MINIREVIEW
Novel aspectsofheatshockfactors:DNA recognition,
chromatin modulationandgene expression
Hiroshi Sakurai and Yasuaki Enoki
Department of Clinical Laboratory Science, Kanazawa University Graduate School of Medical Science, Ishikawa, Japan
Background
The heatshock factor (HSF) in eukaryotes is involved
not only in heatshock protein (HSP) gene expression
and stress resistance, but also in the expression of
genes with roles in cell maintenance and differentia-
tion, as well as in developmental processes. HSF forms
a homotrimer that binds to gene promoters containing
a heatshock element (HSE), which is composed of
multiple inverted repeats of the pentanucleotide motif
nGAAn. Functional conservation of HSFs among
eukaryotes has been revealed by the finding that HSFs
from various organisms, including insects, mammals
and plants, can substitute for yeast HSF in Saccharo-
myces [1–4].
HSF proteins contain two evolutionarily conserved
functional modules: the DNA-binding domain (DBD)
at the amino-terminus and the oligomerization domain
in the central region of the protein [1,4]. The HSF
DBD belongs to the ‘winged’ helix-turn-helix family of
DNA-binding proteins and contains a three-helix bun-
dle capped by a four-stranded antiparallel b-sheet, and
a flexible loop or ‘wing’ with a less ordered structure
(Fig. 1) [5,6]. The second and third a-helices comprise
the helix-turn-helix motif. The oligomerization domain
consists of arrays of hydrophobic heptad repeats
(HRs), characteristic of helical coiled-coil structures
[1,4,7]. The HRs are divided into two subdomains:
HR-A and HR-B. The amino-terminal HR-A has
the potential to form trimers independently of HR-B,
and the carboxy-terminal HR-B can form large
oligomers [7].
Keywords
chromatin; heatshock element; heat shock
transcription factor; histone; protein–DNA
interactions
Correspondence
H. Sakurai, Department of Clinical
Laboratory Science, Kanazawa University
Graduate School of Medical Science,
5-11-80 Kodatsuno, Kanazawa, Ishikawa
920-0942, Japan
Fax: +81 76 234 4369
Tel: +81 76 265 2588
E-mail: sakurai@kenroku.kanazawa-u.ac.jp
(Received 10 May 2010, revised 9 July
2010, accepted 23 July 2010)
doi:10.1111/j.1742-4658.2010.07829.x
Heat shock factor (HSF) is an evolutionarily conserved stress-response reg-
ulator that activates the transcription ofheatshock protein genes, whose
products maintain protein homeostasis under normal physiological condi-
tions, as well as under conditions of stress. The promoter regions of the
target genes contain a heatshock element consisting of multiple inverted
repeats of the pentanucleotide sequence nGAAn. A single HSF of yeast
can bind to heatshock elements that differ in the configuration of the
nGAAn units and can regulate the transcription of various genes that func-
tion not only in stress resistance, but also in a broad range of biological
processes. Mammalian cells have four HSF family members involved in dif-
ferent, but in some cases similar, biological functions, including stress resis-
tance, cell differentiation and development. Mammalian HSF family
members exhibit differential specificity for different types ofheatshock ele-
ments, which, together with cell type-specific expressionof HSFs is impor-
tant in determining the target genes of each HSF. This minireview focuses
on the molecular mechanisms ofDNArecognition,chromatin modulation
and geneexpression by yeast and mammalian HSFs.
Abbreviations
3P, three perfect repeats; DBD, DNA-binding domain; HDAC1, ; HDAC2, ; HR, hydrophobic heptad repeat; HSE, heatshock element; HSF,
heat shock factor; HSP, heatshock protein; ncRNA, noncoding RNA; PARP, poly(ADP)-ribose polymerase; Pol II, RNA polymerase II;
SAGA, Spt-Ada-Gcn5 acetyltransferase; TFIIA, general transcription factor IIA.
4140 FEBS Journal 277 (2010) 4140–4149 ª 2010 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2010 FEBS
Trimerization of HSF polypeptides is a prerequisite
for binding to the HSE. Under physiological condi-
tions, stress-inducible HSFs, such as Drosophila HSF
and mammalian HSF1, are found in an inactive mono-
meric form. In vitro analysis has shown that inactive
monomeric HSF directly senses heatand oxidative
stress, and becomes able to trimerize and bind to the
HSE [8,9]. Drosophila HSF and mammalian HSF1
have a third HR, HR-C, adjacent to the carboxy-ter-
minus of the protein [10]. The HR-C maintains HSFs
in a monomeric form by suppressing trimerization
through intramolecular coiled-coil interactions with the
HR-A ⁄ B. Under stress conditions, the HR-A ⁄ B–HR-C
interaction is disrupted, thereby leading to intermolec-
ular coiled-coil interactions of the HR-A ⁄ B, although
the detailed molecular mechanisms are unknown
[10–12]. In addition, protein–protein interactions with
HSPs and other proteins can regulate the monomeric–
trimeric transition of HSF in cells [2]. Transcription
activation domains have been located in the HSFs of
several organisms; however, the transactivating ability
of the domain itself, even from stress-inducible HSFs,
is not stress sensitive [1,2,4]. Rather, another region of
HSF possesses a stress-regulated inhibitory role that
represses the transactivating ability under physiological
conditions [13]. Therefore, the transcriptional activity
of HSF is regulated at two steps: DNA-binding; and
acquisition of the transactivating ability.
HSF–HSE interactions
The HSE is composed of multiple inverted repeats of
the nGAAn pentanucleotide that are positioned con-
tinuously without spacing. Because each individual
DBD of a trimeric HSF binds to the sequence, the typ-
ical HSE contains at least three nGAAn units [4]. The
helical repeat of the DNA (10.5 bp), the length of the
unit (5 bp) and the inverted nature of the repeats, posi-
tions all of the GAA units on the same side of the
double helix, with the central GAA oriented in the
opposite direction. In vitro, Drosophila HSF is capable
of binding to two repeat sequences, but the affinity is
significantly lower than binding to three repeat
sequences [14]. The crystal structure of the yeast Kluy-
veromyces HSF DBD complexed with the sequence
ggTTCtaGAAcc (containing one set of the nGAAn
inverted repeat) has been determined [15]. In the com-
plex, the third helix of the DBD is docked into the
major groove, approximately perpendicular to the heli-
cal axis of the DNA. The evolutionarily conserved
arginine residue in this recognition helix makes two
hydrogen bonds with G
2
of the pentanucleotide
n
1
G
2
A
3
A
4
n
5
(Fig. 1). Additional direct contacts
include van der Waals bonds between the arginine and
a conserved serine residue and the thymine comple-
mentary to the third A
3
. The remaining contacts with
the DNA are to the phosphate backbone. Consistent
with the structural data, in vitro-binding assays have
shown that the order of importance of the bases in the
nGAAn repeat is G
2
>A
3
>A
4
[16–18]. In addition,
HSF binds with highest affinity when the n
1
residue is
adenine.
