Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Histone Modification02:32

Histone Modification

14.2K
The histone proteins have a flexible N-terminal tail extending out from the nucleosome. These histone tails are often subjected to post-translational modifications such as acetylation, methylation, phosphorylation, and ubiquitination. Particular combinations of these modifications form “histone codes” that influence the chromatin folding and tissue-specific gene expression.
Acetylation
The enzyme histone acetyltransferase adds acetyl group to the histones. Another enzyme, histone...
14.2K
Master Transcription Regulators02:23

Master Transcription Regulators

7.1K
Master transcription regulators are regulatory proteins that are predominantly responsible for regulating the expression of multiple genes. Often these genes work in concert to drive a  complex process. Activation of a master transcription regulator can lead to a cascade of transcriptional activation necessary for that outcome. These regulators can directly bind to the regulatory sequences of the various genes involved, or they can indirectly regulate transcription by binding to regulatory...
7.1K
Spreading of Chromatin Modifications02:25

Spreading of Chromatin Modifications

8.5K
The histone proteins in the nucleosomes are post-translationally modified (PTM) to increase or decrease access to DNA. The commonly observed PTMs are methylation, acetylation, phosphorylation, and ubiquitination of lysine amino acids in the histone H3 tail region. These histone modifications have specific meaning for the cell. Hence, they are called "histone code". The protein complex involved in histone modification is termed as "reader-writer" complex.
Writers
The writer...
8.5K
Co-activators and Co-repressors02:04

Co-activators and Co-repressors

7.6K
Gene transcription is regulated by the synergistic action of several proteins that form a complex at a gene regulatory site. This is observed in eukaryotes, where the regulation of gene expression is a complex process. Regulatory proteins in eukaryotes can broadly be classified into two types – regulators that bind directly to specific DNA sequences and co-regulators that associate with regulatory proteins but cannot directly bind to the DNA. These co-regulators are further divided into...
7.6K
Chromatin Modification in iPS Cells01:32

Chromatin Modification in iPS Cells

1.9K
Chromatin modification alters gene expression; therefore, scientists can add histone-modifying enzymes, histone variants, and chromatin remodeling complexes to somatic cells to aid reprogramming into pluripotent stem (iPS) cells.
Compact chromatin makes reprogramming difficult. Enzymes, such as histone demethylases and acetyltransferases, are often added during reprogramming to loosen the chromatin, making the DNA more accessible to transcription factors. Molecules that inhibit histone...
1.9K
RNA Polymerase II Accessory Proteins02:36

RNA Polymerase II Accessory Proteins

9.6K
Proteins that regulate transcription can do so either via direct contact with RNA Polymerase or through indirect interactions facilitated by adaptors, mediators, histone-modifying proteins, and nucleosome remodelers. Direct interactions to activate transcription is seen in bacteria as well as in some eukaryotic genes. In these cases, upstream activation sequences are adjacent to the promoters, and the activator proteins interact directly with the transcriptional machinery. For example, in...
9.6K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

The Indiana University Brain Health Program to deliver amyloid-targeted therapy to Alzheimer's disease patients.

Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)·2026
Same author

Structural Modulation and Binding of HLA-DQ8 by Cysteine-to-Serine Mutated Insulin Peptide: Insights from Molecular Dynamics Simulations.

International journal of molecular sciences·2026
Same author

Semaglutide and Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration Among Adults with Type 2 Diabetes: An OHDSI Network Study.

Ophthalmology·2026
Same author

Olutasidenib as maintenance therapy after treatment response in acute myeloid leukemia with persistent <i>IDH1</i> mutation.

Blood neoplasia·2026
Same author

Patient Digital Engagement With After Visit Summary in Ambulatory Care.

JAMA network open·2026
Same author

Identifying potential binding sites for complex formation between Tyrosyl-DNA phosphodiesterase 1 and poly [ADP-ribose] polymerase 1.

