Matrix Attachment Regions and Transgene Expression

  • William F. Thompson
  • George C. Allen
  • Gerald HallJr.
  • Steven Spiker
Part of the Stadler Genetics Symposia Series book series (SGSS)


Many of the questions we have about how biological systems work are ultimately questions about the regulation of gene expression. For this reason, the control of transcription is fundamental and has received well-deserved attention. From a simplistic point of view, transcription can be though of as being regulated at two levels. The first level (coarse control) involves access of RNA polymerase and transacting factors to the specific DNA sequences with which they interact. Access is a function of chromatin structure. In chromatin fibers of both condensed metaphase chromosomes and interphase chromatin, DNA is highly compacted and essentially inaccessible to RNA polymerase and trans-acting factors. In order to make the DNA accessible, chromatin fibers must in some way take on a more open, less compact structure. Once an open (transcriptionally poised) chromatin structure is obtained, further regulation of transcription involving availability and interactions of transacting factors (fine control), come into play. For reviews see Paranjape et al. (1994) and Reeves (1984).


Nuclear Matrix Matrix Attachment Region Loop Domain Nuclear Matrix Protein Chicken Lysozyme 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adachi, Y., Käs, E, and Laemmli, U.K., 1989, Preferential, cooperative binding of DNA topoisomerase II to scaffold-associated regions., EMBO J. 8: 3997.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen, G.C., Hall, G., Michalowski, S., Newman, W., Spiker, S., Weissinger, A.K., and Thompson, W.F., 1995, High level transgene epxression in plant cells: Effects of a strong SAR from tobacco, submitted.Google Scholar
  3. Allen, G.C., Hall, G.E., Childs, LC., Weissinger, A.K., Spiker, S., and Thompson, W. F., 1993, Scaffold attachment regions increase reporter gene epxression in stably transformed plant cells, Plant Cell 5: 603.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Amati, B.B., and Glasser, S.M., 1988, Chromosomal ARS and CEN elements bind specifically to the yeast nuclear scaffold, Cell 54: 967.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Anderson, H.J., and Roberge, M., 1992, DNA topoisomerase II: A review of its involvement in chromosome structure, DNA replication, transcription and mitosis, Cell Biol. Int. Rep. 16: 717.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Assaad, F.F., Tucker, K.L., and Signer, E.R., 1993, Epigenetic Repeat-Induced Gene Silencing (RIGS) in Arabidopsis, Plant Mol. Biol. 22: 1067.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Barnes, W.M., 1990, Variable patterns of expression of luciferase in transgenic tobacco leaves, Proc. Natl. Acad Sci. USA 87: 9183.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Bevin, A. Guan, Y.H., Peart, J., Cooper, C., and Shaw, P., 1991, Monoclonal antibodies to plant nuclear matrix reveal intermediate filament-related components within the nucleus, J. Cell Sci. 98: 293.Google Scholar
  9. Bode, J., Kohwi, Y., Dickinson, L, Joh, T., Klehr, D., Mielke, C., and KohwiShigematsu, T., 1992, Biological significance of unwielding capability of nuclear matrix-associating DNAs, Science 255: 195.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Bode, J. and Maass, K., 1988, Chromatin domain surrounding the human interferon-a gene as defined by scaffold-attached regions, Biochemistry 27: 4706.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Bonifer, C., Hecht, A., Saueressig, H., Winter, D.M., and Sippel, A.E., 1991, Dynamic chromatin: The regulatory domain organization of eukaryotic gene loci, J. Cell. Biochem. 47: 99.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Bonifer, C., Vidal, M., Grosveld, F., and Sippel, A., 1990, Tissue specific and position independent expression of the complete gene domain for chick lysozyme in transgenic mice, EMBO J. 9: 2843.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Bonifer, C., Yannoutsos, N., Krüger, G., Grosveld, F., and Sippel, A.E., 1994, Dissection of the locus control function located on the chicken lysozyme gene domain in transgenic mice, Nucleic Adds Res. 22: 4202.Google Scholar
