative analysis of known representatives. Although an expression platform also is important for riboswitch function, this portion of a riboswitch is usually far less conserved and is not used in the search. By scanning the output of these computer-aided searches, we have identified a number of instances in bacteria where two TPP aptamers appear in tandem (Fig. 1A
A closer examination of the tandem representative from B. anthracis (Fig. 3
High-affinity binding of TPP by both aptamers from the B. anthracis tenA RNA The tandem aptamer arrangements that have been studied previously exhibit either cooperative binding of two identical ligands (Mandal et al. 2004) or the independent binding of two different ligands (Sudarsan et al. 2006). The tenA RNA is distinct because it carries two complete riboswitches (aptamer and expression platform) that respond to the same ligand type. This arrangement must provide some selective advantage to the bacteria for it to be maintained. However, given the different architecture of the B. anthracis tenA 5′ UTR, we expected that the tenA RNA characteristics would be different from those of tandem aptamer precedents. To establish that aptamer 1 and aptamer 2 (Fig. 3
The levels of spontaneous cleavage at three positions (site 1, A44; site 2, U91; site 3, A104) were quantitated and used to estimate the apparent dissociation constant (K
D) for ligand binding (Fig. 4B Ligand binding by tandem TPP aptamers is not cooperative Previous efforts to establish K
D values for riboswitch aptamers have revealed that nucleotides downstream of the conserved core of the aptamer can influence ligand affinity (Winkler et al. 2002b). These added nucleotides commonly interfere with proper folding of the aptamer and thereby cause the construct to bind more weakly. This effect can be pronounced with some riboswitches wherein the expression platform functions by forming alternatively paired structures that preclude proper aptamer folding (Wickiser et al. 2005a,b; Lemay et al. 2006). We observed that constructs including either terminator 1 (Thi1+T1) or terminator 2 (Thi2+T2) with their corresponding aptamers (Fig. 3 Most glycine riboswitches are atypical because they require nucleotides outside the conserved core of each aptamer to enhance binding affinity (Mandal et al. 2004). Glycine aptamers arranged in tandem require glycine to be docked in the adjacent aptamer for the adjoining aptamer to exhibit maximal affinity. To rule out the possibility that the tandem TPP aptamers are configured to bind two TPP molecules cooperatively, we determined the K
D values for both aptamer 1 and aptamer 2 when co-residing in a single RNA construct (Complete; Fig. 4C Tandem TPP riboswitches control transcription termination Some previous studies of riboswitches that control transcription termination have employed in vitro transcription assays to monitor riboswitch function (e.g., Mironov et al. 2002; Winkler et al. 2002a, 2003; Epshtein et al. 2003; Grundy et al. 2003; McDaniel et al. 2003; Sudarsan et al. 2003b; Mandal et al. 2004; Wickiser et al. 2005a,b). These assays provide evidence that transcription termination is modulated by selective binding of metabolite to the aptamer. However, the extent of modulation of transcription termination in vitro is rarely maximal, which might be due to a poor correspondence between the conditions used for the assays and those experienced by riboswitches in vivo. We used single-round transcription assays (Sudarsan et al. 2003b) to examine the products made by Escherichia coli RNA polymerase as it transcribes a DNA template corresponding to the 5′ UTR of the B. anthracis tenA RNA. Aliquots from in vitro transcription assays (see Materials and Methods) were removed at various time points to assess the RNA products. Although a number of premature termination and pause sites are evident as transcription progresses (Fig. 5A
In addition, the relative levels of these three major transcripts change in response to the addition of 1 μM TPP (Fig. 5B Tandem TPP riboswitches control gene expression independently To confirm our hypothesis that the two riboswitches function independently and respond to the same ligand, we tested a series of reporter gene constructs that carry variations of the wild-type tenA mRNA 5′ UTR. These constructs were integrated into thiamine auxotroph Bacillus subtilis, and levels of β-galactosidase reporter gene expression were measured after cell growth in a minimal medium supplemented with various concentrations of thiamine. Thiamine supplementation is expected to permit these cells to take up the vitamin, generate the phosphorylated derivative TPP, and down-regulate the TPP riboswitch-controlled reporter gene as was observed