Characterization of the transvection mediating region of the abdominal-B locus in Drosophila

Mechanisms of Interaction between Enhancers and Promoters in Three Drosophila Model Systems

In higher eukaryotes, the regulation of developmental gene expression is determined by enhancers, which are often located at a large distance from the promoters they regulate. Therefore, the architecture of chromosomes and the mechanisms that determine the functional interaction between enhancers and promoters are of decisive importance in the development of organisms. Mammals and the model animal Drosophila have homologous key architectural proteins and similar mechanisms in the organization of chromosome architecture. This review describes the current progress in understanding the mechanisms of the formation and regulation of long-range interactions between enhancers and promoters at three well-studied key regulatory loci in Drosophila.

CRISPR/Cas9 and FLP-FRT mediated regulatory dissection of the BX-C of Drosophila melanogaster

The homeotic genes or Hox define the anterior-posterior (AP) body axis formation in bilaterians and are often present on the chromosome in an order collinear to their function across the AP axis. However, there are many cases wherein the Hox are not collinear, but their expression pattern is conserved across the AP axis. The expression pattern of Hox is attributed to the cis-regulatory modules (CRMs) consisting of enhancers, initiators, or repressor elements that regulate the genes in a segment-specific manner. In the Drosophila melanogaster Hox complex, the bithorax complex (BX-C) and even the CRMs are organized in an order that is collinear to their function in the thoracic and abdominal segments. In the present study, the regulatorily inert regions were targeted using CRISPR/Cas9 to generate a series of transgenic lines with the insertion of FRT sequences. These FRT lines are repurposed to shuffle the CRMs associated with Abd-B to generate modular deletion, duplication, or inversion of multiple CRMs. The rearrangements yielded entirely novel phenotypes in the fly suggesting the requirement of such complex manipulations to address the significance of higher order arrangement of the CRMs. The functional map and the transgenic flies generated in this study are important resources to decipher the collective ability of multiple regulatory elements in the eukaryotic genome to function as complex modules.

The 3D genome landscape: Diverse chromosomal interactions and their functional implications

Genome organization includes contacts both within a single chromosome and between distinct chromosomes. Thus, regulatory organization in the nucleus may include interplay of these two types of chromosomal interactions with genome activity. Emerging advances in omics and single-cell imaging technologies have allowed new insights into chromosomal contacts, including those of homologs and sister chromatids, and their significance to genome function. In this review, we highlight recent studies in this field and discuss their impact on understanding the principles of chromosome organization and associated functional implications in diverse cellular processes. Specifically, we describe the contributions of intra-chromosomal, inter-homolog, and inter-sister chromatid contacts to genome organization and gene expression.

GAGA factor: a multifunctional pioneering chromatin protein

The Drosophila GAGA factor (GAF) is a multifunctional protein implicated in nucleosome organization and remodeling, activation and repression of gene expression, long distance enhancer-promoter communication, higher order chromosome structure, and mitosis. This broad range of activities poses questions about how a single protein can perform so many seemingly different and unrelated functions. Current studies argue that GAF acts as a "pioneer" factor, generating nucleosome-free regions of chromatin for different classes of regulatory elements. The removal of nucleosomes from regulatory elements in turn enables other factors to bind to these elements and carry out their specialized functions. Consistent with this view, GAF associates with a collection of chromatin remodelers and also interacts with proteins implicated in different regulatory functions. In this review, we summarize the known activities of GAF and the functions of its protein partners.

Characterization of Button Loci that Promote Homologous Chromosome Pairing and Cell-Type-Specific Interchromosomal Gene Regulation

Homologous chromosomes colocalize to regulate gene expression in processes including genomic imprinting, X-inactivation, and transvection. In Drosophila, homologous chromosomes pair throughout development, promoting transvection. The "button" model of pairing proposes that specific regions along chromosomes pair with high affinity. Here, we identify buttons interspersed across the fly genome that pair with their homologous sequences, even when relocated to multiple positions in the genome. A majority of transgenes that span a full topologically associating domain (TAD) function as buttons, but not all buttons contain TADs. Additionally, buttons are enriched for insulator protein clusters. Fragments of buttons do not pair, suggesting that combinations of elements within a button are required for pairing. Pairing is necessary but not sufficient for transvection. Additionally, pairing and transvection are stronger in some cell types than in others, suggesting that pairing strength regulates transvection efficiency between cell types. Thus, buttons pair homologous chromosomes to facilitate cell-type-specific interchromosomal gene regulation.

Boundaries mediate long-distance interactions between enhancers and promoters in the Drosophila Bithorax complex

Drosophila bithorax complex (BX-C) is one of the best model systems for studying the role of boundaries (insulators) in gene regulation. Expression of three homeotic genes, Ubx, abd-A, and Abd-B, is orchestrated by nine parasegment-specific regulatory domains. These domains are flanked by boundary elements, which function to block crosstalk between adjacent domains, ensuring that they can act autonomously. Paradoxically, seven of the BX-C regulatory domains are separated from their gene target by at least one boundary, and must “jump over” the intervening boundaries. To understand the jumping mechanism, the Mcp boundary was replaced with Fab-7 and Fab-8. Mcp is located between the iab-4 and iab-5 domains, and defines the border between the set of regulatory domains controlling abd-A and Abd-B. When Mcp is replaced by Fab-7 or Fab-8, they direct the iab-4 domain (which regulates abd-A) to inappropriately activate Abd-B in abdominal segment A4. For the Fab-8 replacement, ectopic induction was only observed when it was inserted in the same orientation as the endogenous Fab-8 boundary. A similar orientation dependence for bypass activity was observed when Fab-7 was replaced by Fab-8. Thus, boundaries perform two opposite functions in the context of BX-C–they block crosstalk between neighboring regulatory domains, but at the same time actively facilitate long distance communication between the regulatory domains and their respective target genes.

Drosophila bithorax complex (BX-C) is one of a few examples demonstrating in vivo role of boundary/insulator elements in organization of independent chromatin domains. BX-C contains three HOX genes, whose parasegment-specific pattern is controlled by cis-regulatory domains flanked by boundary/insulator elements. Since the boundaries ensure autonomy of adjacent domains, the presence of these elements poses a paradox: how do the domains bypass the intervening boundaries and contact their proper regulatory targets? According to the textbook model, BX-C regulatory domains are able to bypass boundaries because they harbor special promoter targeting sequences. However, contrary to this model, we show here that the boundaries themselves play an active role in directing regulatory domains to their appropriate HOX gene promoter.

