Nuclear extracts from chicken erythroid cells selectively stimulate transcription of the chicken histone H5 gene (and not of other chicken histone genes) after coinjection into frog oocytes. This effect is shown to involve an enhancerlike activity, and a region of the H5 gene sufficient to mediate trans-activation is defined.H5 is a linker histone variant (1, 13) which, in the chicken, is found only in erythroid cells (19). Levels of H5 protein increase during the differentiation and maturation of these cells (11,17,21), and this increase is correlated with chromatin condensation and repression of replication and transcription (17). We have previously isolated and characterized the single-copy chicken H5 gene (9) and demonstrated that transcription of this gene is accurately initiated in Xenopus oocytes (22). Our current interest lies in the transcriptional regulation of this gene.We report here our use of the frog oocyte to identify factors in erythroid-cell extracts that are involved in transcription of the H5 gene. Coinjection of DNA and cell extracts into frog oocytes has previously been used in the identification of regulatory factors for sea urchin histone genes (5,12,20) and in transcriptional studies with the adenovirus ElA protein (7,15).Effect of erythroid-cell extracts on the level of H5 transcripts in coinjected oocytes. Chromatin salt-wash fractions (CSWFs) were isolated from a chicken erythroid cell line by the methods of Stunnenberg and Birnstiel (20). The cells used (ts34 AEV LSCC HD3 [2]) (AEV cells) are transformed by a temperature-sensitive avian erythroblastosis virus, and they express H5 mRNA and protein (19).To test the fractions for possible effects on H5 gene expression, CSWF samples were coinjected, with the H5 gene and control genes, into batches of frog oocytes. The injected DNA was a mixture of pH.5/2.6 DNA, containing the H5 gene from -1,200 to +1,360 in pBR322 (Fig. la), and pH1/H23 DNA, containing two chicken histone genes, Hi and H2B (from pCH7.OE [3]), in pAT153. As shown in Fig. 2a, the CSWFs were injected into the oocyte cytoplasm, followed by nuclear injection of the DNA mixture. Oocyte manipulations were carried out according to Gurdon (6). DNA (5 to 10 ng) and CWSF (protein) (25 to 100 ng) were injected into each oocyte, and after incubation, total RNA was isolated from pooled batches of 25 oocytes (14). Figure 2b shows the result of quantitative primer extension analysis (10) of the oocyte RNA with synthetic 26-base primers. Extension on all three histone transcripts was carried out in the same reaction; each transcript generated two or more major extension products (due to cap site heterogeneity). Track 1 shows the result obtained when buffer alone was coinjected with the DNA, and track 2 shows coinjection of an AEV cell CSWF with the DNA.By comparing the two tracks, it can be seen that injection of the CSWF did not affect the level of Hi and H2B * Corresponding author.transcripts produced. In contrast, injection of the CSWF resulted in a dramatic increase (of at least 10...