Multifactorial regulation of a hox target gene

γ-TuRC asymmetry induces local protofilament mismatch at the RanGTP-stimulated microtubule minus end

The γ-tubulin ring complex (γ-TuRC) is a structural template for de novo microtubule assembly from α/β-tubulin units. The isolated vertebrate γ-TuRC assumes an asymmetric, open structure deviating from microtubule geometry, suggesting that γ-TuRC closure may underlie regulation of microtubule nucleation. Here, we isolate native γ-TuRC-capped microtubules from Xenopus laevis egg extract nucleated through the RanGTP-induced pathway for spindle assembly and determine their cryo-EM structure. Intriguingly, the microtubule minus end-bound γ-TuRC is only partially closed and consequently, the emanating microtubule is locally misaligned with the γ-TuRC and asymmetric. In the partially closed conformation of the γ-TuRC, the actin-containing lumenal bridge is locally destabilised, suggesting lumenal bridge modulation in microtubule nucleation. The microtubule-binding protein CAMSAP2 specifically binds the minus end of γ-TuRC-capped microtubules, indicating that the asymmetric minus end structure may underlie recruitment of microtubule-modulating factors for γ-TuRC release. Collectively, we reveal a surprisingly asymmetric microtubule minus end protofilament organisation diverging from the regular microtubule structure, with direct implications for the kinetics and regulation of nucleation and subsequent modulation of microtubules during spindle assembly.

Dachshund acts with Abdominal-B to trigger programmed cell death in the Drosophila central nervous system at the frontiers of Abd-B expression

A striking feature of the nervous system pertains to the appearance of different neural cell subtypes at different axial levels. Studies in the Drosophila central nervous system reveal that one mechanism underlying such segmental differences pertains to the segment-specific removal of cells by programmed cell death (PCD). One group of genes involved in segment-specific PCD is the Hox homeotic genes. However, while segment-specific PCD is highly precise, Hox gene expression is evident in gradients, raising the issue of how the Hox gene function is precisely gated to trigger PCD in specific segments at the outer limits of Hox expression. The Drosophila Va neurons are initially generated in all nerve cord segments but removed by PCD in posterior segments. Va PCD is triggered by the posteriorly expressed Hox gene Abdominal-B (Abd-B). However, Va PCD is highly reproducible despite exceedingly weak Abd-B expression in the anterior frontiers of its expression. Here, we found that the transcriptional cofactor Dachshund supports Abd-B-mediated PCD in its anterior domain. In vivo bimolecular fluorescence complementation analysis lends support to the idea that the Dachshund/Abd-B interplay may involve physical interactions. These findings provide an example of how combinatorial codes of transcription factors ensure precision in Hox-mediated PCD in specific segments at the outer limits of Hox expression.

The Hox proteins Ubx and AbdA collaborate with the transcription pausing factor M1BP to regulate gene transcription

In metazoans, the pausing of RNA polymerase II at the promoter (paused Pol II) has emerged as a widespread and conserved mechanism in the regulation of gene transcription. While critical in recruiting Pol II to the promoter, the role transcription factors play in transitioning paused Pol II into productive Pol II is, however, little known. By studying how Drosophila Hox transcription factors control transcription, we uncovered a molecular mechanism that increases productive transcription. We found that the Hox proteins AbdA and Ubx target gene promoters previously bound by the transcription pausing factor M1BP, containing paused Pol II and enriched with promoter-proximal Polycomb Group (PcG) proteins, yet lacking the classical H3K27me3 PcG signature. We found that AbdA binding to M1BP-regulated genes results in reduction in PcG binding, the release of paused Pol II, increases in promoter H3K4me3 histone marks and increased gene transcription. Linking transcription factors, PcG proteins and paused Pol II states, these data identify a two-step mechanism of Hox-driven transcription, with M1BP binding leading to Pol II recruitment followed by AbdA targeting, which results in a change in the chromatin landscape and enhanced transcription.