The Ubx Polycomb response element bypasses an unpaired Fab-8 insulator via cis transvection in Drosophila

Chromatin insulators or boundary elements protect genes from regulatory activities from neighboring genes or chromatin domains. In the Drosophila Abdominal-B (Abd-B) locus, the deletion of such elements, such as Frontabdominal-7 (Fab-7) or Fab-8 led to dominant gain of function phenotypes, presumably due to the loss of chromatin barriers. Homologous chromosomes are paired in Drosophila, creating a number of pairing dependent phenomena including transvection, and whether transvection may affect the function of Polycomb response elements (PREs) and thus contribute to the phenotypes are not known. Here, we studied the chromatin barrier activity of Fab-8 and how it is affected by the zygosity of the transgene, and found that Fab-8 is able to block the silencing effect of the Ubx PRE on the DsRed reporter gene in a CTCF binding sites dependent manner. However, the blocking also depends on the zygosity of the transgene in that the barrier activity is present when the transgene is homozygous, but absent when the transgene is heterozygous. To analyze this effect, we performed chromatin immunoprecipitation and quantitative PCR (ChIP-qPCR) experiments on homozygous transgenic embryos, and found that H3K27me3 and H3K9me3 marks are restricted by Fab-8, but they spread beyond Fab-8 into the DsRed gene when the two CTCF binding sites within Fab-8 were mutated. Consistent with this, the mutation reduced H3K4me3 and RNA Pol II binding to the DsRed gene, and consequently, DsRed expression. Importantly, in heterozygous embryos, Fab-8 is unable to prevent the spread of H3K27me3 and H3K9me3 marks from crossing Fab-8 into DsRed, suggesting an insulator bypass. These results suggest that in the Abd-B locus, deletion of the insulator in one copy of the chromosome could lead to the loss of insulator activity on the homologous chromosome, and in other loci where chromosomal deletion created hemizygous regions of the genome, the chromatin barrier could be compromised. This study highlights a role of homologous chromosome pairing in the regulation of gene expression in the Drosophila genome.

Visualization of Transvection in Living Drosophila Embryos

How remote enhancers interact with appropriate target genes persists as a central mystery in gene regulation. Here, we exploit the properties of transvection to explore enhancer-promoter communication between homologous chromosomes in living Drosophila embryos. We successfully visualized the activation of an MS2-tagged reporter gene by a defined developmental enhancer located in trans on the other homolog. This trans-homolog activation depends on insulator DNAs, which increase the stability-but not the frequency-of homolog pairing. A pair of heterotypic insulators failed to mediate transvection, raising the possibility that insulator specificity underlies the formation of chromosomal loop domains. Moreover, we found that a shared enhancer co-activates separate PP7 and MS2 reporter genes incis and intrans. Transvecting alleles weakly compete with one another, raising the possibility that they share a common pool of the transcription machinery. We propose that transvecting alleles form a trans-homolog "hub," which serves as a scaffold for the accumulation of transcription complexes.

Noncoding RNAs in Polycomb and Trithorax Regulation: A Quantitative Perspective

The question of how noncoding RNAs are involved in Polycomb group (PcG) and Trithorax group (TrxG) regulation has been on an extraordinary journey over the last three decades. Favored models have risen and fallen, and healthy debates have swept back and forth. The field has recently reached a critical mass of compelling data that throws light on several previously unresolved issues. The time is ripe for a fruitful combination of these findings with two other long-running avenues of research, namely the biochemical properties of the PcG/TrxG system and the application of theoretical mathematical models toward an understanding of the system's regulatory properties. I propose that integrating our current knowledge of noncoding RNA into a quantitative biochemical and theoretical framework for PcG and TrxG regulation has the potential to reconcile several apparently conflicting models and identifies fascinating questions for future research.

Functional Dissection of the Blocking and Bypass Activities of the Fab-8 Boundary in the Drosophila Bithorax Complex

Functionally autonomous regulatory domains direct the parasegment-specific expression of the Drosophila Bithorax complex (BX-C) homeotic genes. Autonomy is conferred by boundary/insulator elements that separate each regulatory domain from its neighbors. For six of the nine parasegment (PS) regulatory domains in the complex, at least one boundary is located between the domain and its target homeotic gene. Consequently, BX-C boundaries must not only block adventitious interactions between neighboring regulatory domains, but also be permissive (bypass) for regulatory interactions between the domains and their gene targets. To elucidate how the BX-C boundaries combine these two contradictory activities, we have used a boundary replacement strategy. We show that a 337 bp fragment spanning the Fab-8 boundary nuclease hypersensitive site and lacking all but 83 bp of the 625 bp Fab-8 PTS (promoter targeting sequence) fully rescues a Fab-7 deletion. It blocks crosstalk between the iab-6 and iab-7 regulatory domains, and has bypass activity that enables the two downstream domains, iab-5 and iab-6, to regulate Abdominal-B (Abd-B) transcription in spite of two intervening boundary elements. Fab-8 has two dCTCF sites and we show that they are necessary both for blocking and bypass activity. However, CTCF sites on their own are not sufficient for bypass. While multimerized dCTCF (or Su(Hw)) sites have blocking activity, they fail to support bypass. Moreover, this bypass defect is not rescued by the full length PTS. Finally, we show that orientation is critical for the proper functioning the Fab-8 replacement. Though the inverted Fab-8 boundary still blocks crosstalk, it disrupts the topology of the Abd-B regulatory domains and does not support bypass. Importantly, altering the orientation of the Fab-8 dCTCF sites is not sufficient to disrupt bypass, indicating that orientation dependence is conferred by other factors.

Boundary elements in the Bithorax complex have two seemingly contradictory activities. They must block crosstalk between neighboring regulatory domains, but at the same time be permissive (insulator bypass) for regulatory interactions between the domains and the BX-C homeotic genes. We have used a replacement strategy to investigate how they carry out these two functions. We show that a 337 bp fragment spanning the Fab-8 boundary nuclease hypersensitive site is sufficient to fully rescue a Fab-7 boundary deletion. It blocks crosstalk and supports bypass. As has been observed in transgene assays, blocking activity requires the Fab-8 dCTCF sites, while full bypass activity requires the dCTCF sites plus a small part of PTS. In transgene assays, bypass activity typically depends on the orientation of the two insulators relative to each other. A similar orientation dependence is observed for the Fab-8 replacement in BX-C. When the orientation of the Fab-8 boundary is reversed, bypass activity is lost, while blocking is unaffected. Interestingly, unlike what has been observed in mammals, reversing the orientation of only the Fab-8 dCTCF sites does not affect boundary function. This finding indicates that other Fab-8 factors must play a critical role in determining orientation. Taken together, our findings argue that carrying out the paradoxical functions of the BX-C boundaries does not require any unusual or special properties; rather BX-C boundaries utilize generic blocking and insulator bypass activities that are appropriately adapted to their regulatory context. Thus making them a good model for studying the functional properties of boundaries/insulators in their native setting.

The boundary paradox in the Bithorax complex

The parasegment-specific expression of the three Drosophila Bithorax complex homeotic genes is orchestrated by nine functionally autonomous regulatory domains. Functional autonomy depends upon special elements called boundaries or insulators that are located between each domain. The boundaries ensure the independent activity of each domain by blocking adventitious interactions with initiators, enhancers and silencers in the neighboring domains. However, this blocking activity poses a regulatory paradox--the Bithorax boundaries are also able to insulate promoters from regulatory interactions with enhancers and silencers and six of the nine Bithorax regulatory domains are separated from their target genes by at least one boundary element. Here we consider several mechanisms that have been suggested for how the Bithorax regulatory domains are able to bypass intervening boundary elements and direct the appropriate parasegment-specific temporal and spatial expression of their target gene.

