In vivo Hox binding specificity revealed by systematic changes to a single cis regulatory module

Hox gene-specific cellular targeting using split intein Trojan exons

The Trojan exon method, which makes use of intronically inserted T2A-Gal4 cassettes, has been widely used in Drosophila to create thousands of gene-specific Gal4 driver lines. These dual-purpose lines provide genetic access to specific cell types based on their expression of a native gene while simultaneously mutating one allele of the gene to enable loss-of-function analysis in homozygous animals. While this dual use is often an advantage, the truncation mutations produced by Trojan exons are sometimes deleterious in heterozygotes, perhaps by creating translation products with dominant negative effects. Such mutagenic effects can cause developmental lethality as has been observed with genes encoding essential transcription factors. Given the importance of transcription factors in specifying cell type, alternative techniques for generating specific Gal4 lines that target them are required. Here, we introduce a modified Trojan exon method that retains the targeting fidelity and plug-and-play modularity of the original method but mitigates its mutagenic effects by exploiting the self-splicing capabilities of split inteins. "Split Intein Trojan exons" (siTrojans) ensure that the two truncation products generated from the interrupted allele of the native gene are trans-spliced to create a full-length native protein. We demonstrate the efficacy of siTrojans by generating a comprehensive toolkit of Gal4 and Split Gal4 lines for the segmentally expressed Hox transcription factors and illustrate their use in neural circuit mapping by targeting neurons according to their position along the anterior-posterior axis. Both the method and the Hox gene-specific toolkit introduced here should be broadly useful.

Multimodal Hox5 activity generates motor neuron diversity

Motor neurons (MNs) are the final output of circuits driving fundamental behaviors, such as respiration and locomotion. Hox proteins are essential in generating the MN diversity required for accomplishing these functions, but the transcriptional mechanisms that enable Hox paralogs to assign distinct MN subtype identities despite their promiscuous DNA binding motif are not well understood. Here we show that Hoxa5 controls chromatin accessibility in all mouse spinal cervical MN subtypes and engages TALE co-factors to directly bind and regulate subtype-specific genes. We identify a paralog-specific interaction of Hoxa5 with the phrenic MN-specific transcription factor Scip and show that heterologous expression of Hoxa5 and Scip is sufficient to suppress limb-innervating MN identity. We also demonstrate that phrenic MN identity is stable after Hoxa5 downregulation and identify Klf proteins as potential regulators of phrenic MN maintenance. Our data identify multiple modes of Hoxa5 action that converge to induce and maintain MN identity.

Homeodomain complex formation and biomolecular condensates in Hox gene regulation

Hox genes are a family of homeodomain transcription factors that regulate specialized morphological structures along the anterior-posterior axis of metazoans. Over the past few decades, researchers have focused on defining how Hox factors with similar in vitro DNA binding activities achieve sufficient target specificity to regulate distinct cell fates in vivo. In this review, we highlight how protein interactions with other transcription factors, many of which are also homeodomain proteins, result in the formation of transcription factor complexes with enhanced DNA binding specificity. These findings suggest that Hox-regulated enhancers utilize distinct combinations of homeodomain binding sites, many of which are low-affinity, to recruit specific Hox complexes. However, low-affinity sites can only yield reproducible responses with high transcription factor concentrations. To overcome this limitation, recent studies revealed how transcription factors, including Hox factors, use intrinsically disordered domains (IDRs) to form biomolecular condensates that increase protein concentrations. Moreover, Hox factors with altered IDRs have been associated with altered transcriptional activity and human disease states, demonstrating the importance of IDRs in mediating essential Hox output. Collectively, these studies highlight how Hox factors use their DNA binding domains, protein-protein interaction domains, and IDRs to form specific transcription factor complexes that yield accurate gene expression.