previously using E. coli (Winkler et al. 2002b). As expected, cells carrying a reporter gene fused with the wild-type construct exhibit strong repression of the reporter gene when the medium is supplemented with increasing concentrations of thiamine (Fig. 5C Importantly, variants of the tenA 5′ UTR that carry only the first riboswitch (Thi1+T1), or that carry either a defective first (Mut1) or second (Mut2) aptamer, also exhibit gene control characteristics that are nearly identical with wild type. Although the action of a second riboswitch might further reduce the number of mRNAs that reach full length in the population of bacteria, the observed effect of the loss of a second riboswitch is almost negligible, suggesting that a single riboswitch is sufficient to yield nearly total repression of reporter gene expression. Moreover, the majority of repression occurs when the medium is supplemented with 100 nM thiamine, regardless of which reporter gene construct was examined. These results indicate that either the first or the second TPP riboswitch can function independently to achieve a near total inactivation of reporter gene expression in response to similar levels of thiamine supplementation. Therefore, it is unlikely that the tandem riboswitch arrangement is present to increase the dynamic range for gene control, or to yield a composite genetic switch that responds to a wider range of ligand concentrations. DISCUSSION Tandem riboswitch functions The utility of some tandem riboswitch systems is unambiguous and well established (Mandal et al. 2004; Sudarsan et al. 2006). The close adjoining of two aptamers that function cooperatively to bind two identical ligands yields a gene control element that is more responsive to smaller changes in ligand concentration (Mandal et al. 2004). If the two aptamers are perfectly cooperative, they would reduce from 81-fold to ninefold the change in ligand concentration needed to progress from 10% to 90% modulation of gene expression (Fig. 6A
Although not perfectly cooperative, the tandem glycine aptamers found in Vibrio cholerae (Mandal et al. 2004) exhibit a level of cooperativity (n = 1.64) that requires a ligand concentration change of only 14-fold to progress from 10% to 90% modulation. This increased sensitivity to changes in glycine concentration most likely allows bacteria to efficiently use this amino acid as an energy source without depleting it to the point where protein synthesis would be compromised. In contrast, noncooperative tandem riboswitches that sense two different ligands would allow cells to control genes in response to changing concentrations of two metabolite types. This strategy is used by strains of B. clausii to sense SAM and AdoCbl to modulate the production of enzymes to optimally biosynthesize methionine (Sudarsan et al. 2006). However, the common arrangement represented by the TPP riboswitches in the tenA RNA from B. anthracis senses the same ligand type in both aptamers, so the biological utility of this arrangement must be different. Possible functions of tandem riboswitches that sense the same ligand type There are three possible characteristics that might be advantageous for gene control by independent tandem riboswitches that sense the same ligand. First, the two riboswitches might increase the dynamic range of gene expression. For example, if each riboswitch has a 0.9 probability of terminating transcription when bound to ligand, then the presence of only one riboswitch in an mRNA would allow ~10-fold change in gene expression. But the combined action of both riboswitches in a single mRNA would allow ~100-fold change in gene expression. This possible utility for the B. anthracis tenA riboswitches seems unlikely, given that even a single functional TPP riboswitch gives essentially full gene repression when fused to a reporter gene in B. subtilis (Fig. 5C Second, it has been pointed out previously (Rodionov et al. 2004) that the tandem arrangement of two independent riboswitches will produce a genetic switch that requires a lower ligand concentration to trigger gene control. The authors also pointed out that it would be unusual for tandem riboswitches to be used to achieve this goal instead of acquiring mutations that would improve ligand affinity. We have calculated the effect that two independent riboswitches would have on gene control (Fig. 6B To further stress the unlikelihood that this characteristic provides the selective advantage that cells acquire from this type of tandem riboswitch arrangement, we point out that very small changes in either the rate of ligand association or the speed of RNA transcription could easily permit a single riboswitch to respond more sensitively to ligands (Wickiser et al. 2005a,b). Therefore, it seems very unlikely that the most common architecture for tandem riboswitches is used to modestly improve ligand sensitivity when other strategies that are far more productive and far less information intensive are possible. By using in-line probing, we have established that the K