An Organizational Hub of Developmentally Regulated Chromatin Loops in the Drosophila Antennapedia Complex

Chromatin boundary elements (CBEs) are widely distributed in the genome and mediate formation of chromatin loops, but their roles in gene regulation remain poorly understood. The complex expression pattern of the Drosophila homeotic gene Sex combs reduced (Scr) is directed by an unusually long regulatory sequence harboring diverse cis elements and an intervening neighbor gene fushi tarazu (ftz). Here we report the presence of a multitude of CBEs in the Scr regulatory region. Selective and dynamic pairing among these CBEs mediates developmentally regulated chromatin loops. In particular, the SF1 boundary plays a central role in organizing two subsets of chromatin loops: one subset encloses ftz, limiting its access by the surrounding Scr enhancers and compartmentalizing distinct histone modifications, and the other subset subdivides the Scr regulatory sequences into independent enhancer access domains. We show that these CBEs exhibit diverse enhancer-blocking activities that vary in strength and tissue distribution. Tandem pairing of SF1 and SF2, two strong CBEs that flank the ftz domain, allows the distal enhancers to bypass their block in transgenic Drosophila, providing a mechanism for the endogenous Scr enhancer to circumvent the ftz domain. Our study demonstrates how an endogenous CBE network, centrally orchestrated by SF1, could remodel the genomic environment to facilitate gene regulation during development.

The open for business model of the bithorax complex in Drosophila

After nearly 30 years of effort, Ed Lewis published his 1978 landmark paper in which he described the analysis of a series of mutations that affect the identity of the segments that form along the anterior-posterior (AP) axis of the fly (Lewis 1978). The mutations behaved in a non-canonical fashion in complementation tests, forming what Ed Lewis called a "pseudo-allelic" series. Because of this, he never thought that the mutations represented segment-specific genes. As all of these mutations were grouped to a particular area of the Drosophila third chromosome, the locus became known of as the bithorax complex (BX-C). One of the key findings of Lewis' article was that it revealed for the first time, to a wide scientific audience, that there was a remarkable correlation between the order of the segment-specific mutations along the chromosome and the order of the segments they affected along the AP axis. In Ed Lewis' eyes, the mutants he discovered affected "segment-specific functions" that were sequentially activated along the chromosome as one moves from anterior to posterior along the body axis (the colinearity concept now cited in elementary biology textbooks). The nature of the "segment-specific functions" started to become clear when the BX-C was cloned through the pioneering chromosomal walk initiated in the mid 1980s by the Hogness and Bender laboratories (Bender et al. 1983a; Karch et al. 1985). Through this molecular biology effort, and along with genetic characterizations performed by Gines Morata's group in Madrid (Sanchez-Herrero et al. 1985) and Robert Whittle's in Sussex (Tiong et al. 1985), it soon became clear that the whole BX-C encoded only three protein-coding genes (Ubx, abd-A, and Abd-B). Later, immunostaining against the Ubx protein hinted that the segment-specific functions could, in fact, be cis-regulatory elements regulating the expression of the three protein-coding genes. In 1987, Peifer, Karch, and Bender proposed a comprehensive model of the functioning of the BX-C, in which the "segment-specific functions" appear as segment-specific enhancers regulating, Ubx, abd-A, or Abd-B (Peifer et al. 1987). Key to their model was that the segmental address of these enhancers was not an inherent ability of the enhancers themselves, but was determined by the chromosomal location in which they lay. In their view, the sequential activation of the segment-specific functions resulted from the sequential opening of chromatin domains along the chromosome as one moves from anterior to posterior. This model soon became known of as the open for business model. While the open for business model is quite easy to visualize at a conceptual level, molecular evidence to validate this model has been missing for almost 30 years. The recent publication describing the outstanding, joint effort from the Bender and Kingston laboratories now provides the missing proof to support this model (Bowman et al. 2014). The purpose of this article is to review the open for business model and take the reader through the genetic arguments that led to its elaboration.

Hox miRNA regulation within the Drosophila Bithorax complex: Patterning behavior

The study of Drosophila Hox genes, located in the Antennapedia complex (ANT-C) and Bithorax complex (BX-C), has provided fundamental insights into mechanisms of how the segments of the animal body plan are specified. Notably, even though the analysis of the BX-C formally began over a century ago, surprises continue to emerge regarding its regulation and function. Even simply the gene content of the BX-C has been regularly revised in past years, especially with regard to non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs), including microRNAs. In this perspective, we review the history of studies of non-coding transcription in the BX-C, and highlight recent studies of its miRNAs that provide new insights into their tissue-specific roles in Hox gene regulation. In particular, we have demonstrated unexpected importance of endogenous BX-C miRNAs to restrict the spatial accumulation of Hox proteins and their TALE cofactors in the ventral nerve cord, and link this to aberrant neural differentiation and reproductive behavior. These findings open new directions on studying Hox miRNA function, and we speculate that further understanding of their roles in insect models may provide new leads for studying the enigmatic biological functions of analogous miRNAs located in vertebrate Hox clusters.

Functional role of dimerization and CP190 interacting domains of CTCF protein in Drosophila melanogaster

Background

Insulators play a central role in gene regulation, chromosomal architecture and genome function in higher eukaryotes. To learn more about how insulators carry out their diverse functions, we have begun an analysis of the Drosophila CTCF (dCTCF). CTCF is one of the few insulator proteins known to be conserved from flies to man.

Results

In the studies reported here we have focused on the identification and characterization of two dCTCF protein interaction modules. The first mediates dCTCF multimerization, while the second mediates dCTCF–CP190 interactions. The multimerization domain maps in the N-terminus of the dCTCF protein and likely mediates the formation of tetrameric complexes. The CP190 interaction module encompasses a sequence ~200 amino acids long that spans the C-terminal and mediates interactions with the N-terminal BTB domain of the CP190 protein. Transgene rescue experiments showed that a dCTCF protein lacking sequences critical for CP190 interactions was almost as effective as wild type in rescuing the phenotypic effects of a dCTCF null allele. The mutation did, however, affect CP190 recruitment to specific Drosophila insulator elements and had a modest effect on dCTCF chromatin association. A protein lacking the N-terminal dCTCF multimerization domain incompletely rescued the zygotic and maternal effect lethality of the null and did not rescue the defects in Abd-B regulation evident in surviving adult dCTCF mutant flies. Finally, we show that elimination of maternally contributed dCTCF at the onset of embryogenesis has quite different effects on development and Abd-B regulation than is observed when the homozygous mutant animals develop in the presence of maternally derived dCTCF activity.