Combinatorial transcription factor binding encodes cis-regulatory wiring of forebrain GABAergic neurogenesis

Transcription factors (TFs) bind combinatorially to genomic cis-regulatory elements (cREs), orchestrating transcription programs. While studies of chromatin state and chromosomal interactions have revealed dynamic neurodevelopmental cRE landscapes, parallel understanding of the underlying TF binding lags. To elucidate the combinatorial TF-cRE interactions driving mouse basal ganglia development, we integrated ChIP-seq for twelve TFs, H3K4me3-associated enhancer-promoter interactions, chromatin and transcriptional state, and transgenic enhancer assays. We identified TF-cREs modules with distinct chromatin features and enhancer activity that have complementary roles driving GABAergic neurogenesis and suppressing other developmental fates. While the majority of distal cREs were bound by one or two TFs, a small proportion were extensively bound, and these enhancers also exhibited exceptional evolutionary conservation, motif density, and complex chromosomal interactions. Our results provide new insights into how modules of combinatorial TF-cRE interactions activate and repress developmental expression programs and demonstrate the value of TF binding data in modeling gene regulatory wiring.

Floral Homeotic Factors: A Question of Specificity

MADS-domain transcription factors are involved in the control of a multitude of processes in eukaryotes, and in plants, they play particularly important roles during reproductive development. Among the members of this large family of regulatory proteins are the floral organ identity factors, which specify the identities of the different types of floral organs in a combinatorial manner. Much has been learned over the past three decades about the function of these master regulators. For example, it has been shown that they have similar DNA-binding activities and that their genome-wide binding patterns exhibit large overlaps. At the same time, it appears that only a minority of binding events lead to changes in gene expression and that the different floral organ identity factors have distinct sets of target genes. Thus, binding of these transcription factors to the promoters of target genes alone may not be sufficient for their regulation. How these master regulators achieve specificity in a developmental context is currently not well understood. Here, we review what is known about their activities and highlight open questions that need to be addressed to gain more detailed insights into the molecular mechanisms underlying their functions. We discuss evidence for the involvement of cofactors as well as the results from studies on transcription factors in animals that may be instructive for a better understanding of how the floral organ identity factors achieve regulatory specificity.

Hox function and specificity – A tissue centric view

Since their discovery, the Hox genes, with their incredible power to reprogram the identity of complete body regions, a phenomenon called homeosis, have captured the fascination of many biologists. Recent research has provided new insights into the function of Hox proteins in different germ layers and the mechanisms they employ to control tissue morphogenesis. We focus in this review on the ectoderm and mesoderm to highlight new findings and discuss them with regards to established concepts of Hox target gene regulation. Furthermore, we highlight the molecular mechanisms involved the transcriptional repression of specific groups of Hox target genes, and summarize the role of Hox mediated gene silencing in tissue development. Finally, we reflect on recent findings identifying a large number of tissue-specific Hox interactor partners, which open up new avenues and directions towards a better understanding of Hox function and specificity in different tissues.

Hox genes in spiders: Their significance for development and evolution

Hox genes are known for their role in the specification of typical body plan features in animals. Evolutionary changes in Hox gene function are believed to be involved in the emergence of the diverse body plans we observe in animals today. Spiders share many body plan features with other arthropods, but also have numerous unique traits of their own. Studies of spider Hox genes have already provided insights into evolutionarily conserved and derived features of the spider body plan and their genetic basis. However, many aspects of Hox gene biology have been insufficiently studied in spiders so far. In this review, we highlight previous comparative studies of Hox genes in spiders and their significance for our understanding of the evolution of the spider body plan. We also identify aspects of Hox gene biology that need to be studied in greater detail. Many spider Hox genes have not been investigated beyond their mRNA expression patterns, and the role of Hox genes with apparently plesiomorphic or dual functions, like ftz and Hox3 is still unclear. Spiders have a duplicated Hox gene cluster, but possible sub- or neofunctionalisation of duplicates have not yet been studied systematically. Future research should therefore focus on these issues, in addition to the role of Polycomb and trithorax-mediated regulation, the identification of regulatory regions, cofactors or spider-specific target genes, and the significance of non-coding RNAs transcribed from within the Hox cluster and even from the antisense strand of particular Hox genes.