  14. Boulikas, T., 1993, Nature of DNA sequences at the attachment regions of genes to the nuclear matrix., J. Cell. Biochem. 52: 14.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Breyne, P., Van Montagu, M., Depicker, A., and Gheysen, G. 1992, Characterization of a plant scaffold attachment region in a DNA fragment that normalizes transgene expression in tobacco, Plant Cell 4: 463.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Brink, R.A., 1973, Paramutation, Annu. Rev. Genet. 7: 129–152.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Brusslan, J.A., Karlin-Neuman, G.A., Huang, L., and Tobin, E. M., 1993, An Arabidopsis mutant with a reduced level of cab140 RNA is a result of cosuppression, Plant Cell 5: 667.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Capco, D.G., Wan, K.M., and Penman, S., 1982, The nuclear matrix: three-dimensional archetecture and protein composition, Cekk 29: 847.Google Scholar
  19. Cheng, J., and Maquat, LE., 1993, Nonsense condons can reduce the abundance of nuclear mRNA without affecting the abundance of pre-mRNA or the half life of cytoplasmic mRNA, Mol. Cell. Biol. 13: 1892.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Christou, P., Swain, W.F., Yang, N.S., and McCabe, D.E., 1989, Inheritance and expression of foreign genes in transgenic soybean plants, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 86: 7500.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Conkling, M.A., Cheng, C.-L, Yamamoto, Y.T., and Goodman, H.M., 1990, Isolation of transcriptionally regulated root-specific genes from tobacco, Plant Physiol. 93: 1203.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Dean, C., Jones, J., Favreau, M., Dunsmuir, P., and Bedbrook, J., 1988, Influence of flanking sequences on variability in expression levels of an introduced gene in transgenic tobacco plants, Nucleic Acids Res. 16: 9267.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Dehio, C., and Schell, J., 1994, Identification of plant genetic loci involved in a posttranscriptional mechanism for meiotically reversible gene silencing, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 91: 5538.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Dickinson, LA., Joh, T., Kohwi, Y., and Kohwi-Shigematsu, T., 1992, A tissue-specific MAR/SAR DNA-binding protein with unusual binding site recognition, Cell 70: 631.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Dorer, D.R., and Henikoff, S., 1994, Expansions of transgene repeats cause heterochromatin formation and gene silencing in Drosophila, Cell 77: 993.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Dworetsky, S.I., Wright, K.L., Fey, E.G., Penman, S., Lian, J. B., Stein, J. L, and Stien, G.S., 1992, Sequence-specific DNA binding proteins are components of a nuclear matrix-attachment site, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 89: 4178.Google Scholar
  27. Earnshaw, W.C., and Heck, M.M.S., 1985, Localization of topoisomerase II in mitotic chromosomes, J. Cell. Biol. 100: 1716.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Earnshaw, W.C., and Heck, M.M.S., 1988, The ultrastructure of the mitotic chromosome scaffold: studies using whole-mount electron microscopy and immunocytological techniques, in: “Chromosomes and Chromatin,” K. W. Adolph, ed., CRC Press.Google Scholar
  29. Farache, G., Razin, S.V., Rzeszowska-Wolney, J., Moreau, J., Fecillas Targa, F., and Scherrer, K., 1990, Mapping of structural and transcription-related matrix attachment sites in the b-globin gene domain of avian erythroblasts and erythrocytes., Mol. Cell. Biol. 10. 5349.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Federoff, N.V., 1989, About maize transposable elements and development, Cell 56: 181.Google Scholar
  31. Ferraro, A., Grandi, P., Eufemi, M., Alfieri, F., and Turano, C., Cross-linking of nuclear proteins to DNA by cis-iamminedichloroplatinum in intact cells-involvement of nuclear matrix proteins, FEBS Lett. 307: 383.Google Scholar
  32. Finnegan, J., and McElroy, D., 1994, Transgene inactiviation: Plants fight back!, Biotechnology 12: 883.Google Scholar