D values for the tandem TPP aptamers from B. anthracis are 210 pM and 850 pM. These values are among the tightest known metabolite interactions with natural aptamers, and are well below the concentration of thiamine in culture medium that triggers reporter gene repression (Fig. 5C A third characteristic that is inherent to independently functioning tandem riboswitches with similar K
D values is an increase in the digital character of the genetic switch (Fig. 6B In an effort to determine whether transcription termination in the tandem riboswitch system is more responsive to TPP concentration changes, we have conducted single-round transcription termination assays at various concentrations of TPP (Fig. 6C Conclusions The predicted reduction in the dynamic range of ligand concentration is not as substantial as a perfectly cooperative tandem system (Fig. 6A In summary, the assembly of independently functioning riboswitches appears to be a relatively simple way that organisms can construct genetic switches made of RNA that are more responsive to smaller changes in metabolite concentrations. Although greater dynamic range for gene control and greater sensitivity to ligand concentrations also emerge on assembling riboswitches with identical ligand specificities in tandem, these properties could easily be manifested by lone riboswitches. Therefore, the ligand-binding characteristics, gene control functions, and genetic distribution of tandem TPP riboswitches are consistent with our hypothesis that these systems exist to provide a small increase in digital gene control character. MATERIALS AND METHODS Chemicals and oligonucleotides Thiamine and TPP were purchased from Sigma, and the dinucleotide ApA was purchased from BIOLOG Life Science Institute. The intergenic region upstream of the tenA thiamine biosynthesis operon of B. anthracis (Sterne strain) was PCR amplified (by Dr. Sean Rollins, Department of Infectious Diseases, Massachusetts General Hospital) using the DNA primers 5′-TAATACGACTCACTATAGGGATAATAGAGACCTCCTCTAGTTGTATAG (T7 RNA polymerase promoter and three additional G residues are underlined) and 5′-TTCTCTATCCCCTTCCGGTATGTG. The resulting DNA construct was cloned into a TOPO-TA vector (Invitrogen), transformed into Top10 E. coli cells (Invitrogen), and the resulting plasmid was isolated from cells using the Qiaprep Spin Miniprep Kit (QIAGEN) following protocols supplied by the manufacturers. DNA sequencing (The Keck Foundation Biotechnology Resource Center, Yale University) confirmed successful cloning, and all constructs used in this work were generated from this plasmid by PCR with appropriate synthetic DNA primers using methods similar to those described elsewhere (Puerta-Fernandez et al. 2006). In-line probing RNA constructs used for in-line probing were transcribed in vitro from PCR-amplified DNA, dephosphorylated, and 5′-32P-labeled using protocols similar to those published previously (Seetharaman et al. 2001). To improve transcription efficiency with T7 RNA polymerase, additional G residues were introduced into the DNA template as noted. In-line probing was performed as described previously (Winkler et al. 2002b). Briefly, 5′-32P-labeled RNA (<1 nM) was incubated for 40 h at 25°C in 10 μL of in-line probing buffer (50 mM Tris-HCl [pH 8.3 at 25°C], 20 mM MgCl2, and 100 mM KCl) containing concentrations of TPP as defined for each reaction. After incubation, 10 μL of 10 M urea was added and the products were separated using denaturating 10% polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (PAGE). Gels were dried and analyzed using a Storm PhosphorImager (GE Healthcare). To obtain K
D values in the subnanomolar range, the in-line assay was conducted with RNA concentrations <50 pM. Therefore, the concentration of ligand needed to cause half-maximal modulation of spontaneous cleavage yield reflects the K
