The classical DNA recognition sequence of the glucocorticoid receptor (GR) appears to be present at only a fraction of bound genomic regions. To identify sequences responsible for recruitment of this transcription factor (TF) to individual loci, we turned to the high-resolution ChIP-exo approach. We exploited this signal by determining footprint profiles of TF binding at single-base-pair resolution using ExoProfiler, a computational pipeline based on DNA binding motifs. When applied to our GR and the few available public ChIP-exo data sets, we find that ChIP-exo footprints are proteinand recognition sequence-specific signatures of genomic TF association. Furthermore, we show that ChIP-exo captures information about TFs other than the one directly targeted by the antibody in the ChIP procedure. Consequently, the shape of the ChIP-exo footprint can be used to discriminate between direct and indirect (tethering to other DNA-bound proteins) DNA association of GR. Together, our findings indicate that the absence of classical recognition sequences can be explained by direct GR binding to a broader spectrum of sequences than previously known, either as a homodimer or as a heterodimer binding together with a member of the ETS or TEAD families of TFs, or alternatively by indirect recruitment via FOX or STAT proteins. ChIP-exo footprints also bring structural insights and locate DNA:protein crosslink points that are compatible with crystal structures of the studied TFs. Overall, our generically applicable footprintbased approach uncovers new structural and functional insights into the diverse ways of genomic cooperation and association of TFs.

The genomic loci bound by the glucocorticoid receptor (GR), a hormone-activated transcription factor, show little overlap between cell types. To study the role of chromatin and sequence in specifying where GR binds, we used Bayesian modeling within the universe of accessible chromatin. Taken together, our results uncovered that although GR preferentially binds accessible chromatin, its binding is biased against accessible chromatin located at promoter regions. This bias can only be explained partially by the presence of fewer GR recognition sequences, arguing for the existence of additional mechanisms that interfere with GR binding at promoters. Therefore, we tested the role of H3K9ac, the chromatin feature with the strongest negative association with GR binding, but found that this correlation does not reflect a causative link. Finally, we find a higher percentage of promoter–proximal GR binding for genes regulated by GR across cell types than for cell type-specific target genes. Given that GR almost exclusively binds accessible chromatin, we propose that cell type-specific regulation by GR preferentially occurs via distal enhancers, whose chromatin accessibility is typically cell type-specific, whereas ubiquitous target gene regulation is more likely to result from binding to promoter regions, which are often accessible regardless of cell type examined.

No abstract

No abstract