HSF trimers bind to long arrays of the nGAAn
sequence in a cooperative manner [19]. In an electro-
phoretic mobility shift assay, an HSE containing four
continuous nGAAn units (four perfect repeats) was
found to bind two trimers of Saccharomyces HSF,
Drosophila HSF, or human HSF1, with two subunits
PAFLTKLWTLVSDPDTDALICWSPSGNSFHVFDQGQFAKEVLPKYFKHNNMASFVRQLNMYGFRKVVHIEQGGLVKPERDDTEFQHPCFLR
S3H3 S4
Turn Wing
H1
S2 H2
Linker
PAFVNKLWSMLNDDSNTKLIQWAEDGKSFIVTNREEFVHQILPKYFKHSNFASFVRQLNMYGWHKVQDVKSGSIQSSSDDKWQFENENFIR
Sc
Hs1
PAFVNKLWSMVNDKSNEKFIHWSTSGESIVVPNRERFVQEVLPKYFKHSNFASFVRQLNMYGWHKVQDVKSGSMLSNNDSRWEFENENFKR
Kl
PAFLAKLWRLVDDADTNRLICWTKDGQSFVIQNQAQFAKELLPLNYKHNNMASFIRQLNMYGFHKITSIDNGGL-RFDRDEIEFSHPFFKR
Dm
PAFLSKLWTLVEETHTNEFITWSQNGQSFLVLDEQRFAKEILPKYFKHNNMASFVRQLNMYGFRKVVHIDSGIVKQERDGPVEFQHPYFKQ
Hs2
PAFLGKLWALVGDPGTDHLIRWSPSGTSFLVSDQSRFAKEVLPQYFKHSNMASFVRQLNMYGFRKVVSIEQGGLLRPERDHVEFQHPSFVR
Hs4
DNA contact
Aromatic-aromatic interaction
Disulfide bond formation in mammalian HSF1
S1
PHFLTKLWILVDDAVLDHVIRWGKDGHSFQIVNEETFAREVLPKYFKHNKITSFIRQLNMYGSRKVFALQTEKTSQENKISIEFQHPLFKR
Mm3
Fig. 1. Amino acid sequences of HSF DBDs. The DBD contains three a-helices (H1, H2 and H3), four b-sheets (S1, S2, S3 and S4), a ‘turn’
of the helix-turn-helix motif and a disordered loop referred to as a ‘wing’. The linker region connects between the DBD and the HR-A ⁄ B
motifs. The amino acid sequences of the DBDs from Kluyveromyces HSF (Kl), Saccharomyces HSF (Sc), Drosophila HSF (Dm), human HSF1
(Hs1), HSF2 (Hs2) and HSF4 (Hs4), and mouse HSF3 (Mm3) are shown. Residues making contacts with DNA are shown in red, residues
that have aromatic–aromatic interactions are shown in blue, cysteine residues that form a disulfide bond are shown in green and conserved
residues are shown in black.
H. Sakurai and Y. Enoki HSF–HSE interaction
FEBS Journal 277 (2010) 4140–4149 ª 2010 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2010 FEBS 4141
(possibly one from each trimer) not making contact
with the DNA (Fig. 2A, B) [14,20,21]. The dissociation
constant of Drosophila HSF for an HSE containing six
or more units (2 · 10
)15
m at 25 °C) is significantly
lower than that for an HSE containing three perfect
repeats (3P) (4 · 10
)12
m at 25 °C) [19]. Multiple
inverted repeats of nGAAn found at the promoter
regions of many HSP genes provide high affinity-bind-
ing sites for HSF.
The DBD–DBD interaction is important in the
HSF–HSF and HSF–HSE interactions. In HSF DBD–
HSE co-crystals, the protein–protein interface consists
of the helix 2 amino-terminus, the turn and the wing
[15]. Unlike other winged helix-turn-helix proteins, the
wing of the HSF does not appear to contact the DNA.
The wing of the Saccharomyces HSF is necessary for
efficient binding of a single trimer to the HSE [22], and
that of mammalian HSF1 is involved in trimer–trimer
interactions [23]. The tryptophan and phenylalanine
residues in the mammalian HSF1 DBD form intermo-
lecular aromatic–aromatic interactions, which stimulate
trimerization (Fig. 1) [24]. Furthermore, two cysteine
residues near the aromatic amino acids in HSF1 form
intermolecular disulfide bonds in a stress-inducible
manner [9,24]. The aromatic amino acids are conserved
in HSFs of various organisms and would generally
enhance HSF trimerization; however, the disulfide
bond formation is specific for mammalian HSF1
because the cysteines are not conserved in the HSFs of
other organisms (Fig. 1). Mutations in the linker region
that connects the DBD and HR-A ⁄ B have been shown
to alter the monomer–trimer equilibrium of mamma-
lian HSF1, indicating that this region is crucial for
HSF1 trimerization [25].
HSE-specific transcriptional regulation
by Saccharomyces HSF
Saccharomyces HSF constitutively forms a trimer,
localizes in the nucleus and binds to and regulates
basal expression via HSEs of target genes [26].
Deletion of the HSF gene is lethal to cells, even at
physiological temperatures. The genes targeted by
HSF encode proteins that function in protein folding
and degradation, detoxification, energy generation,
carbohydrate metabolism and cell wall organization
[27,28]. Heatshockand oxidative stress lead to
enhanced binding of HSF to HSEs in yeast [27,29].
However, whether the trimerization status and ⁄ or
the affinity of each DBD for nGAAn changes under
stress conditions is not known. The activation
domains at the amino- and carboxy-termini are
required for the transient and sustained heat shock
responses, respectively [30]. Phosphorylation of HSF,
regulated by heatand oxidative stress, is involved in
the activation and inactivation of the transactivating
ability [26]. Interestingly, Saccharomyces HSF is unu-
sual among transcriptional activators because it can
bypass a need for critical general transcription factors
and co-activators, including general transcription fac-
tor IIA (TFIIA) [31], Kin28 (a C-terminal-domain
kinase of TFIIH) [32], the Taf9 subunit of TFIID
and Spt-Ada-Gcn5 acetyltransferase (SAGA) [33,34],
and the Med17 and Med22 subunits of Mediator [32].