Specification of the endocrine primordia controlling insect moulting and metamorphosis by the JAK/STAT signalling pathway

The corpora allata and the prothoracic glands control moulting and metamorphosis in insects. These endocrine glands are specified in the maxillary and labial segments at positions homologous to those forming the trachea in more posterior segments. Glands and trachea can be homeotically transformed into each other suggesting that all three evolved from a metamerically repeated organ that diverged to form glands in the head and respiratory organs in the trunk. While much is known about tracheal specification, there is limited information about corpora allata and prothorathic gland specification. Here we show that the expression of a key regulator of early gland development, the snail gene, is controlled by the Dfd and Scr Hox genes and by the Hedgehog and Wnt signalling pathways that induce localised transcription of upd, the ligand of the JAK/STAT signalling pathway, which lies at the heart of gland specification. Our results show that the same upstream regulators are required for the early gland and tracheal primordia specification, reinforcing the hypothesis that they originated from a segmentally repeated organ present in an ancient arthropod.

HOX genes in stem cells: Maintaining cellular identity and regulation of differentiation

Stem cells display a unique cell type within the body that has the capacity to self-renew and differentiate into specialized cell types. Compared to pluripotent stem cells, adult stem cells (ASC) such as mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) and hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) exhibit restricted differentiation capabilities that are limited to cell types typically found in the tissue of origin, which implicates that there must be a certain code or priming determined by the tissue of origin. HOX genes, a subset of homeobox genes encoding transcription factors that are generally repressed in undifferentiated pluripotent stem cells, emerged here as master regulators of cell identity and cell fate during embryogenesis, and in maintaining this positional identity throughout life as well as specifying various regional properties of respective tissues. Concurrently, intricate molecular circuits regulated by diverse stem cell-typical signaling pathways, balance stem cell maintenance, proliferation and differentiation. However, it still needs to be unraveled how stem cell-related signaling pathways establish and regulate ASC-specific HOX expression pattern with different temporal-spatial topography, known as the HOX code. This comprehensive review therefore summarizes the current knowledge of specific ASC-related HOX expression patterns and how these were integrated into stem cell-related signaling pathways. Understanding the mechanism of HOX gene regulation in stem cells may provide new ways to manipulate stem cell fate and function leading to improved and new approaches in the field of regenerative medicine.

Eukaryotic gene regulation at equilibrium, or non?

Models of transcriptional regulation that assume equilibrium binding of transcription factors have been less successful at predicting gene expression from sequence in eukaryotes than in bacteria. This could be due to the non-equilibrium nature of eukaryotic regulation. Unfortunately, the space of possible non-equilibrium mechanisms is vast and predominantly uninteresting. The key question is therefore how this space can be navigated efficiently, to focus on mechanisms and models that are biologically relevant. In this review, we advocate for the normative role of theory-theory that prescribes rather than just describes-in providing such a focus. Theory should expand its remit beyond inferring mechanistic models from data, towards identifying non-equilibrium gene regulatory schemes that may have been evolutionarily selected, despite their energy consumption, because they are precise, reliable, fast, or otherwise outperform regulation at equilibrium. We illustrate our reasoning by toy examples for which we provide simulation code.

Specificity of the Hox member Deformed is determined by transcription factor levels and binding site affinities

Hox proteins have similar binding specificities in vitro, yet they control different morphologies in vivo. This paradox has been partially solved with the identification of Hox low-affinity binding sites. However, anterior Hox proteins are more promiscuous than posterior Hox proteins, raising the question how anterior Hox proteins achieve specificity. We use the AP2x enhancer, which is activated in the maxillary head segment by the Hox TF Deformed (Dfd). This enhancer lacks canonical Dfd-Exd sites but contains several predicted low-affinity sites. Unexpectedly, these sites are strongly bound by Dfd-Exd complexes and their conversion into optimal Dfd-Exd sites results only in a modest increase in binding strength. These small variations in affinity change the sensitivity of the enhancer to different Dfd levels, resulting in perturbed AP-2 expression and maxillary morphogenesis. Thus, Hox-regulated morphogenesis seems to result from the co-evolution of Hox binding affinity and Hox dosage for precise target gene regulation.

