Next, we addressed the molecular role of Prdm8 within this repressor complex. Some members of the Prdm family have been shown to function as sequence specific transcription factors, while others are known to function as cofactors to mediate transcriptional repression (Davis et al., 2006, Duan et al., 2005, Gyory et al., 2004, Hayashi
et al., 2005 and Kim et al., 2003). Given the phenotypic similarity between Bhlhb5 and Prdm8 mutant mice, we first considered the hypothesis that a Bhlhb5 dimer is recruited to specific DNA elements through its consensus binding motif and then recruits Prdm8 to mediate transcriptional repression. If so, we reasoned that Bhlhb5 would bind normally to its DNA targets Adriamycin nmr SRT1720 nmr in the absence of Prdm8, but that Prdm8 would not associate with these sites in the absence of Bhlhb5. To address this hypothesis, we performed ChIP-qPCR from the dorsal telencephalon of wild-type or mutant mice and analyzed the binding of Bhlhb5 and Prdm8 at the RP58 promoter. As we had shown above ( Figures 5F and 5I), we again found that both Bhlhb5 and Prdm8 display robust binding to the proximal promoter of RP58 in wild-type mice ( Figure 6Bi). Furthermore, Bhlhb5 shows similar binding to
the RP58 promoter when ChIP-qPCR was performed in Prdm8 mutant mice, indicating that the binding of Bhlhb5 at this promoter is not dependent on Prdm8 ( Figure 6Bii). In sharp contrast, however, we found that Prdm8 was not bound to the RP58 promoter in Bhlhb5 mutant mice ( Figure 6Biii). Note that the observed absence of Prdm8 binding at this site is not due to a general absence of Prdm8 protein in Bhlhb5−/− mice (e.g., see Figure 1C). Thus, the inability of Prdm8 to bind to the RP58 promoter in the absence of Bhlhb5 suggests that Prdm8 requires Bhlhb5 for targeting to this genetic locus. Furthermore, the dependence of Prdm8 on Bhlhb5 for sequence-specific targeting to DNA appears to be a general phenomenon since we observed similar results when we tested several
other genomic loci including the Bhlhb5 promoter ( Figure S8A) and the Mephenoxalone Bhlhb5 binding site in the first Cdh11 intron ( Figure S8B). Based on these findings, we suggest a model in which Bhlhb5 functions by binding to specific DNA elements possibly as a homodimer and then recruiting Prdm8 to mediate the repression of target genes (Figure 8A). When the Bhlhb5 alone is present, it can bind to target genes, but it cannot repress them. Likewise, when Prdm8 alone is present, target genes are also not repressed, in this case because Prdm8 does not bind to DNA in the absence of Bhlhb5. Thus, both factors are required to mediate transcriptional repression of a specific set of target genes so that, when either Bhlhb5 or Prdm8 is knocked out, common genes are upregulated and highly similar phenotypes result.