Although the archetypical HSE is a sequence of con-
tinuous perfect inverted repeats of nGAAn (perfect-
type), the Saccharomyces HSF tolerates the presence of
gaps between the units [28,35]. The gap-type HSE con-
sists of two inverted nGAAn units followed by another
unit after a gap of 5 bp, and the step-type HSE con-
sists of three direct units, each interrupted by 5 bp
(Fig. 2A). In the discontinuous gap- and step-type
Two trimers on 4P-type HSE
One trimer on step-type HSE
One trimer on gap-type HSE
One trimer on 3P-type HSE
4P type
A
B
a
b
c
d
nTTCnnGAAnnTTCnnGAAn
3P type
nTTCnnGAAnnTTCn
Gap type
nTTCnnGAAnnnnnnnGAAn
Step type
nTTCnnnnnnnTTCnnnnnnnTTCn
Fig. 2. HSE types and HSF–HSE interactions. (A) Nucleotide
sequences of the different types of HSEs. The GAA and inverted
TTC sequences are indicated by bold uppercase letters with
arrows. (B) HSF binding to the different types of HSEs. Thick lines
represent DNA with GAA and inverted TTC sequences (white
squares). Gray ovals represent HSF monomers making contact with
the sequences, and light gray ovals represent HSF monomers that
do not make contact with the DNA. On the gap- and step-type
HSEs, a single HSF trimer is in equilibrium between the two bind-
ing states that are shown.
HSF–HSE interaction H. Sakurai and Y. Enoki
4142 FEBS Journal 277 (2010) 4140–4149 ª 2010 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2010 FEBS
HSEs, all three GAA units are positioned on the same
side of the double helix, as in the continuous HSE.
HSF binds to discontinuous HSEs with similar affinity
for the continuous 3P-type HSE [20,28]. On discontin-
uous HSEs, the HSF trimer dissociates from two units
and quickly rebinds to another two units, thereby sta-
bilizing the protein–DNA complex (Fig. 2B). Gap-type
HSEs are involved in moderate stress-induced tran-
scription, whereas step-type HSEs are involved in basal
constitutive transcription and in low-level activation
[28,36]. These discontinuous HSEs are widely used as
HSF-binding sequences, at least in the Saccharomyces
genome, because approximately half of the HSF target
genes contain these types of HSE [37].
The number of HSF trimers bound to an HSE
affects the subsequent acquisition of the transactivat-
ing capacity. In HSF, a C-terminal modulator
domain is necessary for stress-induced hyperphosph-
orylation of the protein and for transcriptional activa-
tion of a gene by a single trimer bound to HSEs with
three nGAAn units (3P-, gap-, or step-type). How-
ever, the C-terminal modulator, and thereby hyper-
phosphorylation, are not necessary for transcriptional
activation by trimers cooperatively bound to HSEs
containing four or more repeat units [20,29]. The
HR-A ⁄ B is indispensable for binding of a single tri-
mer to three-unit HSEs and for HSF hyperphosph-
orylation, but HR-A ⁄ B is not required for binding
HSEs with four or more units or for transactivation
at these HSEs. These results indicate that trimer–tri-
mer interactions are implicated not only in the coop-
erative binding of HSF to the DNA, but also in
transcriptional activation [36]. Although the role of
hyperphosphorylation in transcriptional activation is
not understood, this modification may induce a con-
formational change in a single trimer that converts it
to an active form. As hyperphosphorylation is not
required for activation at HSEs containing four or
more repeats, a similar conformational change may
be mediated by trimer–trimer interactions. The essen-
tial role of the HR-A ⁄ B is to maintain the structural
integrity of the HSF trimer, because an HSF deriva-
tive containing the dimerization domain of
transcription factor Gcn4 instead of the HR-A ⁄ Bis
hyperphosphorylated and is capable of activating
transcription via three-unit HSEs [36].
HSE binding by the four mammalian
HSFs
Mammalian HSF1 is a bona fide stress-inducible HSF:
in response to stress, monomeric HSF1 located in the
cytoplasm trimerizes, translocates into the nucleus and
binds to the HSEs of HSP genes [10,11]. Under physi-
ological conditions, the activity of the carboxy-termi-
nal activation domain is repressed by the regulatory
region of the protein, and repression is relieved in
response to heatshock [13]. The transcriptional activ-
ity of HSF1 is further regulated by covalent modifica-
tions, including phosphorylation, SUMOylation and
acetylation [2]. It should be noted, however, that
HSF1-null mice exhibit multiple phenotypes, including
placentation defects, growth retardation and exagger-
ated production of the pro-inflammatory cytokine
tumour necrosis factor-a, without affecting basal HSP
expression [38]. Although HSF1 gains DNA-binding
and transactivating abilities upon stress, a little HSF1
trimer is present constitutively in cells and binds to
and regulates the expressionof genes without any
apparent stress intervention [1,3].
HSF2 and HSF4 may not be directly involved in the
stress response, but rather in cell differentiation and
development [3]. In addition to covalent modifications,
including phosphorylation, SUMOylation and ubiquiti-
nation, the regulatory roles of HSF2 and HSF4 are
dependent on their cellular concentrations [2]. The
non-DNA-binding form of HSF2 exists primarily in
the cytoplasm as a dimer, which has been suggested to
require an interaction between HR-A⁄ B and HR-C.
Although the signals responsible for activation of
HSF2 remain enigmatic, activated HSF2 trimerizes
and binds to HSEs [39]. HSF2 possesses an activation
domain at the carboxy-terminus, but the activity is sig-
nificantly lower than the activation domain of HSF1
[2]. During development, HSF2 is important for neural
specification and spermatogenesis [3]. HSF4 lacks the
HR-C, and trimeric HSF4 is able to constitutively bind
to the HSEs of target genes [40]. Alternative splicing
of the HSF4 transcript results in the production of
two isoforms, HSF4a and HSF4b. HSF4b has the
potential to activate transcription, whereas HSF4a
does not [2]. HSF4 is required for ocular lens develop-
ment and fibre cell differentiation [3].
The HSF3 gene was recently identified in mouse as
an orthologue of the chicken HSF3 gene; however,
the human HSF3 gene is a pseudogene [41]. Mouse
HSF3 translocates into the nucleus upon heat shock
and may activate nonclassical heatshock genes, but
does not activate classical heatshock genes (i.e. HSP
genes).
HSF1 prefers long arrays of the nGAAn unit, while
HSF2 prefers short arrays [18]. In addition, a four per-
fect repeat-type HSE binds two trimers of HSF1 or a
single trimer of HSF2 [21]. These differences are
related to differences in the cooperativity of the tri-
mers; the wing regions of the HSF1 and HSF2 DBDs
H. Sakurai and Y. Enoki HSF–HSE interaction
FEBS Journal 277 (2010) 4140–4149 ª 2010 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2010 FEBS 4143
affect the cooperativity [23]. HSF4 trimers exhibit
weak cooperativity [21,40].