Conclusions

Our results indicate that dCTCF–CP190 interactions are less critical for the in vivo functions of the dCTCF protein than the N-terminal dCTCF–dCTCF interaction domain. We also show that the phenotypic consequences of dCTCF mutations differ depending upon when and how dCTCF activity is lost.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12915-015-0168-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Deciphering the combinatorial architecture of a Drosophila homeotic gene enhancer

In Drosophila, the 330 kb bithorax complex regulates cellular differentiation along the anterior–posterior axis during development in the thorax and abdomen and is comprised of three homeotic genes: Ultrabithorax, abdominal-A, and Abdominal-B. The expression of each of these genes is in turn controlled through interactions between transcription factors and a number of cis-regulatory modules in the neighboring intergenic regions. In this study, we examine how the sequence architecture of transcription factor binding sites mediates the functional activity of one of these cis-regulatory modules. Using computational, mathematical modeling and experimental molecular genetic approaches we investigate the IAB7b enhancer, which regulates Abdominal-B expression specifically in the presumptive seventh and ninth abdominal segments of the early embryo. A cross-species comparison of the IAB7b enhancer reveals an evolutionarily conserved signature motif containing two FUSHI-TARAZU activator transcription factor binding sites. We find that the transcriptional repressors KNIRPS, KRUPPEL and GIANT are able to restrict reporter gene expression to the posterior abdominal segments, using different molecular mechanisms including short-range repression and competitive binding. Additionally, we show the functional importance of the spacing between the two FUSHI-TARAZU binding sites and discuss the potential importance of cooperativity for transcriptional activation. Our results demonstrate that the transcriptional output of the IAB7b cis-regulatory module relies on a complex set of combinatorial inputs mediated by specific transcription factor binding and that the sequence architecture at this enhancer is critical to maintain robust regulatory function.

Enhancer loops appear stable during development and are associated with paused polymerase

Developmental enhancers initiate transcription and are fundamental to our understanding of developmental networks, evolution and disease. Despite their importance, the properties governing enhancer-promoter interactions and their dynamics during embryogenesis remain unclear. At the β-globin locus, enhancer-promoter interactions appear dynamic and cell-type specific, whereas at the HoxD locus they are stable and ubiquitous, being present in tissues where the target genes are not expressed. The extent to which preformed enhancer-promoter conformations exist at other, more typical, loci and how transcription is eventually triggered is unclear. Here we generated a high-resolution map of enhancer three-dimensional contacts during Drosophila embryogenesis, covering two developmental stages and tissue contexts, at unprecedented resolution. Although local regulatory interactions are common, long-range interactions are highly prevalent within the compact Drosophila genome. Each enhancer contacts multiple enhancers, and promoters with similar expression, suggesting a role in their co-regulation. Notably, most interactions appear unchanged between tissue context and across development, arising before gene activation, and are frequently associated with paused RNA polymerase. Our results indicate that the general topology governing enhancer contacts is conserved from flies to humans and suggest that transcription initiates from preformed enhancer-promoter loops through release of paused polymerase.

The Drosophila eve insulator Homie promotes eve expression and protects the adjacent gene from repression by polycomb spreading

Insulators can block the action of enhancers on promoters and the spreading of repressive chromatin, as well as facilitating specific enhancer-promoter interactions. However, recent studies have called into question whether the activities ascribed to insulators in model transgene assays actually reflect their functions in the genome. The Drosophila even skipped (eve) gene is a Polycomb (Pc) domain with a Pc-group response element (PRE) at one end, flanked by an insulator, an arrangement also seen in other genes. Here, we show that this insulator has three major functions. It blocks the spreading of the eve Pc domain, preventing repression of the adjacent gene, TER94. It prevents activation of TER94 by eve regulatory DNA. It also facilitates normal eve expression. When Homie is deleted in the context of a large transgene that mimics both eve and TER94 regulation, TER94 is repressed. This repression depends on the eve PRE. Ubiquitous TER94 expression is “replaced” by expression in an eve pattern when Homie is deleted, and this effect is reversed when the PRE is also removed. Repression of TER94 is attributable to spreading of the eve Pc domain into the TER94 locus, accompanied by an increase in histone H3 trimethylation at lysine 27. Other PREs can functionally replace the eve PRE, and other insulators can block PRE-dependent repression in this context. The full activity of the eve promoter is also dependent on Homie, and other insulators can promote normal eve enhancer-promoter communication. Our data suggest that this is not due to preventing promoter competition, but is likely the result of the insulator organizing a chromosomal conformation favorable to normal enhancer-promoter interactions. Thus, insulator activities in a native context include enhancer blocking and enhancer-promoter facilitation, as well as preventing the spread of repressive chromatin.

Insulators are specialized DNA elements that can separate the genome into functional units. Most of the current thinking about these elements comes from studies done with model transgenes. Studies of insulators within the specialized Hox gene complexes have suggested that model transgenes can reflect the normal functions of these elements in their native context. However, recent genome-wide studies have called this into question. This work analyzes the native function of an insulator that resides between the Drosophila genes eve and TER94, which are expressed in very different patterns. Also, the eve gene is a Polycomb (Pc) domain, a specialized type of chromatin that is found in many places throughout the genome. We show that this insulator has three major functions. It blocks the spreading of the eve Pc domain, preventing repression of TER94. It prevents activation of TER94 by eve regulatory DNA. It also facilitates normal eve expression. Each of these activities are consistent with those seen with model transgenes, and other known insulators can provide these functions in this context. This work provides a novel and convincing example of the normal role of insulators in regulating the eukaryotic genome, as well as providing insights into their mechanisms of action.

Flanking sequence context-dependent transcription factor binding in early Drosophila development

BACKGROUND

Gene expression in the Drosophila embryo is controlled by functional interactions between a large network of protein transcription factors (TFs) and specific sequences in DNA cis-regulatory modules (CRMs). The binding site sequences for any TF can be experimentally determined and represented in a position weight matrix (PWM). PWMs can then be used to predict the location of TF binding sites in other regions of the genome, although there are limitations to this approach as currently implemented.

RESULTS

In this proof-of-principle study, we analyze 127 CRMs and focus on four TFs that control transcription of target genes along the anterio-posterior axis of the embryo early in development. For all four of these TFs, there is some degree of conserved flanking sequence that extends beyond the predicted binding regions. A potential role for these conserved flanking sequences may be to enhance the specificity of TF binding, as the abundance of these sequences is greatly diminished when we examine only predicted high-affinity binding sites.

CONCLUSIONS

Expanding PWMs to include sequence context-dependence will increase the information content in PWMs and facilitate a more efficient functional identification and dissection of CRMs.

Noncoding RNAs of the Ultrabithorax domain of the Drosophila bithorax complex

RNA transcripts without obvious coding potential are widespread in many creatures, including the fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster. Several noncoding RNAs have been identified within the Drosophila bithorax complex. These first appear in blastoderm stage embryos, and their expression patterns indicate that they are transcribed only from active domains of the bithorax complex. It has been suggested that these noncoding RNAs have a role in establishing active domains, perhaps by setting the state of Polycomb Response Elements A comprehensive survey across the proximal half of the bithorax complex has now revealed nine distinct noncoding RNA transcripts, including four within the Ultrabithorax transcription unit. At the blastoderm stage, the noncoding transcripts collectively span ∼75% of the 135 kb surveyed. Recombination-mediated cassette exchange was used to invert the promoter of one of the noncoding RNAs, a 23-kb transcript from the bxd domain of the bithorax complex. The resulting animals fail to make the normal bxd noncoding RNA and show no transcription across the bxd Polycomb Response Element in early embryos. The mutant flies look normal; the regulation of the bxd domain appears unaffected. Thus, the bxd noncoding RNA has no apparent function.

