n the same way The 3’UTR of HIC activates transcription from the HIV LTR RNase protection assays were carried out to ascertain whether stimulation of gene expression by the HIC 3’UTR reflects an action at the RNA level. As expected, Tat increased the abundance of luciferase transcripts from the HIV LTR-firefly luciferase construct, whereas transcripts from the control vector were unaffected. A further increase in firefly, but not Renilla, luciferase 
transcripts was elicited by HIC but HIC had little or no effect. The HIC 3’UTR alone was sufficient to increase firefly luciferase RNA. RT-PCR analysis demonstrated that comparable amounts of 3’UTR RNA were produced from the HIC and HIC 3’UTR plasmids. In other experiments, the 314 nt 39-terminal fragment of the 3’UTR also increased the level of firefly luciferase transcripts. Thus, the HIC 3’UTR is both necessary and sufficient to increase firefly luciferase reporter RNA levels driven by the HIV-1 LTR. Similar results were 14500812 obtained in HeLa and COS cells. Next we tested the effect of HIC on a different reporter driven by the HIV-1 LTR. In 3T3 cells, expression of the chloramphenicol acetyltransferase from the HIV LTR was also enhanced,3 fold by HIC while expression of firefly luciferase from the PCNA promoter, which is only weakly dependent on P-TEFb, was only mildly stimulated by HIC or the HIC 3’UTR alone. These results argue against effects on protein or mRNA stability and strongly suggested that the 3’UTR functions at the level of transcription. Tat is an RNA-binding transcriptional activator that functions by recruiting P-TEFb to the HIV promoter. To determine whether this viral protein is required for activation of gene expression by the HIC 3’UTR, we took advantage of a modified HIV promoter that can bind cyclin T1 in the absence of Tat. The HIV-1 LTR-firefly luciferase construct is furnished with Gal4 binding sites upstream of the viral promoter. When co-transfected with a vector encoding a Gal4 binding domain -cyclin 3’UTR Activates Transcription failed to do so. Taken together, these findings support the conclusion that the HIC 3’UTR activates gene expression by displacing 7SK from repressed P-TEFb complexes. DISCUSSION Multiple functions have been found to reside in mRNA 3’UTRs, including elements governing RNA stability, localization and translation. Our work shows that the unusually long HIC 3’UTR harbors a novel function which stimulates transcription via P-TEFb by displacing 7SK. This finding reconciles the observations that transfected HIC cDNA stimulates P-TEFbdependent gene expression whereas the HIC and I-mfa proteins are inhibitory in a cell-type dependent manner. More importantly, it suggests a mechanism for release of P-TEFb from inhibitory complexes. For example, in stress-induced cardiac hypertrophy or after exposure to UV radiation or transcription inhibitors, increased P-TEFb activity correlates with decreased 7SK RNA binding. The mechanisms whereby these stress signals reach the 7SK-containing P-TEFb complex are not known. Our observations raise the possibility that RNA sequences in mRNAs or in other RNA molecules, function like the HIC 3’UTR to activate P-TEFb. A predicted structural element in HIC 3’UTR 7SK serves as a structural scaffold for HEXIM1 and P-TEFb 24847734 in the inhibitory complex, as well as for the binding of other proteins. Recent investigations have revealed a high degree of Gynostemma Extract biological activity specificity in the interaction of cellular proteins with structural elements of