Despite the central role of Hox genes in controlling morphogenesis, the DNA binding of different Hox members is relatively similar. Here they show that specificity of Hox member Dfd relies on a precise balance of transcription factors and binding site affinities.

Transcription factor paralogs orchestrate alternative gene regulatory networks by context-dependent cooperation with multiple cofactors

In eukaryotes, members of transcription factor families often exhibit similar DNA binding properties in vitro, yet orchestrate paralog-specific gene regulatory networks in vivo. The serially homologous first (T1) and third (T3) thoracic legs of Drosophila, which are specified by the Hox proteins Scr and Ubx, respectively, offer a unique opportunity to address this paradox in vivo. Genome-wide analyses using epitope-tagged alleles of both Hox loci in the T1 and T3 leg imaginal discs, the precursors to the adult legs and ventral body regions, show that ~8% of Hox binding is paralog-specific. Binding specificity is mediated by interactions with distinct cofactors in different domains: the Hox cofactor Exd acts in the proximal domain and is necessary for Scr to bind many of its paralog-specific targets, while in the distal leg domain, the homeodomain protein Distal-less (Dll) enhances Scr binding to a different subset of loci. These findings reveal how Hox paralogs, and perhaps paralogs of other transcription factor families, orchestrate alternative downstream gene regulatory networks with the help of multiple, context-specific cofactors.

An Evolutionary Perspective on Hox Binding Site Preferences in Two Different Tissues

Transcription factor (TF) networks define the precise development of multicellular organisms. While many studies focused on TFs expressed in specific cell types to elucidate their contribution to cell specification and differentiation, it is less understood how broadly expressed TFs perform their precise functions in the different cellular contexts. To uncover differences that could explain tissue-specific functions of such TFs, we analyzed here genomic chromatin interactions of the broadly expressed Drosophila Hox TF Ultrabithorax (Ubx) in the mesodermal and neuronal tissues using bioinformatics. Our investigations showed that Ubx preferentially interacts with multiple yet tissue-specific chromatin sites in putative regulatory regions of genes in both tissues. Importantly, we found the classical Hox/Ubx DNA binding motif to be enriched only among the neuronal Ubx chromatin interactions, whereas a novel Ubx-like motif with rather low predicted Hox affinities was identified among the regions bound by Ubx in the mesoderm. Finally, our analysis revealed that tissues-specific Ubx chromatin sites are also different with regards to the distribution of active and repressive histone marks. Based on our data, we propose that the tissue-related differences in Ubx binding behavior could be a result of the emergence of the mesoderm as a new germ layer in triploblastic animals, which might have required the Hox TFs to relax their binding specificity.

Cell-type-specific Hox regulatory strategies orchestrate tissue identity

Hox proteins are homeodomain transcription factors that diversify serially homologous segments along the animal body axis, as revealed by the classic bithorax phenotype of Drosophila melanogaster, in which mutations in Ultrabithorax (Ubx) transform the third thoracic segment into the likeness of the second thoracic segment. To specify segment identity, we show that Ubx both increases and decreases chromatin accessibility, coinciding with its dual role as both an activator and repressor of transcription. However, the choice of transcriptional activity executed by Ubx is spatially regulated and depends on the availability of cofactors, with Ubx acting as a repressor in some populations and as an activator in others. Ubx-mediated changes to chromatin accessibility positively and negatively affect the binding of Scalloped (Sd), a transcription factor that is required for appendage development in both segments. These findings illustrate how a single Hox protein can modify complex gene regulatory networks to transform the identity of an entire tissue.

Anterior Hox Genes and the Process of Cephalization

During evolution, bilateral animals have experienced a progressive process of cephalization with the anterior concentration of nervous tissue, sensory organs and the appearance of dedicated feeding structures surrounding the mouth. Cephalization has been achieved by the specialization of the unsegmented anterior end of the body (the acron) and the sequential recruitment to the head of adjacent anterior segments. Here we review the key developmental contribution of Hox1-5 genes to the formation of cephalic structures in vertebrates and arthropods and discuss how this evolved. The appearance of Hox cephalic genes preceded the evolution of a highly specialized head in both groups, indicating that Hox gene involvement in the control of cephalic structures was acquired independently during the evolution of vertebrates and invertebrates to regulate the genes required for head innovation.

