4.6 Article

Zinc Finger Transcription Factors Displaced SREBP Proteins as the Major Sterol Regulators during Saccharomycotina Evolution

期刊

PLOS GENETICS
卷 10, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1004076

关键词

-

资金

  1. Science Foundation Ireland [08/N1B1865]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In most eukaryotes, including the majority of fungi, expression of sterol biosynthesis genes is regulated by Sterol-Regulatory Element Binding Proteins (SREBPs), which are basic helix-loop-helix transcription activators. However, in yeasts such as Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Candida albicans sterol synthesis is instead regulated by Upc2, an unrelated transcription factor with a Gal4-type zinc finger. The SREBPs in S. cerevisiae (Hms1) and C. albicans (Cph2) have lost a domain, are not major regulators of sterol synthesis, and instead regulate filamentous growth. We report here that rewiring of the sterol regulon, with Upc2 taking over from SREBP, likely occurred in the common ancestor of all Saccharomycotina. Yarrowia lipolytica, a deep-branching species, is the only genome known to contain intact and full-length orthologs of both SREBP (Sre1) and Upc2. Deleting YlUPC2, but not YlSRE1, confers susceptibility to azole drugs. Sterol levels are significantly reduced in the YlUPC2 deletion. RNA-seq analysis shows that hypoxic regulation of sterol synthesis genes in Y. lipolytica is predominantly mediated by Upc2. However, YlSre1 still retains a role in hypoxic regulation; growth of Y. lipolytica in hypoxic conditions is reduced in a Ylupc2 deletion and is abolished in a Ylsre1/Ylupc2 double deletion, and YlSre1 regulates sterol gene expression during hypoxia adaptation. We show that YlSRE1, and to a lesser extent YlUPC2, are required for switching from yeast to filamentous growth in hypoxia. Sre1 appears to have an ancestral role in the regulation of filamentation, which became decoupled from its role in sterol gene regulation by the arrival of Upc2 in the Saccharomycotina.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据