A novel function for the Hox gene Abd-B in the male accessory gland regulates the long-term female post-mating response in Drosophila

In insects, products of the male reproductive tract are essential for initiating and maintaining the female post-mating response (PMR). The PMR includes changes in egg laying, receptivity to courting males, and sperm storage. In Drosophila, previous studies have determined that the main cells of the male accessory gland produce some of the products required for these processes. However, nothing was known about the contribution of the gland's other secretory cell type, the secondary cells. In the course of investigating the late functions of the homeotic gene, Abdominal-B (Abd-B), we discovered that Abd-B is specifically expressed in the secondary cells of the Drosophila male accessory gland. Using an Abd-B BAC reporter coupled with a collection of genetic deletions, we discovered an enhancer from the iab-6 regulatory domain that is responsible for Abd-B expression in these cells and that apparently works independently from the segmentally regulated chromatin domains of the bithorax complex. Removal of this enhancer results in visible morphological defects in the secondary cells. We determined that mates of iab-6 mutant males show defects in long-term egg laying and suppression of receptivity, and that products of the secondary cells are influential during sperm competition. Many of these phenotypes seem to be caused by a defect in the storage and gradual release of sex peptide in female mates of iab-6 mutant males. We also found that Abd-B expression in the secondary cells contributes to glycosylation of at least three accessory gland proteins: ovulin (Acp26Aa), CG1656, and CG1652. Our results demonstrate that long-term post-mating changes observed in mated females are not solely induced by main cell secretions, as previously believed, but that secondary cells also play an important role in male fertility by extending the female PMR. Overall, these discoveries provide new insights into how these two cell types cooperate to produce and maintain a robust female PMR.

Enhancer trap infidelity in Drosophila optomotor-blind

Reporter gene activity in enhancer trap lines is often implicitly assumed to mirror quite faithfully the endogenous expression of the "trapped" gene, even though there are numerous examples of enhancer trap infidelity. optomotor-blind (omb) is a 160 kb gene in which 16 independent P-element enhancer trap insertions of three different types have been mapped in a range of more than 60 kb. We have determined the expression pattern of these elements in wing, eye-antennal and leg imaginal discs as well as in the pupal tergites. We noted that one pGawB insertion (omb (P4) ) selectively failed to report parts of the omb pattern even though the missing pattern elements were apparent in all other 15 lines. We ruled out that omb (P4) was defective in the Gal4 promoter region or had inactivated genomic enhancers in the integration process. We propose that the Gal4 reporter gene in pGawB may be sensitive to orientation or promoter proximity effects.

abd-A regulation by the iab-8 noncoding RNA

The homeotic genes in Drosophila melanogaster are aligned on the chromosome in the order of the body segments that they affect. The genes affecting the more posterior segments repress the more anterior genes. This posterior dominance rule must be qualified in the case of abdominal-A (abd-A) repression by Abdominal-B (Abd-B). Animals lacking Abd-B show ectopic expression of abd-A in the epidermis of the eighth abdominal segment, but not in the central nervous system. Repression in these neuronal cells is accomplished by a 92 kb noncoding RNA. This “iab-8 RNA” produces a micro RNA to repress abd-A, but also has a second, redundant repression mechanism that acts only “in cis.” Transcriptional interference with the abd-A promoter is the most likely mechanism.

Although long, noncoding RNAs have been found in many organisms, it has been difficult to assign to them any molecular function. The homeotic gene clusters in the fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster, contain many such noncoding RNAs. We have characterized one such noncoding RNA, a 92 kb transcription unit from within the bithorax complex. This transcript, called the iab-8 ncRNA, is made in the cells of the central nervous system in the eighth abdominal segment, along with the homeotic transcription factor Abdominal-B. Another homeotic transcription factor, abdominal-A, is repressed in these cells. It has generally been assumed that abdominal-A repression in these cells is mediated by the Abdominal-B protein. However, here we show that it is not Abdominal-B that represses abdominal-A, but the iab-8 ncRNA. This repression is accomplished by two redundant mechanisms; the iab-8 precursor produces a micro RNA, which targets the abdominal-A mRNA, and iab-8 transcription interferes with the abdominal-A promoter, which lies just downstream of the iab-8 ncRNA poly(A) site.

Transcription factor binding site redundancy in embryonic enhancers of the Drosophila bithorax complex

The molecular control of gene expression in development is mediated through the activity of embryonic enhancer cis-regulatory modules. This activity is determined by the combination of repressor and activator transcription factors that bind at specific DNA sequences in the enhancer. A proposed mechanism to ensure a high fidelity of transcriptional output is functional redundancy between closely spaced binding sites within an enhancer. Here I show that at the bithorax complex in Drosophila there is selective redundancy for both repressor and activator factor binding sites in vivo. The absence of compensatory binding sites is responsible for two rare gain-of-function mutations in the complex.

Molecular dissection of cis-regulatory modules at the Drosophila bithorax complex reveals critical transcription factor signature motifs

At the Drosophila melanogaster bithorax complex (BX-C) over 330kb of intergenic DNA is responsible for directing the transcription of just three homeotic (Hox) genes during embryonic development. A number of distinct enhancer cis-regulatory modules (CRMs) are responsible for controlling the specific expression patterns of the Hox genes in the BX-C. While it has proven possible to identify orthologs of known BX-C CRMs in different Drosophila species using overall sequence conservation, this approach has not proven sufficiently effective for identifying novel CRMs or defining the key functional sequences within enhancer CRMs. Here we demonstrate that the specific spatial clustering of transcription factor (TF) binding sites is important for BX-C enhancer activity. A bioinformatic search for combinations of putative TF binding sites in the BX-C suggests that simple clustering of binding sites is frequently not indicative of enhancer activity. However, through molecular dissection and evolutionary comparison across the Drosophila genus we discovered that specific TF binding site clustering patterns are an important feature of three known BX-C enhancers. Sub-regions of the defined IAB5 and IAB7b enhancers were both found to contain an evolutionarily conserved signature motif of clustered TF binding sites which is critical for the functional activity of the enhancers. Together, these results indicate that the spatial organization of specific activator and repressor binding sites within BX-C enhancers is of greater importance than overall sequence conservation and is indicative of enhancer functional activity.

Enhancer-promoter interference and its prevention in transgenic plants

Biotechnology has several advantages over conventional breeding for the precise engineering of gene function and provides a powerful tool for the genetic improvement of agronomically important traits in crops. In particular, it has been exploited for the improvement of multiple traits through the simultaneous introduction or stacking of several genes driven by distinct tissue-specific promoters. Since transcriptional enhancer elements have been shown to override the specificity of nearby promoters in a position- and orientation-independent manner, the co-existence of multiple enhancers/promoters within a single transgenic construct could be problematic as it has the potential to cause the mis-expression of transgene product(s). In order to develop strategies with, which to prevent such interference, a clear understanding of the mechanisms underlying enhancer-mediated activation of target promoters, as well as the identification of DNA sequences that function to block these interactions in plants, will be necessary. To date, little is known concerning enhancer function in plants and only a very limited number of enhancer-blocking insulators that operate in plant species have been identified. In this review, we discuss the current knowledge surrounding enhancer-promoter interactions, as well as possible means of minimizing such interference during plant transformation experiments.