Hox functional diversity: Novel insights from flexible motif folding and plastic protein interaction

How the formidable diversity of forms emerges from developmental and evolutionary processes is one of the most fascinating questions in biology. The homeodomain-containing Hox proteins were recognized early on as major actors in diversifying animal body plans. The molecular mechanisms underlying how this transcription factor family controls a large array of context- and cell-specific biological functions is, however, still poorly understood. Clues to functional diversity have emerged from studies exploring how Hox protein activity is controlled through interactions with PBC class proteins, also evolutionary conserved HD-containing proteins. Recent structural data and molecular dynamic simulations add further mechanistic insights into Hox protein mode of action, suggesting that flexible folding of protein motifs allows for plastic protein interaction. As we discuss in this review, these findings define a novel type of Hox-PBC interaction, weak and dynamic instead of strong and static, hence providing novel clues to understanding Hox transcriptional specificity and diversity.

Cellular and molecular insights into Hox protein action

Hox genes encode homeodomain transcription factors that control morphogenesis and have established functions in development and evolution. Hox proteins have remained enigmatic with regard to the molecular mechanisms that endow them with specific and diverse functions, and to the cellular functions that they control. Here, we review recent examples of Hox-controlled cellular functions that highlight their versatile and highly context-dependent activity. This provides the setting to discuss how Hox proteins control morphogenesis and organogenesis. We then summarise the molecular modalities underlying Hox protein function, in particular in light of current models of transcription factor function. Finally, we discuss how functional divergence between Hox proteins might be achieved to give rise to the many facets of their action.

The HOX-Apoptosis Regulatory Interplay in Development and Disease

Apoptosis is a cellular suicide program, which is on the one hand used to remove superfluous cells thereby promoting tissue or organ morphogenesis. On the other hand, the programmed killing of cells is also critical when potentially harmful cells emerge in a developing or adult organism thereby endangering survival. Due to its critical role apoptosis is tightly controlled, however so far, its regulation on the transcriptional level is less studied and understood. Hox genes, a highly conserved gene family encoding homeodomain transcription factors, have crucial roles in development. One of their prominent functions is to shape animal body plans by eliciting different developmental programs along the anterior-posterior axis. To this end, Hox proteins transcriptionally regulate numerous processes in a coordinated manner, including cell-type specification, differentiation, motility, proliferation as well as apoptosis. In this review, we will focus on how Hox proteins control organismal morphology and function by regulating the apoptotic machinery. We will first focus on well-established paradigms of Hox-apoptosis interactions and summarize how Hox transcription factors control morphological outputs and differentially shape tissues along the anterior-posterior axis by fine-tuning apoptosis in a healthy organism. We will then discuss the consequences when this interaction is disturbed and will conclude with some ideas and concepts emerging from these studies.

Hox targets and cellular functions

Hox genes are a group of genes that specify structures along the anteroposterior axis in bilaterians. Although in many cases they do so by modifying a homologous structure with a different (or no) Hox input, there are also examples of Hox genes constructing new organs with no homology in other regions of the body. Hox genes determine structures though the regulation of targets implementing cellular functions and by coordinating cell behavior. The genetic organization to construct or modify a certain organ involves both a genetic cascade through intermediate transcription factors and a direct regulation of targets carrying out cellular functions. In this review I discuss new data from genome-wide techniques, as well as previous genetic and developmental information, to describe some examples of Hox regulation of different cell functions. I also discuss the organization of genetic cascades leading to the development of new organs, mainly using Drosophila melanogaster as the model to analyze Hox function.

Tracking context-specific transcription factors regulating hox activity

BACKGROUND

Hox proteins are key developmental regulators involved in almost every embryonic tissue for specifying cell fates along longitudinal axes or during organ formation. It is thought that the panoply of Hox activities relies on interactions with tissue-, stage-, and/or cell-specific transcription factors. High-throughput approaches in yeast or cell culture systems have shown that Hox proteins bind to various types of nuclear and cytoplasmic components, illustrating their remarkable potential to influence many different cell regulatory processes. However, these approaches failed to identify a relevant number of context-specific transcriptional partners, suggesting that these interactions are hard to uncover in non-physiological conditions. Here we discuss this problematic.

RESULTS

In this review, we present intrinsic Hox molecular signatures that are probably involved in multiple (yet specific) interactions with transcriptional partners. We also recapitulate the current knowledge on Hox cofactors, highlighting the difficulty to tracking context-specific cofactors through traditional large-scale approaches.