D for the RNA–ligand interaction. Synchronized in vitro transcriptions Synchronized transcription reactions were performed using a protocol similar to that published previously (Sudarsan et al. 2003b). Initial transcription experiments with PCR-generated template DNAs comprising the complete intergenic region upstream of the B. anthracis tenA gene and E. coli RNA polymerase were used to reveal the putative native promoter and transcription start site. For efficient transcription initiation, an additional A residue was inserted upstream of A1 by PCR to permit initiation by the dinucleotide ApA. The initiation reaction mixture contained 100 nM double-stranded DNA template, NTPs (1 μM ATP and GTP, 0.4 μM UTP), 200 μM ApA, 10 μg/mL BSA, and 33 nM α-32P-radiolabeled UTP in transcription buffer (50 mM Tris HCl [pH 7.5 at 25°C], 10 mM MgCl2, 50 mM KCl). Transcription was initiated by the addition of E. coli RNA polymerase holoenzyme (EpiCentre) at 88 nM final concentration. The reaction was incubated for 10 min at 37°C, and subsequently transcription elongation was started by transferring 10 μL aliquots to a microfuge tube containing 2.5 μL of prewarmed elongation mix (transcription buffer, 1 mg/mL heparin, 50 μM each NTP, and a TPP concentration as noted for each experiment). Reactions were terminated after 20 min at 37°C by adding 12.5 μL of 7 M urea and storage on ice. Product analysis was performed as described for in-line probing reactions. In vivo reporter assays DNA constructs containing one or both B. anthracis tenA TPP riboswitches were fused to a lacZ reporter and transformed into B. subtilis cells using protocols similar to those published previously (Sudarsan et al. 2003b). Briefly, DNA constructs encompassing the putative native promoter and either the first or both riboswitches (nucleotides −430 to −183 or nucleotides −430 to −10 relative to the translation start site) were PCR-amplified using DNA primers 5′-CAGGAATTCGACAATTGAGAAAATTAAAACAGTTGATGATGTC and 5′-CATGGATCCAATATGAAATTTTCAAATAAAAAAGCCCCGTTTC that introduce EcoRI and BamHI restriction sites, respectively. Mutations were introduced by two-step PCR using appropriate primers. Constructs were cloned into plasmid pDG1661 (Bacillus Genetic Stock Center, The Ohio State University) upstream of the lacZ reporter gene. Subsequent transformation into the amyE locus of a thiamine auxotroph strain of B. subtilis (1A251; Bacillus Genetic Stock Center, The Ohio State University) was confirmed by sequencing. Fresh overnight cultures in 2XYT medium (16 g/L tryptone, 10 g/L yeast extract, 5 g/L NaCl) were diluted to 0.05 OD600 mL−1 with 2XYT medium and grown for an additional 2 h by shaking at 37°C. Cultures were pelleted (10 min, 2500 rpm) and suspended in minimal medium (100 mM K2HPO4, 44 mM KH2PO4, 4 mM trisodium citrate, 0.8 mM MgSO4, 14 mM Na2SO4, 50 μM FeCl3, 0.4% glucose, 0.2% glutamate, 0.1% DIFCO vitamin assay casamino acids) supplemented with 500 mg/L adenine, and grown to 0.3 OD600 mL−1. After adding 50 μL of cells to 100 μL of minimal medium supplemented with adenine and containing different thiamine concentrations, cultures were shaken for 4 h at 37°C. β-galactosidase assays were performed in 96-well microplates following a procedure published elsewhere (Blount et al. 2007). Calculations of tandem riboswitch effects Described below is an example calculation of the dependence of the change in ligand concentration needed to shift between 10% and 90% gene repression (example given for gene repression by transcription termination) for a K
D ratio of x between two independently functioning tandem riboswitches. The lowest ratio (the most “digital” response curve) is found when x = 1, or K
D1 = K
D2. The fraction of transcripts undergoing termination (R) is given by the following equation:
where Y
1 equals fractional saturation of aptamer 1 with ligand and Y
2 equals fractional saturation of aptamer 2 with ligand. The fractional saturation of a single receptor equals
for a simple receptor–ligand interaction where [L] equals the ligand concentration. Then:
For x = K
D2/K
D1:
Since [L] > 0, x ≥ 0, KD > 0 and 0 ≤ r ≤ 1;
Examples of the dynamic ranges of ligand concentration needed to shift from 10% to 90% gene modulation:
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We thank members of the Breaker laboratory and Dr. Donald Crothers for helpful discussions, and Drs. Sean Rollins and Edward Ryan for preparing and supplying the B. anthracis tenA PCR DNA. This work was supported by funding to R.R.B. from the NIH (GM068819), NSF (EIA 0323510), and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. Footnotes Article published online ahead of print. Article and publication date are at http://www.rnajournal.org/cgi/doi/10.1261/rna.407707. REFERENCES
|
PubMed related articles
Your browsing activity is empty. Activity recording is turned off. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chem Biol. 2002 Sep; 9(9):1043.
[Chem Biol. 2002]Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2004 Jun; 5(6):451-63.
[Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2004]Curr Opin Struct Biol. 2004 Jun; 14(3):344-9.
[Curr Opin Struct Biol. 2004]Annu Rev Microbiol. 2005; 59():487-517.
[Annu Rev Microbiol. 2005]Cell. 2002 Nov 27; 111(5):747-56.