  33. Flavell, R.B., 1994, Inactivation of gene expression in plants as a consequence of specific sequence duplication, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 91: 3490.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Gasser, S., and Laemmli, U., 1986, Cohabitation of scaffold binding regions with upstream/enhancer elements of three developmentally regulated genes of D. melanogaster, Cell 46: 521.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Gasser, S.M., Amati, B.B., Cardenas, M.E., and Hofmann, J.F.-X., 1989, Studies on scaffold attachment sites and their relation to genome function, Int. Rev. Cytol. 119: 57.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Gasser, S.M., and Laemlli, U.K., 1986b, The organization of chromatin loops: characterization of a scaffold attachment site, EMBO J. 5: 511.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Goldman, M.A., 1988, The chromatin domain as a unit of gene regulation, BioFssays 9: 50.Google Scholar
  38. Grabber, A., Eberharter, A., Gstraunthaler, G., and Loidl, P., 1992, Characterization of nuclear matrix proteins of Physarum polycephalum and mammalian cells, Cell Biol. Int. Rep. 16: 1151.Google Scholar
  39. Hall, G., Allen, G.C., Loer, D.S., Thompson, W.F. and Spiker, S., 1991, Nuclear scaffolds and scaffold attachment regions (SARS) in higher plants, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 88: 9320.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Hall, G., Jr., and Spiker, S., 1994, Isolation and characterization of nuclear scaffolds, in: “Plant Molecular Biology Manual,” S. B. Gelvin and Schilperoort, R. A., ed., Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  41. Henerey, C.C., Miranda, M., Wiekowski, M., Wilmut, I., and DePamphilis, M. L, 1995, Repression of gene expression at the beginning of mouse development, Devel. Biol. 169: 448.Google Scholar
  42. Herman, L, Jacobs, A., Van Montagu, M., and Depicker, A., 1990, Plant chromosome/marker gene fusion assay for study of normal and truncated T-DNA integration events, Mol. Gen. Genet. 224: 248.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Hobbs, S.LA.., Warkentin, T.D., and DeLong, C.M.O., 1993, Transgene copy number can be positively or negatively associated with transgene epxression, Plant Mol. Biol. 21: 17.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Huber, M., Bosch, F.X., Sippel, A.E., and Bonifer, C., 1994, Chromosomal position effects in chicken lysozyme gene transgenic mice are correlated with suppression of hypersensitive site formation, Nucleic Acids Res. 22: 4195.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Ingelbrecht, I., Van Houdt, H., Van Montagu, M., and Depicker, A., 1994, Posttranscriptional silencing of reporter transgenes in tobacco correlates with DNA methylation, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 91: 10502.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Ivanchenko, M., and Avramova, Z., 1992, Interaction of MAR-sequences with nuclear matrix proteins, J. Cell Biochem. 50: 190.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Ivanchenko, M., Tasheva, B., Stoilov, L, Christova, R., and Zlatanova, J., 1993Google Scholar
  48. Characterization of some nuclear matrix proteins in maize, Plant Sci. 91:35. Izaurralde, E., Käs, E, and Laemmli, U. K., 1989, Highly preferential nucleation of histone H1 assembly on scaffold-associated regions, J. Mol. Biol. 210:573.Google Scholar
  49. Jack, R.S., and Eggert, H., 1992, The elusive nuclear matrix, Eur. J. Biochem. 209: 503.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Jarmon, A.P., and Higgs, D. R., 1988, Nuclear scaffold attachment sites in the human globin gene complexes, EMBO J. 7: 3337.Google Scholar
  51. Jones, J.D.G., Dunsmuir, P., and Bedbrook, J., 1985, High level expression of introduced chimaeric genes in regenerated transformed plants, EMBO J. 4: 2411.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Jorgensen, R., 1992, Silencing of plant genes by homologous transgenes, AgBiotech News and Information 4: 265N.Google Scholar
  53. Jorgensen, R., 1993, The germinal inheritance of epigenetic information in plants, Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. B 339:173.Google Scholar