CONCLUSION

We propose experimental approaches that will allow a better characterisation of interaction networks underlying Hox contextual activities in the next future.

Cell-type specific cis-regulatory networks: insights from Hox transcription factors

Hox proteins are a prominent class of transcription factors that specify cell and tissue identities in animal embryos. In sharp contrast to tissue-specifically expressed transcription factors, which coordinate regulatory pathways leading to the differentiation of a selected tissue, Hox proteins are active in many different cell types but are nonetheless able to differentially regulate gene expression in a context-dependent manner. This particular feature makes Hox proteins ideal candidates for elucidating the mechanisms employed by transcription factors to achieve tissue-specific functions in multi-cellular organisms. Here we discuss how the recent genome-wide identification and characterization of Hox cis-regulatory elements has provided insight concerning the molecular mechanisms underlying the high spatiotemporal specificity of Hox proteins. In particular, it was shown that Hox transcriptional outputs depend on the cell-type specific interplay of the different Hox proteins with co-regulatory factors as well as with epigenetic modifiers. Based on these observations it becomes clear that cell-type specific approaches are required for dissecting the tissue-specific Hox regulatory code. Identification and comparative analysis of Hox cis-regulatory elements driving target gene expression in different cell types in combination with analyses on how cofactors, epigenetic modifiers and protein-protein interactions mediate context-dependent Hox function will elucidate the mechanistic basis of tissue-specific gene regulation.

Disentangling the many layers of eukaryotic transcriptional regulation

Regulation of gene expression in eukaryotes is an extremely complex process. In this review, we break down several critical steps, emphasizing new data and techniques that have expanded current gene regulatory models. We begin at the level of DNA sequence where cis-regulatory modules (CRMs) provide important regulatory information in the form of transcription factor (TF) binding sites. In this respect, CRMs function as instructional platforms for the assembly of gene regulatory complexes. We discuss multiple mechanisms controlling complex assembly, including cooperative DNA binding, combinatorial codes, and CRM architecture. The second section of this review places CRM assembly in the context of nucleosomes and condensed chromatin. We discuss how DNA accessibility and histone modifications contribute to TF function. Lastly, new advances in chromosomal mapping techniques have provided increased understanding of intra- and interchromosomal interactions. We discuss how these topological maps influence gene regulatory models.

The cis-regulatory code of Hox function in Drosophila

Precise gene expression is a fundamental aspect of organismal function and depends on the combinatorial interplay of transcription factors (TFs) with cis-regulatory DNA elements. While much is known about TF function in general, our understanding of their cell type-specific activities is still poor. To address how widely expressed transcriptional regulators modulate downstream gene activity with high cellular specificity, we have identified binding regions for the Hox TF Deformed (Dfd) in the Drosophila genome. Our analysis of architectural features within Hox cis-regulatory response elements (HREs) shows that HRE structure is essential for cell type-specific gene expression. We also find that Dfd and Ultrabithorax (Ubx), another Hox TF specifying different morphological traits, interact with non-overlapping regions in vivo, despite their similar DNA binding preferences. While Dfd and Ubx HREs exhibit comparable design principles, their motif compositions and motif-pair associations are distinct, explaining the highly selective interaction of these Hox proteins with the regulatory environment. Thus, our results uncover the regulatory code imprinted in Hox enhancers and elucidate the mechanisms underlying functional specificity of TFs in vivo.

Antagonistic regulation of apoptosis and differentiation by the Cut transcription factor represents a tumor-suppressing mechanism in Drosophila

Apoptosis is essential to prevent oncogenic transformation by triggering self-destruction of harmful cells, including those unable to differentiate. However, the mechanisms linking impaired cell differentiation and apoptosis during development and disease are not well understood. Here we report that the Drosophila transcription factor Cut coordinately controls differentiation and repression of apoptosis via direct regulation of the pro-apoptotic gene reaper. We also demonstrate that this regulatory circuit acts in diverse cell lineages to remove uncommitted precursor cells in status nascendi and thereby interferes with their potential to develop into cancer cells. Consistent with the role of Cut homologues in controlling cell death in vertebrates, we find repression of apoptosis regulators by Cux1 in human cancer cells. Finally, we present evidence that suggests that other lineage-restricted specification factors employ a similar mechanism to put the brakes on the oncogenic process.

