Nasal and otic placode specific regulation of Sox2 involves both activation by Sox-Sall4 synergism and multiple repression mechanisms

Enhancer Activation by Transcription Factors and Underlying Mechanisms

Enhancers are classified into two classes based on various criteria. Class I enhancers participate primarily in finely tuned cell-specific regulation, as exemplified by the neural enhancers discussed in Chap. 9 . They are activated by simultaneous binding of transcription factors (TFs) to adjacent sites in the core sequence and are marked by moderate levels of H3K27ac modification. Class II enhancers are activated by the reiterated binding of the same TFs at multiple sites and are marked by high levels of H3K27ac modification. Class II enhancers are exemplified by enhancers in the SCR downstream of the Sox2 gene, as also discussed in Chap. 9 . Both classes of enhancers activate transcription similarly with low selectivity toward the promoters.The genomic loci broadly covered by high-level H3K27ac modification were once dubbed "Super-enhancers," implying that they are densely packed enhancers with superpowers in gene regulation. However, marking with H3K27ac modification does not predict the enhancer activity of a sequence; a "Super enhancer" region includes a few ordinary Class II enhancers. Currently, the most reliable criterion for enhancer prediction is cross-species sequence conservation.The mechanism by which transcription factors find and stay on the target enhancer site remains elusive. Results from two approaches, single-molecule live imaging and kinetic analysis using FRAP, are discussed.

SOX9 and SOX10 control fluid homeostasis in the inner ear for hearing through independent and cooperative mechanisms

The in vivo mechanisms underlying dominant syndromes caused by mutations in SRY-Box Transcription Factor 9 (SOX9) and SOX10 (SOXE) transcription factors, when they either are expressed alone or are coexpressed, are ill-defined. We created a mouse model for the campomelic dysplasia SOX9Y440X mutation, which truncates the transactivation domain but leaves DNA binding and dimerization intact. Here, we find that SOX9Y440X causes deafness via distinct mechanisms in the endolymphatic sac (ES)/duct and cochlea. By contrast, conditional heterozygous Sox9-null mice are normal. During the ES development of Sox9Y440X/+ heterozygotes, Sox10 and genes important for ionic homeostasis are down-regulated, and there is developmental persistence of progenitors, resulting in fewer mature cells. Sox10 heterozygous null mutants also display persistence of ES/duct progenitors. By contrast, SOX10 retains its expression in the early Sox9Y440X/+ mutant cochlea. Later, in the postnatal stria vascularis, dominant interference by SOX9Y440X is implicated in impairing the normal cooperation of SOX9 and SOX10 in repressing the expression of the water channel Aquaporin 3, thereby contributing to endolymphatic hydrops. Our study shows that for a functioning endolymphatic system in the inner ear, SOX9 regulates Sox10, and depending on the cell type and target gene, it works either independently of or cooperatively with SOX10. SOX9Y440X can interfere with the activity of both SOXE factors, exerting effects that can be classified as haploinsufficient/hypomorphic or dominant negative depending on the cell/gene context. This model of disruption of transcription factor partnerships may be applicable to congenital deafness, which affects ∼0.3% of newborns, and other syndromic disorders.

SOX2/SALL4 stemness axis modulates Notch signaling genes to maintain self-renewal capacity of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Stemness phenotype is considered as the centerpiece of cancer biology due to its potential in conventional chemo-radiotherapy resistance and tumor recurrence after clinical intervention. This feature in tumor mass belongs to activation of core regulatory stemness factors and different cell signaling pathways in cancer stem cells. We aimed in this study to elucidate contribution of Notch signaling pathway in stemness state of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) through their relevance with stem cell markers SOX2 and SALL4. 50 ESCC tumor and related margin normal tissues were considered and categorized based on SOX2/SALL4 expression pattern, and mRNA levels of Notch signaling genes including ligands, receptors, target genes, and transcriptional coactivator were analyzed in the selected groups using qRT-PCR. Concomitant overexpression of stem cell markers SOX2 and SALL4 in ESCCs upregulated the involved genes in Notch signaling pathway. Upregulation of Notch pathway genes associated with depth of tumor invasion and lymph node metastasis of ESCC. Based on biological function of SOX2 and SALL4 axis in stemness state potential, our results may suggest contribution of Notch signaling pathway in self-renewal capacity of ESCCs, as well as invasion and metastasis of the disease. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report elucidating the crosstalk between SOX2/SALL4 stemness factors and Notch signaling pathway in cancer research.

Cell fate decisions during the development of the peripheral nervous system in the vertebrate head

Sensory placodes and neural crest cells are among the key cell populations that facilitated the emergence and diversification of vertebrates throughout evolution. Together, they generate the sensory nervous system in the head: both form the cranial sensory ganglia, while placodal cells make major contributions to the sense organs-the eye, ear and olfactory epithelium. Both are instrumental for integrating craniofacial organs and have been key to drive the concentration of sensory structures in the vertebrate head allowing the emergence of active and predatory life forms. Whereas the gene regulatory networks that control neural crest cell development have been studied extensively, the signals and downstream transcriptional events that regulate placode formation and diversity are only beginning to be uncovered. Both cell populations are derived from the embryonic ectoderm, which also generates the central nervous system and the epidermis, and recent evidence suggests that their initial specification involves a common molecular mechanism before definitive neural, neural crest and placodal lineages are established. In this review, we will first discuss the transcriptional networks that pattern the embryonic ectoderm and establish these three cell fates with emphasis on sensory placodes. Second, we will focus on how sensory placode precursors diversify using the specification of otic-epibranchial progenitors and their segregation as an example.

Sox2 gene regulation via the D1 enhancer in embryonic neural tube and neural crest by the combined action of SOX2 and ZIC2

The transcription factor (TF) SOX2 regulates various stem cells and tissue progenitors via functional interactions with cell type-specific partner TFs that co-bind to enhancer sequences. Neural progenitors are the major embryonic tissues where SOX2 assumes central regulatory roles. In order to characterize the partner TFs of SOX2 in neural progenitors, we investigated the regulation of the D1 enhancer of the Sox2 gene, which is activated in the embryonic neural tube (NT) and neural crest (NC), using chicken embryo electroporation. We identified essential TF binding sites for a SOX, and two ZIC TFs in the activation of the D1 enhancer. By comparison of dorso-ventral and antero-posterior patterns of D1 enhancer activation, and the effect of mutations on the enhancer activation patterns with TF expression patterns, we determined SOX2 and ZIC2 as the major D1 enhancer-activating TFs. Binding of these TFs to the D1 enhancer sequence was confirmed by chromatin immunoprecipitation analysis. The combination of SOX2 and ZIC2 TFs activated the enhancer in both the NT and NC. These results indicate that SOX2 and ZIC2, which have been known to play major regulatory roles in neural progenitors, do functionally cooperate. In addition, the recently demonstrated SOX2 expression during the NC development is accounted for at least partly by the D1 enhancer activity. Deletion of the D1 enhancer sequence from the mouse genome, however, did not affect the mouse development, indicating functional redundancies of other enhancers.