The genomic sequences to which HSF1 binds are
continuous perfect inverted repeats of nGAAn [42]. In
contrast, the HSF4-binding consensus sequence is
more ambiguous than that of HSF1 and HSF2 [43].
The human cA-crystallin and cC-crystallin promoters
contain HSEs of different configurations, and the for-
mer is recognized by both HSF1 and HSF4, while the
latter is preferentially recognized by HSF4 [21]. The
mouse p35 gene, a specific target of HSF2, contains a
putative HSE that diverges from the canonical HSE
[44]. The HSE specificity of three HSF members has
been systematically characterized using model 3P-,
gap- and step-type HSEs [21]. HSF1 preferentially
binds to continuous 3P-type HSE, HSF2 exhibits a
slightly higher binding affinity to discontinuous HSEs
than does HSF1, and HSF4 efficiently recognizes dis-
continuous HSEs. When HSF1, HSF2 and HSF4 are
expressed in yeast cells, transcription of various genes
is differentially regulated by the three HSFs and corre-
lated with the type of HSE, namely perfect, gap, or
step [21,45]. These observations indicate that the con-
figuration of the nGAAn unit is an important determi-
nant of HSF–HSE interactions. This is consistent with
the notion that although DNA-binding transcription
factors of the same family bind the same highest-affin-
ity sites, they prefer different lower-affinity sites, and
that low-affinity sites do contribute to factor binding
and geneexpression [46].
Differences in the HSE-binding specificity are in part
explained by the oligomerization of HSFs. When an
amino acid substitution is made in the HR-A⁄ Bof
HSF4, the protein exhibits a reduced ability to trimerize
and is unable to bind to discontinuous gap- and step-type
HSEs, but binding to the continuous 3P-type HSE is not
affected [21]. In contrast, an amino acid substitution in
the HR-C of HSF1 enables HSF1 to constitutively form
trimers that bind to discontinuous HSEs [45]. Similar
results have been obtained by introducing oligomeriza-
tion-prone mutations into the HSF1 DBD [45]. On
discontinuous HSEs, in which two pairs of two nGAAn
units provide a platform for binding two DBDs of a
single HSF trimer, stable oligomerization inhibits disso-
ciation and ⁄ or stimulates rebinding of HSF (Fig. 2B).
Interestingly, HSF1 and HSF2 form heterotrimers
via the HR-A ⁄ B regions [47–49]. When HSF1 and
HSF2 bind as a complex to satellite III DNA in
nuclear stress bodies, elevated expressionof HSF2
causes transcriptional activation of noncoding satellite
III RNA by the heterotrimer [49]. In addition, HSF2
modulates the activity of stress-induced HSF1 in a
gene-specific manner: the presence of HSF2 leads to
stimulation of HSP70 expression but to inhibition of
HSP40 and HSP110 expression [48]. Differences
between HSF1 and HSF2 in HSE specificity may
enable an HSF1–HSF2 heterotrimer to have a distinct
HSE specificity.
Binding of HSF to chromatin and
changes in chromatin structure
Packaging ofDNA into nucleosome arrays, which can
be folded into higher-order structures, provides way
with which to tightly control access to the DNA
sequence. Many sequence-specific DNA-binding fac-
tors, including HSF, as well as general transcription
factors, cannot bind to nucleosomal DNA [50]. In
cells, there are various proteins and protein complexes
that change chromatin structure: histone variants,
histone-modifying enzymes, histone chaperones and
chromatin remodelling complexes [51].
In yeast
In Saccharomyces cerevisiae cells, heatshock induces
the binding of general transcription factors and RNA
polymerase II (Pol II) to the HSP promoter, resulting
in rapid RNA synthesis [52]. Chromatin regulators,
including the SAGA histone–acetylase complex, the
Rpd3 histone–deacetylase complex, ATP-dependent
chromatin remodelling complexes (SWI ⁄ SNF, ISW1
and RSC) and histone chaperones (Asf1, Spt6 and
Spt16), are involved in histone acetylation and eviction
[52–55]. Stress-inducible or constitutive binding of
HSF to a promoter is dependent on the structure of
the HSE. The HSP12 promoter possesses a low-affinity
HSE and a binding site for the general stress response
transcription factors Msn2 and Msn4 (Msn2 ⁄ 4).
However, HSF and Msn2 ⁄ 4 are not preloaded on this
promoter. Heat-induced binding of HSF to the pro-
moter in nucleosomes is assisted by Msn2 ⁄ 4 and the
chromatin remodelling complexes SWI ⁄ SNF, ISW1
and RSC [56,57]. These remodellers play partially
overlapping, but not redundant, function [57]. In con-
trast, the HSP82 promoter possesses a high-affinity
HSE, which constitutively binds HSF. The promoter
contains remodelled nucleosomes exhibiting DNase I
hypersensitivity, and the gene is transcribed at low
levels under physiological conditions [58,59]. Binding
of HSF to the HSP82 promoter has been suggested to
occur soon after DNA replication and before nucleo-
somes have assembled, in the S ⁄ G
2
phase of the cell
cycle [59], depending on ISW1 and RSC activities [57].
In response to heat shock, HSF occupancy at HSE-
containing promoters increases, the SAGA and
HSF–HSE interaction H. Sakurai and Y. Enoki
4144 FEBS Journal 277 (2010) 4140–4149 ª 2010 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2010 FEBS
SWI ⁄ SNF complexes are recruited to both the pro-
moter and coding regions, and histones are acetylated
and displaced [56–58]. However, the presence of SAGA
and SWI ⁄ SNF, and a high density of Pol II within the
coding region, are not sufficient to elicit histone dis-
placement, suggesting that histone eviction is modu-
lated by factors that are not linked to elongating
polymerase [55]. Recently, a candidate factor was iden-
tified in Drosophila [60, see below]. The Rpd3-contain-
ing histone–deacetylase complex, which deacetylates
histones to repress transcription, is also recruited to
induced genes. It is possible that the opposing activities
of histone acetylase and deacetylase modulate chroma-
tin structure and fine-tune transcription [58]. The his-
tone chaperones Asf1, Spt6 and Spt16 are involved in
histone eviction and redeposition, and inactivation of
Spt16 leads to sustained transcription [61].