Apoptosis is a highly conserved cellular function to remove excessive or unstable cells in diverse developmental processes and disease-responses. An important example is the elimination of cells unable to differentiate, which have the potential to generate tumors. Despite the significance of this process, the mechanisms coupling loss of differentiation and apoptosis have remained elusive. Using cell-type specification in Drosophila as a model, we now identify a conserved regulatory logic that underlies cell-type specific removal of uncommitted cells by apoptosis. We find that the transcription factor Cut activates differentiation, while it simultaneously represses cell death via the direct regulation of a pro-apoptotic gene. We show that this regulatory interaction occurs in many diverse cell types and is essential for normal development. Using in vivo Drosophila cancer models, we demonstrate that apoptosis activation in differentiation-compromised cells is an immediate-early cancer prevention mechanism. Importantly, we show that this type of regulatory wiring is also found in vertebrates and that other cell-type specification factors might employ a similar mechanism for tumor suppression. Thus, our findings suggest that the coupling of differentiation and apoptosis by individual transcription factors is a widely used and evolutionarily conserved cancer prevention module, which is hard-wired into the developmental program.

Activity of transcription factor JACKDAW is essential for SHR/SCR-dependent activation of SCARECROW and MAGPIE and is modulated by reciprocal interactions with MAGPIE, SCARECROW and SHORT ROOT

Two GRAS family transcription factors, SHORT-ROOT (SHR) and SCARECROW (SCR), are required for ground tissue and quiescent center formation in Arabidopsis roots. The action of SHR and SCR is regulated by two INDETERMINATE DOMAIN (IDD) family proteins, JACKDAW (JKD) and MAGPIE (MGP). Although the reciprocal interaction of these transcription factors is considered to be involved in the modulation of SHR and SCR action by JKD and MGP, the underlying mechanism remains unclear. In this study, we use a transient assay with Arabidopsis culture cells to show that the physical interaction of these transcription factors modulate their transcriptional activity. Transient expression of LUC reporter genes with the proximal sequences upstream from the ATG codon of SCR and MGP in protoplasts were activated by JKD. Moreover, promoter activities were enhanced further by the addition of SHR and SCR to JKD, but not by the combination of SHR and SCR in the absence of JKD. Yeast one-hybrid analysis showed that JKD binds to the SCR and MGP promoter sequences, indicating the existence of another binding sequences of JKD different from the previously determined IDD binding sequence. Our findings suggest that JKD directly regulates SCR and MGP expression in cooperation with SHR, SCR and MGP.

Functional dissection of the Hox protein Abdominal-B in Drosophila cell culture

Hox transcription factors regulate the morphogenesis along the anterior-posterior (A/P) body axis through the interaction with small cis-regulatory modules (CRMs) of their target gene, however so far very few Hox CRMs are known and have been analyzed in detail. In this study we have identified a new Hox CRM, ct340, which guides the expression of the cell type specification gene cut (ct) in the posterior spiracle under the direct control of the Hox protein Abdominal-B (Abd-B). Using the ct340 enhancer activity as readout, an efficient cloning system to generate VP16 activation domain fusion protein was developed to unambiguously test protein-DNA interaction in Drosophila cell culture. By functionally dissecting the Abd-B protein, new features of Abd-B dependent target gene regulation were detected. Due to its easy adaptability, this system can be generally used to map functional domains within sequence-specific transcriptional factors in Drosophila cell culture, and thus provide preliminary knowledge of the protein functional domain structure for further in vivo analysis.