Gene expression in time and space: additive vs hierarchical organization of cis-regulatory regions

In higher eukaryotes, individual genes are often intermingled with other genes and spread out across tens to hundreds of kilobases, even though only small portions of their sequence are devoted to protein coding. Yet, in this seemingly extended and tangled mess, the cell is able to precisely regulate gene expression in both time and space. Over the past few decades, numerous elements, like enhancers, silencers and insulators have been found that shed some light on how the precise control of gene expression is achieved. Through these discoveries, an additive model of gene expression was envisioned, where the addition of the patterning details imparted by regulatory elements would create the final pattern of gene expression. Although many genes can be described using this model, recent work in the Drosophila bithorax complex suggests that this model may be somewhat simplistic and, in fact, regulatory elements sometimes seem to communicate with each other to form a functional hierarchy that is far from additive.

Disruption of the abdominal-B promoter tethering element results in a loss of long-range enhancer-directed Hox gene expression in Drosophila

There are many examples within gene complexes of transcriptional enhancers interacting with only a subset of target promoters. A number of molecular mechanisms including promoter competition, insulators and chromatin looping are thought to play a role in regulating these interactions. At the Drosophila bithorax complex (BX-C), the IAB5 enhancer specifically drives gene expression only from the Abdominal-B (Abd-B) promoter, even though the enhancer and promoter are 55 kb apart and are separated by at least three insulators. In previous studies, we discovered that a 255 bp cis-regulatory module, the promoter tethering element (PTE), located 5′ of the Abd-B transcriptional start site is able to tether IAB5 to the Abd-B promoter in transgenic embryo assays. In this study we examine the functional role of the PTE at the endogenous BX-C using transposon-mediated mutagenesis. Disruption of the PTE by P element insertion results in a loss of enhancer-directed Abd-B expression during embryonic development and a homeotic transformation of abdominal segments. A partial deletion of the PTE and neighboring upstream genomic sequences by imprecise excision of the P element also results in a similar loss of Abd-B expression in embryos. These results demonstrate that the PTE is an essential component of the regulatory network at the BX-C and is required in vivo to mediate specific long-range enhancer-promoter interactions.

Initiator elements function to determine the activity state of BX-C enhancers

A >300 kb cis-regulatory region is required for the proper expression of the three bithorax complex (BX-C) homeotic genes. Based on genetic and transgenic analysis, a model has been proposed in which the numerous BX-C cis-regulatory elements are spatially restricted through the activation or repression of parasegment-specific chromatin domains. Particular early embryonic enhancers, called initiators, have been proposed to control this complex process. Here, in order to better understand the process of domain activation, we have undertaken a systematic in situ dissection of the iab-6 cis-regulatory domain using a new method, called InSIRT. Using this method, we create and genetically characterize mutations affecting iab-6 function, including mutations specifically modifying the iab-6 initiator. Through our mutagenesis of the iab-6 initiator, we provide strong evidence that initiators function not to directly control homeotic gene expression but rather as domain control centers to determine the activity state of the enhancers and silencers within a cis-regulatory domain.

Understanding how genes become activated is one of the primary areas of research in modern biology. In order to decipher the DNA components required for this process, scientists have traditionally turned to transgenic reporter assays, where DNA elements are removed from their native environment and placed next to a simplified reporter gene to monitor transcriptional activation. Although this approach is powerful, it can result in artifacts stemming from the channelization of regulatory element activities into predetermined classes. In this manuscript, we investigate the biological role of elements from the Drosophila bithorax complex, called initiators. In transgenic assays, these elements have been categorized as enhancers. However, genetic analysis suggests that, in situ, these elements perform a far more complex function. Here, using a new method to repeatedly target a genetic locus for mutagenesis, we show that initiators function as control elements that coordinate the activity of nearby enhancers and silencers. Overall, our study highlights how gene expression can be controlled through a hierarchical arrangement of cis-regulatory elements.

Polycomb preferentially targets stalled promoters of coding and noncoding transcripts

The Polycomb group (PcG) and Trithorax group (TrxG) of proteins are required for stable and heritable maintenance of repressed and active gene expression states. Their antagonistic function on gene control, repression for PcG and activity for TrxG, is mediated by binding to chromatin and subsequent epigenetic modification of target loci. Despite our broad knowledge about composition and enzymatic activities of the protein complexes involved, our understanding still lacks important mechanistic detail and a comprehensive view on target genes. In this study we use an extensive data set of ChIP-seq, RNA-seq, and genome-wide detection of transcription start sites (TSSs) to identify and analyze thousands of binding sites for the PcG proteins and Trithorax from a Drosophila S2 cell line. In addition of finding a preference for stalled promoter regions of annotated genes, we uncover many intergenic PcG binding sites coinciding with nonannotated TSSs. Interestingly, this set includes previously unknown promoters for primary transcripts of microRNA genes, thereby expanding the scope of Polycomb control to noncoding RNAs essential for development, apoptosis, and growth.

Selective interactions of boundaries with upstream region of Abd-B promoter in Drosophila bithorax complex and role of dCTCF in this process

Expression of the genes Ubx, abd-A, and Abd-B of the bithorax complex depends on its cis-regulatory region, which is divided into discrete functional domains (iab). Boundary/insulator elements, named Mcp, Fab-6, Fab-7 and Fab-8 (PTS/F8), have been identified at the borders of the iab domains. Recently, binding sites for a Drosophila homolog of the vertebrate insulator protein CTCF have been identified in Mcp, Fab-6 and Fab-8 and also in several regions that correspond to predicted boundaries, Fab-3 and Fab-4 in particular. Taking into account the inability of the yeast GAL4 activator to stimulate the white promoter when the activator and the promoter are separated by a 5-kb yellow gene, we have tested functional interactions between the boundaries. The results show that all dCTCF-containing boundaries interact with each other. However, inactivation of dCTCF binding sites in Mcp, Fab-6 and PTS/F8 only partially reduces their ability to interact, suggesting the presence of additional protein(s) supporting distant interactions between the boundaries. Interestingly, only Fab-6, Fab-7 (which contains no dCTCF binding sites) and PTS/F8 interact with the upstream region of the Abd-B promoter. Thus, the boundaries might be involved in supporting the specific interactions between iab enhancers and promoters of the bithorax complex.

CtBP levels control intergenic transcripts, PHO/YY1 DNA binding, and PcG recruitment to DNA

Carboxy-terminal binding protein (CtBP) is a well-known corepressor of several DNA binding transcription factors in Drosophila as well as in mammals. CtBP is implicated in Polycomb Group (PcG) complex-mediated transcriptional repression because it can bind to some PcG proteins, and mutation of the ctbp gene in flies results in lost PcG protein recruitment to Polycomb Response Elements (PREs) and lost PcG repression. However, the mechanism of reduced PcG DNA binding in CtBP mutant backgrounds is unknown. We show here that in a Drosophila CtBP mutant background, intergenic transcripts are induced across several PRE sequences and this corresponds to reduced DNA binding by PcG proteins Pleiohomeotic (PHO) and Polycomb (Pc), and reduced trimethylation of histone H3 on lysine 27, a hallmark of PcG repression. Restoration of CtBP levels by expression of a CtBP transgene results in repression of intergenic transcripts, restored PcG binding, and elevated trimethylation of H3 on lysine 27. Our results support a model in which CtBP regulates expression of intergenic transcripts that controls DNA binding by PcG proteins and subsequent histone modifications and transcriptional activity.