  54. Jorgensen, RA., 1995, Cosuppression, flower color patterns, and metastable gene expression states, Science 268: 686.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Kalos, M., and Fournier, R.EK., 1995, Position-independent transgene expression mediated by boundary elements from the apolipoprotein B chromatin domain, Mol. Cell. Biol. 15: 198.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Kermicle, J., 1978, Imprinting of gene action in maize endosperm, in: “Maize Breeding and Genetics,” D. B. Walton, ed., Wiley-Interscience, NY.Google Scholar
  57. Kertbundit, S., De Greve, H., Deboeck, F., Van Montagu, M., and Hernalsteens, J.-P., 1991, In vivo random ß-glucuronidase gene fusions in Arabidopsis thaliana, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 88: 5212.Google Scholar
  58. Klehr, D., Maass, K., and Bode, J., 1991, Scaffold-attached regions from the human interferon ß domain can be used to enhance the stable expression of genes under the control of various promoters, Biochemistry 30: 1264.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Kooter, J.N., and Mol, J. N.M., 1993, Trans-inactivation of gene expression in plants, Curr. Opinion Biotechnol. 4: 166.Google Scholar
  60. Krachmarov, C., Stoilov, L., and Zlatanova, J., 1991, Nuclear matrices from transcriptionally active and inactive plant cells, Plant Science 76: 35.Google Scholar
  61. Latham, K.E., Stolter, D., and Schultz, R., 1992, Acquisition of a transcriptionally permissive state during the 1-cell stage of mouse embyrogenesis, Develop. Biol. 149: 457.Google Scholar
  62. Levy-Wilson, B., and Fortier, C., 1989, The limits of the DNase I sensitive domain of the human apolipoprotein B gene coincide with the locations of chromosomal anchroage loops and define the 5’ and 3’ boundaries of the gene, J. Biol. Chem. 264: 2 1196.Google Scholar
  63. Martienssen, R., Barkan, A., Taylor, W.C., and Freeling, M., 1990, Somatically heritable switches in the DNA modification of Mu transposable elements monitored with a suppressible mutant in maize, Genes and Dey. 4: 331.Google Scholar
  64. Matzke, M., and Matzke, A.J.M., 1993, Genomic imprinting in plants: Parental effects and trans-inactivation phenomena, Ann. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 44: 53.Google Scholar
  65. Matzke, M., Matzke, A.J.M., and Mittelsten Scheid, O., 1994, Inactivation of repeated genes - DNA-DNA interaction? in: “Homologous Recombination and Gene Silencing in Plants,” J. Paszkowski, ed., Kluwer Academic Publishers, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  66. Matzke, M.A., and Matzke, A.J.M., 1995a, Homology-dependent gene silencing in transgenic plants: What does it really tell us?, Trends Genet 11: 1.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Matzke, M.A., and Matzke, A.J.M., 1995b, How and why do plants inactivate homologous (trans)genes?, Plant Physiol. 107: 679.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Matzke, M.A., Neuhuber, F., and Matzke, A.J.M., 1993, A variety of epistatic interactions can occur between partially homologous transgene loci brought together by sexual crossing, Mol. Genl. Genet. 236: 379.Google Scholar
  69. Matzke, M.A., Primig, M., Trnovsky, J., and Matzke, A.J.M., 1989, Reversible methylation and inactivation of marker genes in sequentially transformed tobacco plants, EMBO J. 8: 643.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. McCabe, D.E., Swain, W.F., Martinell, B.J., and Christou, P., 1988, Stable transformation of soybean (Glycine max) by particle accerlation, Biotechnology 6: 923.Google Scholar
  71. McKnight, R.A., Shamay, A., Sankaran, L, Wall, R.J., and Hennighausen, L, 1992, Matrix-attachment regions can impart position-independent regulation of a tissue-specific gene in transgenic mice, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 89: 6943.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. McNulty, A.K., and Saunders, M.J., 1992, Purification and immunological detection of pea nuclear intermediate filaments - evidence for plant nuclear lamins, J. Cell Sci. 103: 407.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Meins, F., 1989, Habituation: heritable variation in the requirement of cultured plant cells for hormones, Ann. Rev. Genet. 32: 395.Google Scholar
  74. Metzlaff, M., O’Dell, M., and Flavell, R.B., 1995, Suppression of chalcone synthase A activities in Petunia by the addition of a transgene encoding chalcone synthase, in:“Gene Silencing,” D. Grierson, ed., Plenum Press, NY, in press.Google Scholar