[Cell. 2002]Nucleic Acids Res. 2002 Jul 15; 30(14):3141-51.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 2002]RNA. 2003 Sep; 9(9):1084-97.
[RNA. 2003]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 Apr 27; 101(17):6421-6.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004]Nucleic Acids Res. 2004; 32(1):143-50.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 2004]Genome Biol. 2005; 6(8):R70.
[Genome Biol. 2005]Cell. 2003 May 30; 113(5):577-86.
[Cell. 2003]Science. 2006 Oct 13; 314(5797):300-4.
[Science. 2006]Genome Biol. 2004; 5(11):R90.
[Genome Biol. 2004]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 Apr 27; 101(17):6421-6.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004]Chem Biol. 2002 Sep; 9(9):1043.
[Chem Biol. 2002]Science. 2006 Oct 13; 314(5797):300-4.
[Science. 2006]Genome Biol. 2004; 5(11):R90.
[Genome Biol. 2004]Science. 2006 Oct 13; 314(5797):300-4.
[Science. 2006]Trends Genet. 2005 Aug; 21(8):432-6.
[Trends Genet. 2005]Genome Biol. 2005; 6(8):R70.
[Genome Biol. 2005]Bioinformatics. 2006 Jan 1; 22(1):35-9.
[Bioinformatics. 2006]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 Apr 27; 101(17):6421-6.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004]Nucleic Acids Res. 2004; 32(1):143-50.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 2004]Genome Biol. 2004; 5(11):R90.
[Genome Biol. 2004]Mol Cell. 1999 Apr; 3(4):495-504.
[Mol Cell. 1999]Science. 1999 Apr 23; 284(5414):611-5.
[Science. 1999]Structure. 2006 Sep; 14(9):1459-68.
[Structure. 2006]Nature. 2006 Jun 29; 441(7097):1167-71.
[Nature. 2006]Science. 2006 May 26; 312(5777):1208-11.
[Science. 2006]Science. 2004 Oct 8; 306(5694):275-9.
[Science. 2004]Science. 2006 Oct 13; 314(5797):300-4.
[Science. 2006]RNA. 1999 Oct; 5(10):1308-25.
[RNA. 1999]RNA. 2001 Apr; 7(4):524-36.
[RNA. 2001]Chem Biol. 2005 Dec; 12(12):1325-35.
[Chem Biol. 2005]Nat Struct Biol. 2003 Sep; 10(9):701-7.
[Nat Struct Biol. 2003]Cell. 2003 May 30; 113(5):577-86.
[Cell. 2003]Chem Biol. 2006 Aug; 13(8):857-68.
[Chem Biol. 2006]Science. 2004 Oct 8; 306(5694):275-9.
[Science. 2004]Cell. 2002 Nov 27; 111(5):747-56.
[Cell. 2002]Nat Struct Biol. 2003 Sep; 10(9):701-7.
[Nat Struct Biol. 2003]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Apr 29; 100(9):5052-6.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Oct 14; 100(21):12057-62.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Mar 18; 100(6):3083-8.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003]Science. 2004 Oct 8; 306(5694):275-9.
[Science. 2004]Chem Biol. 2005 Dec; 12(12):1325-35.
[Chem Biol. 2005]Science. 2004 Oct 8; 306(5694):275-9.
[Science. 2004]Science. 2006 Oct 13; 314(5797):300-4.
[Science. 2006]Genome Biol. 2004; 5(11):R90.
[Genome Biol. 2004]Science. 2004 Oct 8; 306(5694):275-9.
[Science. 2004]Trends Genet. 2005 Aug; 21(8):432-6.
[Trends Genet. 2005]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Dec 19; 103(51):19490-5.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006]Nat Biotechnol. 2001 Apr; 19(4):336-41.
[Nat Biotechnol. 2001]Mol Cell. 1999 Apr; 3(4):495-504.
[Mol Cell. 1999]Science. 1999 Apr 23; 284(5414):611-5.
[Science. 1999]Science. 2006 Oct 13; 314(5797):300-4.
[Science. 2006]Nucleic Acids Res. 2005 Jan 1; 33(Database issue):D192-6.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 2005]Cell. 2002 Nov 27; 111(5):747-56.
[Cell. 2002]Nature. 2006 Jun 29; 441(7097):1167-71.
[Nature. 2006]Science. 2006 May 26; 312(5777):1208-11.
[Science. 2006]