Chromatin insulator and the promoter targeting sequence modulate the timing of long-range enhancer-promoter interactions in the Drosophila embryo

The homeotic genes are essential to the patterning of the anterior-posterior axis along the developing Drosophila embryo. The expression timing and levels of these genes are crucial for the correct specification of segmental identity. The Abdominal-B (Abd-B) gene is first detected in the most posterior abdominal segments at high levels and gradually appears in progressively anterior abdominal segments in lower amounts. Regulatory mutations affecting this expression pattern produce homeotic transformations in the abdomen. The promoter targeting sequences (PTS) from Abd-B locus overcome the enhancer blocking effect of insulators and facilitate long-range enhancer-promoter interactions in transgenic flies (1, 2). In this study, we found that transgene activation by the IAB5 enhancer can be delayed by inserting a 9.5 kb 3' Abd-B regulatory region containing the Frontabdominal-8 (Fab-8) insulator and the PTS element. We found that the delay is caused by the PTS and an insulator, and it is not specific to the enhancer or the promoter tested. Based on these findings, we hypothesize that the delay of remote enhancers is responsible for the Abd-B expression pattern, which is at least in part due to the regulatory activities of the PTS elements and chromatin boundaries.

Cis-regulation in the Drosophila Bithorax Complex

The discovery of the first homeotic mutation by Calvin Bridges in 1915 profoundly influenced the way we think about developmental processes. Although many mutations modify or deform morphological structures, homeotic mutations cause a spectacular phenotype in which a morphological structure develops like a copy of a structure that is normally found elsewhere on an organism's body plan. This is best illustrated in Drosophila where homeotic mutations were first discovered. For example, Antennapedia mutants have legs developing on their head instead of antennae. Because a mutation in a single gene creates such complete structures, homeotic genes were proposed to be key "selector genes" regulating the initiation of a developmental program. According to this model, once a specific developmental program is initiated (i.e., antenna or leg), it can be executed by downstream "realizator genes" independent of its location along the body axis. Consistent with this idea, homeotic genes have been shown to encode transcription factor proteins that control the activity of the many downstream targets to "realize" a developmental program. Here, we will review the first and perhaps, best characterized homeotic complex, the Bithorax Complex (BX-C).

Modulation of chromatin boundary activities by nucleosome-remodeling activities in Drosophila melanogaster

Chromatin boundaries facilitate independent gene regulation by insulating genes from the effects of enhancers or organized chromatin. However, the mechanisms of boundary action are not well understood. To investigate whether boundary function depends on a higher order of chromatin organization, we examined the function of several Drosophila melanogaster insulators in cells with reduced chromatin-remodeling activities. We found that knockdown of NURF301 and ISWI, key components of the nucleosome-remodeling factor (NURF), synergistically disrupted the enhancer-blocking function of Fab7 and SF1 and augmented the function of Fab8. Mutations in Nurf301/Ebx and Iswi also affected the function of these boundaries in vivo. We further show that ISWI was localized on the endogenous Fab7 and Fab8 insulators and that NURF knockdown resulted in a marked increase in the nucleosome occupancy at these insulator sites. In contrast to the effect of NURF knockdown, reduction in dMi-2, the ATPase component of the Drosophila nucleosome-remodeling and deacetylation (NuRD) complex, augmented Fab7 and suppressed Fab8. Our results provide the first evidence that higher-order chromatin organization influences the enhancer-blocking activity of chromatin boundaries. In particular, the NURF and NuRD nucleosome-remodeling complexes may regulate Hox expression by modulating the function of boundaries in these complexes. The unique responses by different classes of boundaries to changes in the chromatin environment may be indicative of their distinct mechanisms of action, which may influence their placement in the genome and selection during evolution.

Functional evolution of cis-regulatory modules at a homeotic gene in Drosophila

It is a long-held belief in evolutionary biology that the rate of molecular evolution for a given DNA sequence is inversely related to the level of functional constraint. This belief holds true for the protein-coding homeotic (Hox) genes originally discovered in Drosophila melanogaster. Expression of the Hox genes in Drosophila embryos is essential for body patterning and is controlled by an extensive array of cis-regulatory modules (CRMs). How the regulatory modules functionally evolve in different species is not clear. A comparison of the CRMs for the Abdominal-B gene from different Drosophila species reveals relatively low levels of overall sequence conservation. However, embryonic enhancer CRMs from other Drosophila species direct transgenic reporter gene expression in the same spatial and temporal patterns during development as their D. melanogaster orthologs. Bioinformatic analysis reveals the presence of short conserved sequences within defined CRMs, representing gap and pair-rule transcription factor binding sites. One predicted binding site for the gap transcription factor KRUPPEL in the IAB5 CRM was found to be altered in Superabdominal (Sab) mutations. In Sab mutant flies, the third abdominal segment is transformed into a copy of the fifth abdominal segment. A model for KRUPPEL-mediated repression at this binding site is presented. These findings challenge our current understanding of the relationship between sequence evolution at the molecular level and functional activity of a CRM. While the overall sequence conservation at Drosophila CRMs is not distinctive from neighboring genomic regions, functionally critical transcription factor binding sites within embryonic enhancer CRMs are highly conserved. These results have implications for understanding mechanisms of gene expression during embryonic development, enhancer function, and the molecular evolution of eukaryotic regulatory modules.

Diverse transcription influences can be insulated by the Drosophila SF1 chromatin boundary

Chromatin boundaries regulate gene expression by modulating enhancer–promoter interactions and insulating transcriptional influences from organized chromatin. However, mechanistic distinctions between these two aspects of boundary function are not well understood. Here we show that SF1, a chromatin boundary located in the Drosophila Antennapedia complex (ANT-C), can insulate the transgenic miniwhite reporter from both enhancing and silencing effects of surrounding genome, a phenomenon known as chromosomal position effect or CPE. We found that the CPE-blocking activity associates with different SF1 sub-regions from a previously characterized insulator that blocks enhancers in transgenic embryos, and is independent of GAF-binding sites essential for the embryonic insulator activity. We further provide evidence that the CPE-blocking activity cannot be attributed to an enhancer-blocking activity in the developing eye. Our results suggest that SF1 contains multiple non-overlapping activities that block diverse transcriptional influences from embryonic or adult enhancers, and from positive and negative chromatin structure. Such diverse insulating capabilities are consistent with the proposed roles of SF1 to functionally separate fushi tarazu (ftz), a non-Hox gene, from the enhancers and the organized chromatin of the neighboring Hox genes.