  75. Meyer, P., and Heidmann, I., 1994, Epigenetic variants of a transgenic petunia line show hypermethylation in transgene DNA: an indication for specific recognition of foreigh DNA, Mol. Gen. Genet. 243: 390.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. Meyer, P., Heidmann, I., and Niedenhof, I., 1993, Differences in DNA-methylation are associated with a paramutation phenomenon in transgenic petunia, Plant J. 4: 89.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. Mirkovitch, J., Mirault, M.-E., and Laemmli, U.K., 1984, Organization of the higher-order chromatin loop: specific DNA attachment sites on nuclear scaffold, Cell 39: 223.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. Mlynârovâ, L, Jansen, R.C., Conner, A.J., Stiekema, W.J., and Nap, J.-P., 1995, The MAR-meidated reduction in position effect can be uncoupled from copy number-dependent expression in transgenic plants, Plant Cell 7: 599.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. Mlynârovâ, L, Loonen, A., Heldens, J., Jansen, R.C., Keizer, P., Stiekema, W.J., and Nap, J.-P., 1994, Reduced position effect in mature transgenic plants conferred by the chick lysozyume matrix-associated region, Plant Cell 6: 417.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. Napoli, C., Lemieux, C., and Jorgensen, R., 1990, Introduction of a chimeric chalcone synthase gene into petunia results in reversible co-suppression of homologous genes in trans, Plant Cell 2: 279.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. Nelson, H.C. M., Finch, J.T., Luisi, B.F., and Klug, A., 1987, The structure of an oligo(dA)_oligo(dT) tract and its biological implications, Nature 330: 221.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. Neuhuber, F., Park, Y.-D., Matzke, A.J.M., and Matzke, M.A., 1994, Susceptibility of transgene loci to homology-dependent gene silencing, Mol. Gen. Genet. 244: 230.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. Paranjape, S.M., Kamakaka, R.T., and Kadonaga, J.T., 1994, Role of chromatin structure in the regulation of transcription by RNA polymerase II, Ann. Rev. Biochem. 63: 265.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. Patterson, G., Thorpe, C.J., and Chandler, V.J., 1993, Paramutation, an allelic interaction, is associated with a stable and heritable reduction of transcription of the maize b regulatory gene, Genetics 135: 881.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. Paulson, J.R., and Laemmli, U.K., 1977, The structure of histone-depleted metaphase chromosomes, Cell 12: 817.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. Peach, C., and Velten, J., 1991, Transgene expression variability (position effect) of CAT and GUS reporter genes driven by linked divergent T-DNA promotrs, Plant Mol. Biol 17: 49.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. Peng, J.Y., Wen, F.J., Lister, R.L, and Hodges, T.K., 1995, Inheritance of gusA and neo genes in transgenic rice, Plant Mol. Biol 27: 91.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. Phi-van, L, and Strätling, W.H., 1988, The matrix attachment regions of the chick lysozyme gene co-map with the boundaries of the chromatin domain, EMBO J. 7: 655.Google Scholar
  89. Phi-Van, L, von Kries, J.P., Ostertag, W., and Strätling, W.H., 1990, The chicken lysozyme 5’ matrix attachment region increases transcription from a heterologous promoter in heterologous cells and dampens position effects on the expression of transfected genes, Molec. Cell. Biol. 10: 2302.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. Poethig, R.S., 1990, Phase change and the regulation of shoot morphogenesis in plants, Science 250: 923.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. Poljak, L, Seum, C., Mattioni, T., and Laemmli, U.K., 1994, SARs stimulate but do not confer position independent gene expression, Nucleic Acids Res. 22: 4386.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  92. Pröls, F., and Meyer, P., 1992, The methylation patterns of chromosomal integration regions influence gene activity of transferred DNA in Petunia hybrida, Plant J. 2: 465.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. Pulak, R., and Anderson, P., 1993, mRNA surveillance by the Caenorhabditis elegans smg genes, Genes and Develop. 7: 1885.Google Scholar
