3.9 Article

A Pituitary-Specific Enhancer of the POMC Gene with Preferential Activity in Corticotrope Cells

Journal

MOLECULAR ENDOCRINOLOGY
Volume 25, Issue 2, Pages 348-359

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1210/me.2010-0422

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)
  2. National Cancer Institute of Canada (NCIC)
  3. COPSE
  4. Universite de Montreal

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cell-specific expression of the pituitary proopiomelanocortin (POMC) gene depends on the combination of tissue-and cell-restricted transcription factors such as Pitx1 and Tpit. These factors act on the proximal POMC promoter together with transcription factors that integrate inputs from signaling pathways. We now report the identification of an upstream enhancer in the POMC locus that is targeted by the same subset of transcription factors, except Pitx1. This enhancer located at -7 kb in the mouse POMC gene is highly dependent on Tpit for activity. Whereas Tpit requires Pitx1 for action on the promoter, it acts on the -7-kb enhancer as homodimers binding to a palindromic Tpit response element (TpitRE). Both half-sites of the TpitRE palindrome and Tpit homodimerization are required for activity. In vivo, the enhancer exhibits preferential activity in corticotrope cells of the anterior lobe whereas the promoter exhibits preference for intermediate lobe melanotropes. The enhancer is conserved among different species with the TpitRE palindrome localized at the center of conserved sequences. However, the mouse and human -7-kb enhancers do not exhibit conservation of hormone responsiveness and may differ in their relative importance for POMC expression. In summary, pituitary expression of the POMC gene relies on an upstream enhancer that complements the activity of the proximal promoter with Tpit as the major regulator of both regulatory regions. (Molecular Endocrinology 25:348-359, 2011)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available