In Drosophila
Studies in Drosophila provide many insights into how
HSF and Pol II overcome the nucleosome barrier. In
brief, on polytene chromosomes of Drosophila, heat
shock leads to visible changes in the heatshock loci,
termed ‘‘puffing’’. Puffing reflects the changes in chro-
matin structure that lead to the disruption of nucleo-
somes along the coding region of HSP genes. Unlike
yeast HSP genes, the DNase I hypersensitive region of
the hsp70 promoter of nonheat-shocked cells contains
paused Pol II, which is transcriptionally engaged and
paused 20–40 bp downstream of its initiation site [62–
64]. The promoter-bound GAGA factor is required for
efficient pause-site entry of Pol II. Upon heat shock,
escape of the paused polymerase from the site is trig-
gered by HSF-mediated recruitment of positive tran-
scription elongation factor-b (P-TEFb), which
phosphorylates the polymerase [62–64]. Concomitant
nucleosome loss at hsp70 requires poly(ADP)-ribose
polymerase (PARP), which is capable of binding nucleo-
somes and is important for puff formation [60]. The
possible roles of PARP in nucleosome loss are as fol-
lows, (a) PARP prebound to nucleosomes is released
from chromatin to reverse any repressive effects of the
chromatin structure, (b) PARP ADP-ribosylates
histones and thus destabilizes nucleosomes or (c)
ADP-ribose polymers generated by PARP, which look
much like a nucleic acid, bind to histones, facilitating
nucleosome dissociation [60].
In mammals
Similarly to Drosophila, the promoter region of mam-
malian HSP70 is hypersensitive to DNase I and
contains paused polymerase [62–64]. Although GAGA
factor-like DNA-binding activity has been reported,
the involvement of a mammalian GAGA factor-like
protein in polymerase pausing has not been docu-
mented [65]. Instead, the HSP70 promoter is bound by
HSF2 in mitotic cells, which prevents compaction at
the site by condensin and maintains the gene in a tran-
scription-competent state, thereby enabling robust acti-
vation by HSF1 if cells in the early G
1
phase are
exposed to a stressor [66]. The bookmarking function
of HSF2 is achieved by recruitment of protein phos-
phatase 2A to inhibit nearby condesin complexes by
dephosphorylation. The bookmarking of the HSP70
promoter and other HSE-containing promoters by
HSF2 is different from that of many active promoters,
which are marked by binding of TATA-binding pro-
tein and recruitment of protein phosphatase 2A
[67,68]. In mouse lens, HSF4 binds to nonclassical heat
shock genes and induces demethylation of histone H3
lysine 9; methylation of this residue is correlated with
transcriptionally repressed chromatin [43]. This HSF4
function is required for heat-induced transcription of
these genes, in part by facilitating HSF1 binding via
chromatin modification. The roles of HSF1 in chroma-
tin modulation have been shown: under unstressed
conditions, HSF1 binds to the promoter of the non-
heat-shock interleukin-6 geneand functions in the
opening of its chromatin structure through recruitment
of the CBP histone acetyltransferase and the BRG1-
containing SWI ⁄ SNF chromatin remodeller [69]. It is
unknown whether binding of HSF4 and HSF1 to
DNA is maintained in mitotic chromatin.
Upon transcriptional activation, HSF1 bound to the
HSP70 promoter recruits the BRG1-containing
SWI ⁄ SNF chromatin remodeller and the CBP ⁄ p300
histone acetyltransferases [70,71]. In the HSF1 activa-
tion domain, phenylalanine residues are involved in
promoting elongation mediated by Pol II and recruit-
ment of the SWI⁄ SNF complex, while acidic amino
acids are involved in transcriptional initiation [70].
Interestingly, mouse HSF3, which fails to activate clas-
sical heatshock genes (including HSP70), does not
bind SWI ⁄ SNF, suggesting the importance of the chro-
matin remodeller in HSF member-specific transcription
[41]. Histone acetylation at the HSP70 promoter
occurs under treatment with heatand arsenite; how-
ever, phosphorylation of histone H3 occurs as a result
of treatment with arsenite [72]. The arsenite-induced
phosphorylation of H3 and HSP70 transcription is
dependent on p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase
activation. However, it remains to be explored how
phosphorylation of H3 is involved in arsenite-induced,
but not in heat-induced, transcription by HSF1.
H. Sakurai and Y. Enoki HSF–HSE interaction
FEBS Journal 277 (2010) 4140–4149 ª 2010 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2010 FEBS 4145
During attenuation of RNA synthesis, the chaperone
HSP70 behaves as a corepressor of HSF1 in a nega-
tive-feedback loop and interacts with CoREST, a com-
ponent of a histone deacetylase complex containing
HDAC1 and HDAC2 [73]. CoREST binds to the
HSP70 promoter at low levels under physiological
conditions and suppresses basal expression.
Global transcriptional changes and
histone modifications in heat-shocked
mammalian cells
When cells are subjected to heat shock, transcription
of many mRNA genes is rapidly repressed. In contrast,
the levels of the noncoding RNAs (ncRNAs) – B2
RNA and Alu RNA – which are transcribed from
short interspersed elements (SINEs) by RNA polymer-
ase III, increase in mouse and human cells, respec-
tively. Both ncRNAs are transacting transcriptional
repressors during the heatshock response: they block
transcription by binding Pol II and entering complexes
at some mRNA gene promoters [74,75]. On the acti-
vated mouse and human HSP70 promoters, however,
Pol II is present, but B2 RNA and Alu RNA are
absent, implying that mechanisms must exist to over-
come ncRNA repression on the promoter, for example,
degradation of the ncRNA repressors by an RNase,
removal of the ncRNA repressors by an RNA helicase,
or binding of another ncRNA to Pol II to displace the
ncRNA repressors [75]. In this context, it is notewor-
thy that the ncRNA heatshock RNA-1 (HSR1) is an
important regulator for heat-induced HSF1 trimeriza-
tion and HSP expression [76].
A global deacetylation of core histones is associated
with heat shock. This is achieved by HSF1 and the his-
tone deacetylases HDAC1 and HDAC2 [77]. In heat-
shocked cells, HSF1 binds to HDAC1 and HDAC2,
and their histone-deacetylase activities increase. The
heat-induced deacetylation of histone H4 is not
observed in HSF1 knockout mouse cells. In addition,
loss of HSF1 causes hyperacetylation of histone H4 in
nonheat-shocked cells [77]. The relationship between
HSF1 and histone deacetylases has also been shown in
human breast cancer cells: treatment of cells with the
transforming factor heregulin leads to increases in the
levels of HSF1 and MTA1 (a component of the NuRD
complex containing HDAC1 and HDAC2) proteins
and to binding of HSF1 to MTA1 [78]. The complex
is recruited to the promoters of estrogen-responsive
genes and participates in the repression of transcrip-
tion, an effect linked to metastasis [78]. Therefore,
HSF1 is a potent regulator of global histone acetyla-
tion ⁄ deacetylation in stressed and unstressed cells.