The bithorax complex of Drosophila an exceptional Hox cluster

In his 1978 seminal paper, Ed Lewis described a series of mutations that affect the segmental identities of the segments forming the posterior two-thirds of the Drosophila body plan. In each class of mutations, particular segments developed like copies of a more-anterior segment. Genetic mapping of the different classes of mutations led to the discovery that their arrangement along the chromosome paralleled the body segments they affect along the anteroposterior axis of the fly. As all these mutations mapped to the same cytological location, he named this chromosomal locus after its founding mutation. Thus the first homeotic gene (Hox) cluster became known as the bithorax complex (BX-C). Even before the sequencing of the BX-C, the fact that these similar mutations grouped together in a cluster, lead Ed Lewis to propose that the homeotic genes arose through a gene duplication mechanism and that these clusters would be conserved through evolution. With the identification of the homeobox in the early 1980s, Lewis' first prediction was confirmed. The two cloned Drosophila homeotic genes, Antennapedia and Ultrabithorax, were indeed related genes. Using the homeobox as an entry point, homologous genes have since been cloned in many other species. Today, Hox clusters have been discovered in almost all metazoan phyla, confirming Lewis' second prediction. Remarkably, these homologous Hox genes are also arranged in clusters with their order within each cluster reflecting the anterior boundary of their domain of expression along the anterior-posterior axis of the animal. This correlation between the genomic organization and the activity along the anteroposterior body axis is known as the principle of "colinearity." The description of the BX-C inspired decades of developmental and evolutionary biology. And although this first Hox cluster led to the identification of many important features common to all Hox gene clusters, it now turns out that the fly Hox clusters are rather exceptional when compared with the Hox clusters of other animals. In this chapter, we will review the history and salient features of bithorax molecular genetics, in part, emphasizing its unique features relative to the other Hox clusters.

Analysis of chromatin boundary activity in Drosophila cells

Background

Chromatin boundaries, also known as insulators, regulate gene activity by organizing active and repressive chromatin domains and modulate enhancer-promoter interactions. However, the mechanisms of boundary action are poorly understood, in part due to our limited knowledge about insulator proteins, and a shortage of standard assays by which diverse boundaries could be compared.

Results

We report here the development of an enhancer-blocking assay for studying insulator activity in Drosophila cultured cells. We show that the activities of diverse Drosophila insulators including suHw, SF1, SF1b, Fab7 and Fab8 are supported in these cells. We further show that double stranded RNA (dsRNA)-mediated knockdown of SuHw and dCTCF factors disrupts the enhancer-blocking function of suHw and Fab8, respectively, thereby establishing the effectiveness of using RNA interference in our cell-based assay for probing insulator function.

Conclusion

The novel boundary assay provides a quantitative and efficient method for analyzing insulator mechanism and can be further exploited in genome-wide RNAi screens for insulator components. It provides a useful tool that complements the transgenic and genetic approaches for studying this important class of regulatory elements.

Functional interaction between the Fab-7 and Fab-8 boundaries and the upstream promoter region in the Drosophila Abd-B gene

Boundary elements have been found in the regulatory region of the Drosophila melanogaster Abdominal-B (Abd-B) gene, which is subdivided into a series of iab domains. The best-studied Fab-7 and Fab-8 boundaries flank the iab-7 enhancer and isolate it from the four promoters regulating Abd-B expression. Recently binding sites for the Drosophila homolog of the vertebrate insulator protein CTCF (dCTCF) were identified in the Fab-8 boundary and upstream of Abd-B promoter A, with no binding of CTCF to the Fab-7 boundary being detected either in vivo or in vitro. Taking into account the inability of the yeast GAL4 activator to stimulate the white promoter when its binding sites are separated by a 5-kb yellow gene, we have tested the functional interactions between the Fab-7 and Fab-8 boundaries and between these boundaries and the upstream promoter A region containing a dCTCF binding site. It has been found that dCTCF binding sites are essential for pairing between two Fab-8 insulators. However, a strong functional interaction between the Fab-7 and Fab-8 boundaries suggests that additional, as yet unidentified proteins are involved in long-distance interactions between them. We have also shown that Fab-7 and Fab-8 boundaries effectively interact with the upstream region of the Abd-B promoter.

How does noncoding transcription regulate Hox genes?

Noncoding RNA has arrived at centre stage in recent years with the discovery of "hidden transcriptomes" in many higher organisms. Over two decades ago, noncoding transcripts were discovered in Drosophila Hox complexes, but their function has remained elusive. Recent studies1-3 have examined the role of these noncoding RNAs in Hox gene regulation, and have generated a fierce debate as to whether the noncoding transcripts are important for silencing or activation. Here we review the evidence, and show that, by taking developmental timing into account, some of these apparently conflicting results can be resolved. We examine current models that explain these data and explore alternative interpretations.

Dynamics and interplay of nuclear architecture, genome organization, and gene expression

The organization of the genome in the nucleus of a eukaryotic cell is fairly complex and dynamic. Various features of the nuclear architecture, including compartmentalization of molecular machines and the spatial arrangement of genomic sequences, help to carry out and regulate nuclear processes, such as DNA replication, DNA repair, gene transcription, RNA processing, and mRNA transport. Compartmentalized multiprotein complexes undergo extensive modifications or exchange of protein subunits, allowing for an exquisite dynamics of structural components and functional processes of the nucleus. The architecture of the interphase nucleus is linked to the spatial arrangement of genes and gene clusters, the structure of chromatin, and the accessibility of regulatory DNA elements. In this review, we discuss recent studies that have provided exciting insight into the interplay between nuclear architecture, genome organization, and gene expression.

MicroRNAs in the Drosophila bithorax complex

The iab-4 noncoding RNA from the Drosophila bithorax complex is the substrate for a microRNA (miRNA). Gene conversion was used to delete the hairpin precursor of this miRNA; flies homozygous for this deletion are sterile. Surprisingly, this mutation complements with rearrangement breakpoint mutations that disrupt the iab-4 RNA but fails to complement with breaks mapping in the iab-5 through iab-7 regulatory regions. These breaks disrupt the iab-8 RNA, transcribed from the opposite strand. This iab-8 RNA also encodes a miRNA, detected on Northern blots, derived from the hairpin complementary to the iab-4 precursor hairpin. Ultrabithorax is a target of both miRNAs, although its repression is subtle in both cases.

New properties of Drosophila fab-7 insulator

In the Abd-B 3' cis-regulatory region, which is subdivided into a series of iab domains, boundary elements have previously been detected, including the Fab-7 element providing for the autonomous functioning of the iab-6 and iab-7 cis-regulatory domains. Here, it has been shown that a single copy of the 860-bp Fab-7 insulator effectively blocks the yellow and white enhancers. The eye and testis enhancers can stimulate the white promoter across the pair of Fab-7, which is indicative of a functional interaction between the insulators. Unexpectedly, Fab-7 has proved to lose the enhancer-blocking activity when placed near the white promoter. It seems likely that Fab-7 strengthens the relatively weak white promoter, which leads to the efficient enhancer-promoter interaction and insulator bypass.

Making connections: boundaries and insulators in Drosophila

In eukaryotes, enhancers must often exert their effect over many tens of kilobases of DNA with a choice between many different promoters. Given this situation, elements known as chromatin boundaries have evolved to prevent adventitious interactions between enhancers and promoters. The amenability of Drosophila to molecular genetics has been crucial to the discovery and analysis of these elements. Since these elements are involved in such diverse processes and show little or no sequence similarity between them, no single molecular mechanism has been identified that accounts for their activity. However, over the past approximately 5 years, evidence has accumulated suggesting that boundaries probably function through the formation of long-distance chromatin loops. These loops have been proposed to play a crucial role in both controlling enhancer-promoter interactions and packing DNA.