  94. Reeves, R., 1984, Transcriptionally active chromatin, Biochem. Biophys. Acta 782: 343.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. Register, J.C., Peterson, D.J., Bell, P.J., Bullock, W.P., Evans, I.J., Frame, B., Greenland, A.J., Higgs, N.S., Jepson, L, Jiao, S., Lewnau, C.J., Sillick, J.M., and Wilson, M.H., 1994, Structure and function of selectable and non-selectable transgenes in maize after introduction by particle bomardment, Plant Mol. Biol. 25: 951.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  96. Rivier, D.H., and Pillus, L, 1994, Silencing speaks up, Cell 76: 963.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. Romig, H., Fackelmayer, F.O., Renz, A., Ramsperger, U., and Richter, A., 1992, Characterization of SAF-A, a novel nuclear DNA binding protein from HeLa cells with high affinity for nuclear matrix/scaffold attachment DNA elements, EMBO J. 11: 3431.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  98. Schöffl, F., Schröder, G., Kleim, M., and Rieping, M., 1993, An SAR sequence containing 395 bp DNA fragment mediates enhanced, gene-dosagecorrelated expression of a chimaeric heat shock gene in transgenic tobacco plants, Transgenic Res. 2: 93.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. Smith, H.A., Swaney, S.L, Parks, T.D., Wernsman, EA., and Dougherty, W.G., 1994, Transgenic plant virus resistance mediated by untranslatable sense RNAs: Expression, regulation, and fate of nonessential RNAs, Plant Cell 6: 1441.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  100. Stalder, J., Larsen, A., Engel, J.D., Dolan, M., Groudine, M., and Weintraub, H., 1980, Tissue-specific DNA cleavages in the globin chromatin domain introduced by DNAaseI, Cell 20: 451.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  101. Stief, A., Winter, D.M., Strätling, W.H., and Sippel, A.E., 1989, A nuclear DNA attachment element mediates elevated and position-independent gene activity, Nature 341: 343.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  102. Tsutsui, K., Tsutsui, K., Okada, S., Watarai, S., Seki, S., Yasuda, T., and Shohmori, T., 1993, Identification and characterization of a nuclear scaffold protein that binds the matrix attachment region DNA, J. Biol. Chem. 268: 1 2886.Google Scholar
  103. Van Blokland, R., Van der Geest, N., Mol, J.N.M., and Kooter, J.M., 1994, Transgene-mediated suppression of chalcone synthase expression in Petunia hybrida results from an increase in RNA turnover, Plant J. 6: 861.Google Scholar
  104. van der Geest, A.H.M., Hall, G.E, Spiker, S., and Hall, T.C., 1994, The beta-phaseolin gene is flanked by matrix attachment regions, Plant J. 6: 413.Google Scholar
  105. van der Krol, A.R., Mur, LA., Beld, M., Mol, J.N.M., and Stuitje, A.R., 1990, Flavonoid genes in petunia: Addition of a limited number of gene copies may lead to a suppression of gene expression, Plant Cell 2: 291.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  106. Vaucheret, H., 1994, Promoter-dependent trans-inactivation in transgenic tobacco plants: kinetic aspects of gene silencing and gene reactivation, C R. Acad. Sci. Paris 317: 310.Google Scholar
  107. von Kries, J.P., Buhrmester, H., and Strätling, W.H., 1991, A matrix/scaffold attachment region binding protein-identification, purification and mode of binding, Cell 64: 123.Google Scholar
  108. Waddington, C.H., 1953, Epigenetics and evolution, Symp. Soc. Exp. Biol. 7:186. Wassenegger, M., Heimes, S., Riedel, L, and Sanger, H. L, 1994, RNA-directed de novo methylation of genomic sequences in plants, Cell 76: 567.Google Scholar
  109. Weintraub, H., and Groudine, M., 1976, Chromosomal subunits in active genes have and altered conformation, Science 193: 848.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  110. Zhao, K., Käs, E, Gonzalez, E., and Laemmli, U., 1993, SAR-dependent mobilization of histone H1 by HMG-I/Y in vitro: HMG-I/Y is enriched in H1-depleted chromatin, EMBO j. 12:3237.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • William F. Thompson
    • 1
    • 2
  • George C. Allen
    • 1
  • Gerald HallJr.
    • 2
    • 3
  • Steven Spiker
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of BotanyNorth Carolina State UniversityRaleighUSA
  2. 2.Department of GeneticsNorth Carolina State UniversityRaleighUSA
  3. 3.Mycogen Plant GeneticsMadisonUSA

Personalised recommendations