Developmental Robustness: The Haltere Case in Drosophila

Developmental processes have to be robust but also flexible enough to respond to genetic and environmental variations. Different mechanisms have been described to explain the apparent antagonistic nature of developmental robustness and plasticity. Here, we present a “self-sufficient” molecular model to explain the development of a particular flight organ that is under the control of the Hox gene Ultrabithorax (Ubx) in the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster. Our model is based on a candidate RNAi screen and additional genetic analyses that all converge to an autonomous and cofactor-independent mode of action for Ubx. We postulate that this self-sufficient molecular mechanism is possible due to an unusually high expression level of the Hox protein. We propose that high dosage could constitute a so far poorly investigated molecular strategy for allowing Hox proteins to both innovate and stabilize new forms during evolution.

The Hox protein conundrum: The "specifics" of DNA binding for Hox proteins and their partners

Homeotic genes (Hox genes) are homeodomain-transcription factors involved in conferring segmental identity along the anterior-posterior body axis. Molecular characterization of HOX protein function raises some interesting questions regarding the source of the binding specificity of the HOX proteins. How do HOX proteins regulate common and unique target specificity across space and time? This review attempts to summarize and interpret findings in this area, largely focused on results from in vitro and in vivo studies in Drosophila and mouse systems. Recent studies related to HOX protein binding specificity compel us to reconsider some of our current models for transcription factor-DNA interactions. It is crucial to study transcription factor binding by incorporating components of more complex, multi-protein interactions in concert with small changes in binding motifs that can significantly impact DNA binding specificity and subsequent alterations in gene expression. To incorporate the multiple elements that can determine HOX protein binding specificity, we propose a more integrative Cooperative Binding model.

Ultrabithorax Is a Micromanager of Hindwing Identity in Butterflies and Moths

The forewings and hindwings of butterflies and moths (Lepidoptera) are differentiated from each other, with segment-specific morphologies and color patterns that mediate a wide range of functions in flight, signaling, and protection. The Hox geneUltrabithorax(Ubx) is a master selector gene that differentiates metathoracic from mesothoracic identities across winged insects, and previous work has shown this role extends to at least some of the color patterns from the butterfly hindwing. Here we used CRISPR targeted mutagenesis to generateUbxloss-of-function somatic mutations in two nymphalid butterflies (Junonia coenia,Vanessa cardui) and a pyralid moth (Plodia interpunctella). The resulting mosaic clones yielded hindwing-to-forewing transformations, showingUbxis necessary for specifying many aspects of hindwing-specific identities, including scale morphologies, color patterns, and wing venation and structure. These homeotic phenotypes showed cell-autonomous, sharp transitions between mutant and non-mutant scales, except for clones that encroached into the border ocelli (eyespots) and resulted in composite and non-autonomous effects on eyespot ring determination. In the pyralid moth, homeotic clones converted the folding and depigmented hindwing into rigid and pigmented composites, affected the wing-coupling frenulum, and induced ectopic scent-scales in male androconia. These data confirmUbxis a master selector of lepidopteran hindwing identity and suggest it acts on many gene regulatory networks involved in wing development and patterning.

Robust and efficient gene regulation through localized nuclear microenvironments

Developmental enhancers drive gene expression in specific cell types during animal development. They integrate signals from many different sources mediated through the binding of transcription factors, producing specific responses in gene expression. Transcription factors often bind low-affinity sequences for only short durations. How brief, low-affinity interactions drive efficient transcription and robust gene expression is a central question in developmental biology. Localized high concentrations of transcription factors have been suggested as a possible mechanism by which to use these enhancer sites effectively. Here, we discuss the evidence for such transcriptional microenvironments, mechanisms for their formation and the biological consequences of such sub-nuclear compartmentalization for developmental decisions and evolution.