Insights into Hox protein function from a large scale combinatorial analysis of protein domains

Protein function is encoded within protein sequence and protein domains. However, how protein domains cooperate within a protein to modulate overall activity and how this impacts functional diversification at the molecular and organism levels remains largely unaddressed. Focusing on three domains of the central class Drosophila Hox transcription factor AbdominalA (AbdA), we used combinatorial domain mutations and most known AbdA developmental functions as biological readouts to investigate how protein domains collectively shape protein activity. The results uncover redundancy, interactivity, and multifunctionality of protein domains as salient features underlying overall AbdA protein activity, providing means to apprehend functional diversity and accounting for the robustness of Hox-controlled developmental programs. Importantly, the results highlight context-dependency in protein domain usage and interaction, allowing major modifications in domains to be tolerated without general functional loss. The non-pleoitropic effect of domain mutation suggests that protein modification may contribute more broadly to molecular changes underlying morphological diversification during evolution, so far thought to rely largely on modification in gene cis-regulatory sequences.

In silico characterization of the neural alpha tubulin gene promoter of the sea urchin embryo Paracentrotus lividus by phylogenetic footprinting

During Paracentrotus lividus sea urchin embryo development one alpha and one beta tubulin genes are expressed specifically in the neural cells and they are early end output of the gene regulatory network that specifies the neural commitment. In this paper we have used a comparative genomics approach to identify conserved regulatory elements in the P. lividus neural alpha tubulin gene. To this purpose, we have first isolated a genomic clone containing the entire gene plus 4.5 Kb of 5' upstream sequences. Then, we have shown by gene transfer experiments that its non-coding region drives the spatio-temporal gene expression corresponding substantially to that of the endogenous gene. In addition, we have identified by genome and EST sequence analysis the S. purpuratus alpha tubulin orthologous gene and we propose a revised annotation of some tubulin family members. Moreover, by computational techniques we delineate at least three putative regulatory regions located both in the upstream region and in the first intron containing putative binding sites for Forkhead and Nkx transcription factor families.

Genomic approaches to understanding Hox gene function

For many years, biologists have sought to understand how the homeodomain-containing transcriptional regulators encoded by Hox genes are able to control the development of animal morphology. Almost a century of genetics and several decades of molecular biology have defined the conserved organization of homeotic gene clusters in animals and the basic molecular properties of Hox transcription factors. In contrast to these successes, we remain relatively ignorant of how Hox proteins find their target genes in the genome or what sets of genes a Hox protein regulates to direct morphogenesis. The recent deployment of genomic methods, such as whole transcriptome mRNA expression profiling and genome-wide analysis of protein-DNA interactions, begins to shed light on these issues. Results from such studies, principally in the fruit fly, indicate that Hox proteins control the expression of hundreds, if not thousands, of genes throughout the gene regulatory network and that, in many cases, the effects on the expression of individual genes may be quite subtle. Hox proteins regulate both high-level effectors, including other transcription factors and signaling molecules, as well as the cytodifferentiation genes or Realizators at the bottom of regulatory hierarchies. Insights emerging from mapping Hox binding sites in the genome begin to suggest that Hox binding may be strongly influenced by chromatin accessibility rather than binding site affinity. If this is the case, it indicates we need to refocus our efforts at understanding Hox function toward the dynamics of gene regulatory networks and chromatin epigenetics.

The nude mutant gene Foxn1 is a HOXC13 regulatory target during hair follicle and nail differentiation

Among the Hox genes, homeobox C13 (Hoxc13) has been shown to be essential for proper hair shaft differentiation, as Hoxc13 gene-targeted (Hoxc13(tm1Mrc)) mice completely lack external hair. Because of the remarkable overt phenotypic parallels to the Foxn1(nu) (nude) mutant mice, we sought to determine whether Hoxc13 and forkhead box N1 (Foxn1) might act in a common pathway of hair follicle (HF) differentiation. We show that the alopecia exhibited by both the Hoxc13(tm1Mrc) and Foxn1(nu) mice is because of strikingly similar defects in hair shaft differentiation and that both mutants suffer from a severe nail dystrophy. These phenotypic similarities are consistent with the extensive overlap between Hoxc13 and Foxn1 expression patterns in the HF and the nail matrix. Furthermore, DNA microarray analysis of skin from Hoxc13(tm1Mrc) mice identified Foxn1 as significantly downregulated along with numerous hair keratin genes. This Foxn1 downregulation apparently reflects the loss of direct transcriptional control by HOXC13 as indicated by our results obtained through co-transfection and chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) assays. As presented in the discussion, these data support a regulatory model of keratinocyte differentiation in which HOXC13-dependent activation of Foxn1 is part of a regulatory cascade controlling the expression of terminal differentiation markers.