Physical chemistry chemical physics : PCCP·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Sep 19, 2025

Identification of MyoD Interactome Using Tandem Affinity Purification Coupled to Mass Spectrometry
14:47

Identification of MyoD Interactome Using Tandem Affinity Purification Coupled to Mass Spectrometry

Published on: May 17, 2016

9.9K

Mapping the Interactions Among Class IIa Histone Deacetylases and Myocyte Enhancer Factor 2s.

Narayan Gautam1,2, Sophia Wang3, Aykut Üren4

  • 1Central Department of Physics, Tribhuvan University, Kirtipur, Kathmandu 44613, Nepal.

Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling
|June 6, 2025
PubMed
Summary

Myocyte enhancer factor 2 (MEF2) transcription factors interact with Class IIa histone deacetylases (HDACs) primarily through hydrophobic interactions. This study elucidates these molecular dynamics, confirming direct binding and comparable affinities for neuronal development research.

More Related Videos

Assays for Validating Histone Acetyltransferase Inhibitors
09:11

Assays for Validating Histone Acetyltransferase Inhibitors

Published on: August 6, 2020

6.7K
Repressing Gene Transcription by Redirecting Cellular Machinery with Chemical Epigenetic Modifiers
10:28

Repressing Gene Transcription by Redirecting Cellular Machinery with Chemical Epigenetic Modifiers

Published on: September 20, 2018

6.6K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Sep 19, 2025

Identification of MyoD Interactome Using Tandem Affinity Purification Coupled to Mass Spectrometry
14:47

Identification of MyoD Interactome Using Tandem Affinity Purification Coupled to Mass Spectrometry

Published on: May 17, 2016

9.9K
Assays for Validating Histone Acetyltransferase Inhibitors
09:11

Assays for Validating Histone Acetyltransferase Inhibitors

Published on: August 6, 2020

6.7K
Repressing Gene Transcription by Redirecting Cellular Machinery with Chemical Epigenetic Modifiers
10:28

Repressing Gene Transcription by Redirecting Cellular Machinery with Chemical Epigenetic Modifiers

Published on: September 20, 2018

6.6K

Area of Science:

  • Molecular Biology
  • Neuroscience
  • Biochemistry

Background:

  • Myocyte enhancer factor 2 (MEF2) transcription factors are crucial for neural development and neuronal survival.
  • Class IIa histone deacetylases (HDACs) repress MEF2 activity and are implicated in neuronal apoptosis.
  • MEF2s are highly expressed in cerebellar granule neurons, a key area for brain development.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the molecular interactions between Class IIa HDACs and MEF2 transcription factors.
  • To elucidate the binding mechanisms and affinities of these protein complexes.
  • To provide a comprehensive map of Class IIa HDAC-MEF2 interactions for further research.

Main Methods:

  • Molecular dynamics (MD) simulations were employed to model interactions between four Class IIa HDACs (HDAC4, 5, 7, 9) and four MEF2s (MEF2A, B, C, D).
  • Computational analysis identified key residues and interaction types (hydrophobic, hydrogen bonding, salt bridges).
  • Surface plasmon resonance (SPR) experiments were conducted to validate computational findings through direct binding assays.

Main Results:

  • Hydrophobic interactions, particularly involving L66 and L67 in MEF2s, are the primary drivers of Class IIa HDAC-MEF2 complex formation.
  • Conserved residues across all MEF2s contribute to hydrophobic interactions, hydrogen bonding, and salt bridges.
  • MM/GBSA calculations and SPR experiments confirmed comparable binding affinities in the nanomolar range (3.5 nM to 19.1 nM) between Class IIa HDACs and MEF2A.

Conclusions:

  • Class IIa HDACs and MEF2s form stable complexes primarily through hydrophobic interactions.
  • The conserved nature of interacting residues suggests a fundamental binding mechanism across MEF2 family members.
  • This study provides valuable insights into the biomolecular interactions governing neuronal development and survival, offering a foundation for future investigations.