HOX gene cluster (de)regulation in brain: from neurodevelopment to malignant glial tumours

HOX genes encode a family of evolutionarily conserved homeodomain transcription factors that are crucial both during development and adult life. In humans, 39 HOX genes are arranged in four clusters (HOXA, B, C, and D) in chromosomes 7, 17, 12, and 2, respectively. During embryonic development, particular epigenetic states accompany their expression along the anterior-posterior body axis. This tightly regulated temporal-spatial expression pattern reflects their relative chromosomal localization, and is critical for normal embryonic brain development when HOX genes are mainly expressed in the hindbrain and mostly absent in the forebrain region. Epigenetic marks, mostly polycomb-associated, are dynamically regulated at HOX loci and regulatory regions to ensure the finely tuned HOX activation and repression, highlighting a crucial epigenetic plasticity necessary for homeostatic development. HOX genes are essentially absent in healthy adult brain, whereas they are detected in malignant brain tumours, namely gliomas, where HOX genes display critical roles by regulating several hallmarks of cancer. Here, we review the major mechanisms involved in HOX genes (de)regulation in the brain, from embryonic to adult stages, in physiological and oncologic conditions. We focus particularly on the emerging causes of HOX gene deregulation in glioma, as well as on their functional and clinical implications.

MiR-126 Regulates Properties of SOX9+ Liver Progenitor Cells during Liver Repair by Targeting Hoxb6

Liver progenitor cells (LPCs) have a remarkable contribution to the hepatocytes and ductal cells when normal hepatocyte proliferation is severely impaired. As a biomarker for LPCs, Sry-box 9 (Sox9) plays critical roles in liver homeostasis and repair in response to injury. However, the regulation mechanism of Sox9 in liver physiological and pathological state remains unknown. In this study, we found that miR-126 positively regulated the expression of Sox9, the proliferation and differentiation of SOX9⁺ LPCs by suppressing the translation of homeobox b6 (Hoxb6). As a transcription factor, HOXB6 directly binds to the promoter of Sox9 to inhibit Sox9 expression, resulting in the destruction of the properties of SOX9⁺ LPCs in CCl₄-induced liver injury. These findings revealed the role of miR-126 in regulating SOX9⁺ LPCs fate by targeting Hoxb6 in liver injury repair. Our findings suggest the potential role of miR-126 as a nucleic acid therapy drug target for liver failure.

•

miR-126 promotes Sox9 expression and maintains SOX9⁺ LPCs in adult mouse livers

•

HOXB6 suppresses properties of SOX9⁺ LPCs in chronic liver injury model

•

HOXB6 negatively regulates Sox9 trans-activity

•

miR-126 regulates properties of SOX9⁺ LPCs by targeting Hoxb6

Context-dependent HOX transcription factor function in health and disease

During animal development, HOX transcription factors determine the fate of developing tissues to generate diverse organs and appendages. The power of these proteins is striking: mis-expressing a HOX protein causes homeotic transformation of one body part into another. During development, HOX proteins interpret their cellular context through protein interactions, alternative splicing, and post-translational modifications to regulate cell proliferation, cell death, cell migration, cell differentiation, and angiogenesis. Although mutation and/or mis-expression of HOX proteins during development can be lethal, changes in HOX proteins that do not pattern vital organs can result in survivable malformations. In adults, mutation and/or mis-expression of HOX proteins disrupts their gene regulatory networks, deregulating cell behaviors and leading to arthritis and cancer. On the molecular level, HOX proteins are composed of DNA binding homeodomain, and large regions of unstructured, or intrinsically disordered, protein sequence. The primary roles of HOX proteins in arthritis and cancer suggest that mutations associated with these diseases in both the structured and disordered regions of HOX proteins can have substantial functional effects. These insights lead to new questions critical for understanding and manipulating HOX function in physiological and pathological conditions.

Evo-Devo: When Four Became Two Plus Two

Wings and halteres are homologous flight appendages whose shape differences are controlled by the Ubx transcription factor. Recent research shows how Ubx regulates apical and basal extracellular matrix proteases and their inhibitors to achieve this morphological divergence.