Conclusion
In the HSF trimer, binding of each DBD to a 5-bp
unit (nGAAn) is necessary to achieve a stable protein–
DNA interaction, because monomeric HSF binds to
the repeat unit with significantly less affinity than does
the trimer. In addition to the continuous repeat units,
three discontinuous units in the gap- and step-type
HSEs can be bound by HSFs. Efficient trimerization
of HSFs is important to establish interactions with the
gap- and step-type HSEs. The different types of HSEs
result in the induction, by yeast HSFs, of different lev-
els ofgeneexpressionand probably in distinguishing
target genes by mammalian HSFs. In response to
stress, yeast HSF bound to an HSE recruits the gen-
eral transcription factors and Pol II to the promoter,
while the target promoters of mammalian HSF1 con-
tain paused polymerase that switches to productive
elongation in response to activated HSF1. Chromatin
regulators that disrupt the nucleosome structure facili-
tate the binding of HSF, general transcription factors
and Pol II to the promoters, and subsequent RNA
synthesis by polymerase. In mammalian cells, HSF1
target promoters are also bound by HSF2 and HSF4
under physiological conditions, suggesting that these
factors play a positive role in the opening of the chro-
matin structure and in stress-induced transcription by
HSF1. In addition, HSF1 itself associates with histone
deacetylases and regulates global histone acetylation.
Therefore, mammalian HSFs function not only as
transcription activators but also as chromatin-modu-
lating factors.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported in part by Grants-in-Aid for
Scientific Research from the Ministry of Education,
Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology of Japan to
H. Sakurai.
References
1 Fujimoto M & Nakai A (2010) The heatshock factor
family and adaptation to proteotoxic stress. FEBS J
277, 4112–4125.
2 Bjo
¨
rk JK & Sistonen L (2010) Regulation of the
members of the mammalian heatshock factor family.
FEBS J 277, 4126–4139.
3 Abane R & Mezger V (2010) Roles ofheat shock
factors in gametogenesis and development. FEBS J 277,
4150–4172.
4 Pirkkala L, Nykanen P & Sistonen L (2001) Roles of
the heatshock transcription factors in regulation of the
HSF–HSE interaction H. Sakurai and Y. Enoki
4146 FEBS Journal 277 (2010) 4140–4149 ª 2010 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2010 FEBS
heat shock response and beyond. FASEB J 15 , 1118–
1131.
5 Harrison CJ, Bohm AA & Nelson HC (1994) Crystal
structure of the DNA binding domain of the heat shock
transcription factor. Science 263, 224–227.
6 Vuister GW, Kim SJ, Orosz A, Marquardt J, Wu C &
Bax A (1994) Solution structure of the DNA-binding
domain of Drosophila heatshock transcription factor.
Nat Struct Biol 1, 605–614.
7 Peteranderl R, Rabenstein M, Shin YK, Liu CW,
Wemmer DE, King DS & Nelson HC (1999) Biochemi-
cal and biophysical characterization of the trimerization
domain from the heatshock transcription factor.
Biochemistry 38, 3559–3569.
8 Zhong M, Orosz A & Wu C (1998) Direct sensing of
heat and oxidation by Drosophila heat shock
transcription factor. Mol Cell 2, 101–108.
9 Ahn SG & Thiele DJ (2003) Redox regulation of
mammalian heatshock factor 1 is essential for Hsp
gene activation and protection from stress. Genes Dev
17, 516–528.
10 Rabindran SK, Haroun RI, Clos J, Wisniewski J &
Wu C (1993) Regulation ofheatshock factor trimer
formation: role of the conserved leucine zipper. Science
259, 230–234.
11 Zuo J, Baler R, Dahl G & Voellmy R (1994) Activation
of the DNA-binding ability of human heat shock
transcription factor 1 may involve the transition from
an intramolecular to an intermolecular triple-stranded
coiled-coil structure. Mol Cell Biol 14, 7557–7568.
12 Farkas T, Kutskova YA & Zimarino V (1998)
Intramolecular repression of mouse heatshock factor 1.
Mol Cell Biol 18, 906–918.
13 Newton EM, Knauf U, Green M & Kingston RE
(1996) The regulatory domain of human heat shock
factor 1 is sufficient to sense heat stress. Mol Cell Biol
16, 839–846.
14 Perisic O, Xiao H & Lis JT (1989) Stable binding of
Drosophila heatshock factor to head-to-head and
tail-to-tail repeats of a conserved 5 bp recognition unit.
Cell 59, 797–806.
15 Littlefield O & Nelson HC (1999) A new use for the
‘wing’ of the ‘winged’ helix-turn-helix motif in the HSF-
DNA cocrystal. Nat Struct Biol 6, 464–470.
16 Cunniff NF & Morgan WD (1993) Analysis of heat
shock element recognition by saturation mutagenesis of
the human HSP70.1 gene promoter. J Biol Chem 268,
8317–8324.
17 Fernandes M, Xiao H & Lis JT (1994) Fine structure
analyses of the Drosophila and Saccharomyces heat
shock factor-heat shock element interactions. Nucleic
Acids Res 22, 167–173.
18 Kroeger PE & Morimoto RI (1994) Selection of new
HSF1 and HSF2 DNA-binding sites reveals difference
in trimer cooperativity. Mol Cell Biol 14, 7592–7603.
19 Xiao H, Perisic O & Lis JT (1991) Cooperative binding
of Drosophila heatshock factor to arrays of a conserved
5 bp unit. Cell 64, 585–593.
20 Hashikawa N, Mizukami Y, Imazu H & Sakurai H
(2006) Mutated yeast heatshock transcription factor
activates transcription independently of hyperphosph-
orylation. J Biol Chem 281, 3936–3942.
21 Yamamoto N, Takemori Y, Sakurai M, Sugiyama K &
Sakurai H (2009) Differential recognition ofheat shock
elements by members of the heatshock transcription
factor family. FEBS J 276, 1962–1974.
22 Cicero MP, Hubl ST, Harrison CJ, Littlefield O, Hardy
JA & Nelson HC (2001) The wing in yeast heat shock
transcription factor (HSF) DNA-binding domain is
required for full activity. Nucleic Acids Res 29, 1715–
1723.
23 Ahn SG, Liu PC, Klyachko K, Morimoto RI & Thiele
DJ (2001) The loop domain ofheatshock transcription
factor 1 dictates DNA-binding specificity and responses
to heat stress. Genes Dev 15, 2134–2145.