Epigenetic control of Hox genes during neurogenesis, development, and disease

The process of mammalian development is established through multiple complex molecular pathways acting in harmony at the genomic, proteomic, and epigenomic levels. The outcome is profoundly influenced by the role of epigenetics through transcriptional regulation of key developmental genes. Epigenetics refer to changes in gene expression that are inherited through mechanisms other than the underlying DNA sequence, which control cellular morphology and identity. It is currently well accepted that epigenetics play central roles in regulating mammalian development and cellular differentiation by dictating cell fate decisions via regulation of specific genes. Among these genes are the Hox family members, which are master regulators of embryonic development and stem cell differentiation and their mis-regulation leads to human disease and cancer. The Hox gene discovery led to the establishment of a fundamental role for basic genetics in development. Hox genes encode for highly conserved transcription factors from flies to humans that organize the anterior-posterior body axis during embryogenesis. Hox gene expression during development is tightly regulated in a spatiotemporal manner, partly by chromatin structure and epigenetic modifications. Here, we review the impact of different epigenetic mechanisms in development and stem cell differentiation with a clear focus on the regulation of Hox genes.

Mechanisms of transcription factor selectivity

The initiation of transcription is regulated by transcription factors (TFs) binding to DNA response elements (REs). How do TFs recognize specific binding sites among the many similar ones available in the genome? Recent research has illustrated that even a single nucleotide substitution can alter the selective binding of TFs to coregulators, that prior binding events can lead to selective DNA binding, and that selectivity is influenced by the availability of binding sites in the genome. Here, we combine structural insights with recent genomics screens to address the problem of TF-DNA interaction specificity. The emerging picture of selective binding site sequence recognition and TF activation involves three major factors: the cellular network, protein and DNA as dynamic conformational ensembles and the tight packing of multiple TFs and coregulators on stretches of regulatory DNA. The classification of TF recognition mechanisms based on these factors impacts our understanding of how transcription initiation is regulated.

Multi-step control of muscle diversity by Hox proteins in the Drosophila embryo

Hox transcription factors control many aspects of animal morphogenetic diversity. The segmental pattern of Drosophila larval muscles shows stereotyped variations along the anteroposterior body axis. Each muscle is seeded by a founder cell and the properties specific to each muscle reflect the expression by each founder cell of a specific combination of 'identity' transcription factors. Founder cells originate from asymmetric division of progenitor cells specified at fixed positions. Using the dorsal DA3 muscle lineage as a paradigm, we show here that Hox proteins play a decisive role in establishing the pattern of Drosophila muscles by controlling the expression of identity transcription factors, such as Nautilus and Collier (Col), at the progenitor stage. High-resolution analysis, using newly designed intron-containing reporter genes to detect primary transcripts, shows that the progenitor stage is the key step at which segment-specific information carried by Hox proteins is superimposed on intrasegmental positional information. Differential control of col transcription by the Antennapedia and Ultrabithorax/Abdominal-A paralogs is mediated by separate cis-regulatory modules (CRMs). Hox proteins also control the segment-specific number of myoblasts allocated to the DA3 muscle. We conclude that Hox proteins both regulate and contribute to the combinatorial code of transcription factors that specify muscle identity and act at several steps during the muscle-specification process to generate muscle diversity.

Cellular analysis of newly identified Hox downstream genes in Drosophila

Hox genes code for conserved homeodomain transcription factors, which act as regional regulators for the specification of segmental identities along the anterior-posterior axis in all animals studied. They execute their function mainly through the activation or repression of their downstream genes. We have recently identified a large number of genes to be directly or indirectly targeted by Hox proteins through gene expression profiling in the model organism Drosophila. However, the cell-specific regulation of these downstream genes and the functional significance of the regulation are largely unknown. We have validated and functionally studied many of the newly identified downstream genes of the Hox proteins Deformed (Dfd) and Abdominal-B (Abd-B), and provide evidence that Hox proteins regulate a diverse group of downstream genes, from transcription factors to realisators with major and minor roles during morphogenesis.