24 Lu M, Lee YJ, Park SM, Kang HS, Kang SW, Kim S
& Park JS (2009) Aromatic-participant interactions are
essential for disulfide-bond-based trimerization in
human heatshock transcription factor 1. Biochemistry
48, 3795–3797.
25 Liu PC & Thiele DJ (1999) Modulationof human heat
shock factor trimerization by the linker domain. J Biol
Chem 274, 17219–17225.
26 Trott A & Morano KA (2003) The yeast response to
heat shock. In Yeast Stress Responses (Hohmann S &
Mager PWH eds), pp 71–119. Springer-Verlag, Heidel-
berg, Germany.
27 Hahn JS, Hu Z, Thiele DJ & Iyer VR (2004) Genome-
wide analysis of the biology of stress responses through
heat shock transcription factor. Mol Cell Biol 24, 5249–
5256.
28 Yamamoto A, Mizukami Y & Sakurai H (2005) Identifi-
cation of a novel class of target genes and a novel type of
binding sequence ofheatshock transcription factor in
Saccharomyces cerevisiae. J Biol Chem 280, 11911–11919.
29 Yamamoto A, Ueda J, Yamamoto N, Hashikawa N &
Sakurai H (2007) Role ofheatshock transcription
factor in Saccharomyces cerevisiae oxidative stress
response. Eukaryot Cell 6, 1373–1379.
30 Sorger PK (1990) Yeast heatshock factor contains
separable transient and sustained response
transcriptional activators. Cell 62, 793–805.
31 Chou S, Chatterjee S, Lee M & Struhl K (1999)
Transcriptional activation in yeast cells lacking
transcription factor IIA. Genetics 153 , 1573–1581.
32 Lee D & Lis JT (1998) Transcriptional activation inde-
pendent of TFIIH kinase and the RNA polymerase II
mediator in vivo. Nature 393, 389–392.
33 Apone LM, Virbasius CA, Holstege FC, Wang J,
Young RA & Green MR (1998) Broad, but not univer-
H. Sakurai and Y. Enoki HSF–HSE interaction
FEBS Journal 277 (2010) 4140–4149 ª 2010 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2010 FEBS 4147
sal, transcriptional requirement for yTAFII17, a histone
H3-like TAFII present in TFIID and SAGA. Mol Cell
2, 653–661.
34 Moqtaderi Z, Keaveney M & Struhl K (1998) The
histone H3-like TAF is broadly required for
transcription in yeast. Mol Cell 2, 675–682.
35 Silar P, Butler G & Thiele DJ (1991) Heat shock
transcription factor activates transcription of the
yeast metallothionein gene. Mol Cell Biol 11, 1232–
1238.
36 Hashikawa N, Yamamoto N & Sakurai H (2007)
Different mechanisms are involved in the transcriptional
activation by yeast heatshock transcription factor
through two different types ofheatshock elements.
J Biol Chem 282, 10333–10340.
37 Sakurai H & Takemori Y (2007) Interaction between
heat shock transcription factors (HSFs) and
divergent binding sequences: binding specificities of
yeast HSFs and human HSF1. J Biol Chem 282, 13334–
13341.
38 Xiao X, Zuo X, Davis AA, McMillan DR, Curry BB,
Richardson JA & Benjamin IJ (1999) HSF1 is required
for extra-embryonic development, postnatal growth and
protection during inflammatory responses in mice.
EMBO J 18, 5943–5952.
39 Sistonen L, Sarge KD & Morimoto RI (1994) Human
heat shock factors 1 and 2 are differentially activated
and can synergistically induce hsp70 gene transcription.
Mol Cell Biol 14, 2087–2099.
40 Nakai A, Tanabe M, Kawazoe Y, Inazawa J, Morimot-
o RI & Nagata K (1997) HSF4, a new member of the
human heatshock factor family which lacks properties
of a transcriptional activator. Mol Cell Biol 17, 469–
481.
41 Fujimoto M, Hayashida N, Katoh T, Oshima K,
Shinkawa T, Prakasam R, Tan K, Inouye S, Takii R &
Nakai A (2010) A novel mouse HSF3 has the potential
to activate non-classical heatshock genes during heat
shock. Mol Biol Cell 21, 106–116.
42 Trinklein ND, Murray JI, Hartman SJ, Botstein D &
Myers RM (2004) The role ofheatshock transcription
factor 1 in the genome-wide regulation of the
mammalian heatshock response. Mol Biol Cell 15,
1254–1261.
43 Fujimoto M, Oshima K, Shinkawa T, Wang BB,
Inouye S, Hayashida N, Takii R & Nakai A (2008)
Analysis of HSF4 binding regions reveals its necessity
for gene regulation during development andheat shock
response in mouse lenses. J Biol Chem 283, 29961–
29970.
44 Chang Y, Ostling P, Akerfelt M, Trouillet D, Rallu M,
Gitton Y, El Fatimy R, Fardeau V, Le Crom S,
Morange M et al. (2006) Role of heat-shock factor 2 in
cerebral cortex formation and as a regulator of p35
expression. Genes Dev 20, 836–847.
45 Takemori Y, Enoki Y, Yamamoto N, Fukai Y, Adachi
K & Sakurai H (2009) Mutational analysis of human
heat-shock transcription factor 1 reveals a regulatory
role for oligomerization in DNA-binding specificity.
Biochem J 424, 253–261.
46 Pan Y, Tsai CJ, Ma B & Nussinov R (2010) Mecha-
nisms of transcription factor selectivity. Trends Genet
26, 75–83.
47 Loison F, Debure L, Nizard P, Le Goff P, Michel D &
Le Drean Y (2006) Up-regulation of the clusterin gene
after proteotoxic stress: implication of HSF1-HSF2
heterocomplexes. Biochem J 395, 223–231.
48 Ostling P, Bjo
¨
rk JK, Roos-Mattjus P, Mezger V &
Sistonen L (2007) Heatshock factor 2 (HSF2)
contributes to inducible expressionof hsp genes
through interplay with HSF1. J Biol Chem 282, 7077–
7086.
49 Sandqvist A, Bjo
¨
rk JK, Akerfelt M, Chitikova Z,
Grichine A, Vourc’h C, Jolly C, Salminen TA, Nymalm
Y & Sistonen L (2009) Heterotrimerization of heat-
shock factors 1 and 2 provides a transcriptional switch
in response to distinct stimuli. Mol Biol Cell 20, 1340–
1347.
50 Taylor IC, Workman JL, Schuetz TJ & Kingston RE
(1991) Facilitated binding of GAL4 andheat shock
factor to nucleosomal templates: differential function of
DNA-binding domains. Genes Dev
5, 1285–1298.
51 Li B, Carey M & Workman JL (2007) The role of
chromatin during transcription. Cell 128, 707–719.
52 Zanton SJ & Pugh BF (2006) Full and partial
genome-wide assembly and disassembly of the yeast
transcription machinery in response to heat. Genes Dev
20, 2250–2265.
53 Schwabish MA & Struhl K (2006) Asf1 mediates
histone eviction and deposition during elongation by
RNA polymerase II. Mol Cell 22, 415–422.
54 Shivaswamy S & Iyer VR (2008) Stress-dependent
dynamics of global chromatin remodeling in yeast: dual
role for SWI ⁄ SNF in the heatshock stress response.
Mol Cell Biol 28, 2221–2234.
55 Zhao J, Herrera-Diaz J & Gross DS (2005) Domain-
wide displacement of histones by activated heat shock
factor occurs independently of Swi ⁄ Snf and is not
correlated with RNA polymerase II density. Mol Cell
Biol 25, 8985–8999.
56 Erkina TY, Tschetter PA & Erkine AM (2008) Differ-
ent requirements of the SWI ⁄ SNF complex for robust
nucleosome displacement at promoters ofheat shock
factor and Msn2- and Msn4-regulated heatshock genes.
Mol Cell Biol 28, 1207–1217.
57 Erkina TY, Zou Y, Freeling S, Vorobyev VI & Erkine
AM (2009) Functional interplay between chromatin
remodeling complexes RSC, SWI ⁄ SNF and ISWI in
regulation of yeast heatshock genes. Nucleic Acids Res
38, 1441–1449.
HSF–HSE interaction H. Sakurai and Y. Enoki
4148 FEBS Journal 277 (2010) 4140–4149 ª 2010 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2010 FEBS
58 Kremer SB & Gross DS (2009) The SAGA and Rpd3
chromatin modification complexes dynamically regulate
heat shockgene structure and expression. J Biol Chem
284, 32914–32931.
59 Venturi CB, Erkine AM & Gross DS (2000) Cell
cycle-dependent binding of yeast heatshock factor to
nucleosomes. Mol Cell Biol 20, 6435–6448.
60 Petesch SJ & Lis JT (2008) Rapid, transcription-
independent loss of nucleosomes over a large chromatin
domain at Hsp70 loci. Cell 134, 74–84.
61 Jensen MM, Christensen MS, Bonven B & Jensen
TH (2008) Requirements for chromatin reassembly
during transcriptional downregulation of a heat shock
gene in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. FEBS J 275, 2956–
2964.
62 Core LJ & Lis JT (2008) Transcription regulation
through promoter-proximal pausing of RNA
polymerase II. Science 319, 1791–1792.
63 Price DH (2008) Poised polymerases: on your mark get
set go! Mol Cell 30, 7–10.
64 Gilmour DS (2009) Promoter proximal pausing on
genes in metazoans. Chromosoma 118, 1–10.
65 Bevilacqua A, Fiorenza MT & Mangia F (2000) A
developmentally regulated GAGA box-binding factor
and Sp1 are required for transcription of the hsp70.1
gene at the onset of mouse zygotic genome activation.
Development 127, 1541–1551.
66 Xing H, Wilkerson DC, Mayhew CN, Lubert EJ,
Skaggs HS, Goodson ML, Hong Y, Park-Sarge OK &
Sarge KD (2005) Mechanism of hsp70i gene bookmark-
ing. Science 307, 421–423.
67 Xing H, Vanderford NL & Sarge KD (2008) The TBP-
PP2A mitotic complex bookmarks genes by preventing
condensin action. Nat Cell Biol 10, 1318–1323.
68 Sarge KD & Park-Sarge OK (2009) Mitotic
bookmarking of formerly active genes: keeping
epigenetic memories from fading. Cell Cycle 8, 818–823.
69 Inouye S, Fujimoto M, Nakamura T, Takaki E,
Hayashida N, Hai T & Nakai A (2007) Heat shock
transcription factor 1 opens chromatin structure of
interleukin-6 promoter to facilitate binding of
an activator or a repressor. J Biol Chem 282, 33210–
33217.
70 Corey LL, Weirich CS, Benjamin IJ & Kingston RE
(2003) Localized recruitment of a chromatin-remodeling
activity by an activator in vivo drives transcriptional
elongation. Genes Dev 17, 1392–1401.
71 Xu D, Zalmas LP & La Thangue NB (2008) A
transcription cofactor required for the heat-shock
response. EMBO Rep 9, 662–669.
72 Thomson S, Hollis A, Hazzalin CA & Mahadevan LC
(2004) Distinct stimulus-specific histone modifications at
hsp70 chromatin targeted by the transcription factor
heat shock factor-1. Mol Cell 15, 585–594.
73 Go
´
mez AV, Galleguillos D, Maass JC, Battaglioli E,
Kukuljan M & Andre
´
s ME (2008) CoREST represses
the heatshock response mediated by HSF1. Mol Cell
31, 222–231.
74 Espinoza CA, Allen TA, Hieb AR, Kugel JF &
Goodrich JA (2004) B2 RNA binds directly to RNA
polymerase II to repress transcript synthesis. Nat Struct
Mol Biol 11, 822–829.
75 Mariner PD, Walters RD, Espinoza CA, Drullinger LF,
Wagner SD, Kugel JF & Goodrich JA (2008) Human
Alu RNA is a modular transacting repressor of
mRNA transcription during heat shock. Mol Cell 29,
499–509.
76 Shamovsky I, Ivannikov M, Kandel ES, Gershon D &
Nudler E (2006) RNA-mediated response to heat shock
in mammalian cells. Nature 440, 556–560.
77 Fritah S, Col E, Boyault C, Govin J, Sadoul K,
Chiocca S, Christians E, Khochbin S, Jolly C &
Vourc’h C (2009) Heat-shock factor 1 controls genome-
wide acetylation in heat-shocked cells. Mol Biol Cell 20,
4976–4984.
78 Khaleque MA, Bharti A, Gong J, Gray PJ, Sachdev V,
Ciocca DR, Stati A, Fanelli M & Calderwood SK
(2008) Heatshock factor 1 represses estrogen-dependent
transcription through association with MTA1. Oncogene
27, 1886–1893.
H. Sakurai and Y. Enoki HSF–HSE interaction
FEBS Journal 277 (2010) 4140–4149 ª 2010 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2010 FEBS 4149
. MINIREVIEW
Novel aspects of heat shock factors: DNA recognition,
chromatin modulation and gene expression
Hiroshi Sakurai and Yasuaki Enoki
Department of Clinical. & Sakurai H (2005) Identifi-
cation of a novel class of target genes and a novel type of
binding sequence of heat shock transcription factor in
Saccharomyces