Tissue specificity of hedgehog repression by the Polycomb group during Drosophila melanogaster development

A genetic approach to the recruitment of PRC2 at the HoxD locus

Polycomb group (PcG) proteins are essential for the repression of key factors during early development. In Drosophila, the polycomb repressive complexes (PRC) associate with defined polycomb response DNA elements (PREs). In mammals, however, the mechanisms underlying polycomb recruitment at targeted loci are poorly understood. We have used an in vivo approach to identify DNA sequences of importance for the proper recruitment of polycomb proteins at the HoxD locus. We report that various genomic re-arrangements of the gene cluster do not strongly affect PRC2 recruitment and that relatively small polycomb interacting sequences appear necessary and sufficient to confer polycomb recognition and targeting to ectopic loci. In addition, a high GC content, while not sufficient to recruit PRC2, may help its local spreading. We discuss the importance of PRC2 recruitment over Hox gene clusters in embryonic stem cells, for their subsequent coordinated transcriptional activation during development.

Hox genes are essential for the proper organization of structures along the developing vertebrate body axis. These genes must be activated at a precise time and their premature transcription is deleterious to the organism. Early on, Hox gene clusters are covered by Polycomb Repressive protein Complexes (PRCs), which help keep these genes silent. However, the mechanism(s) that selectively recruit PRCs to these particular genomic loci remains elusive. We have used a collection of mutant mice carrying a set of deletions inside and outside the HoxD cluster to try and detect the presence of any DNA sequence of particular importance in this mechanism. We conclude that a range of low affinity sequences synergize to recruit PRCs over the gene cluster, which makes this process very robust and resistant to genetic perturbations.

Polycomb silencing of the Drosophila 4E-BP gene regulates imaginal disc cell growth

Polycomb group (PcG) proteins are best known for their role in maintaining stable, mitotically heritable silencing of the homeotic (HOX) genes during development. In addition to loss of homeotic gene silencing, some PcG mutants also have small imaginal discs. These include mutations in E(z), Su(z)12, esc and escl, which encode Polycomb repressive complex 2 (PRC2) subunits. The cause of this phenotype is not known, but the human homologs of PRC2 subunits have been shown to play a role in cell proliferation, are over-expressed in many tumors, and appear to be required for tumor proliferation. Here we show that the small imaginal disc phenotype arises, at least in part, from a cell growth defect. In homozygous E(z) mutants, imaginal disc cells are smaller than cells in normally proliferating discs. We show that the Thor gene, which encodes eIF4E-binding protein (4E-BP), the evolutionarily conserved inhibitor of cap-dependent translation and potent inhibitor of cell growth, is involved in the development of this phenotype. The Thor promoter region contains DNA binding motifs for transcription factors found in well-characterized Polycomb response elements (PREs), including PHO/PHOL, GAGA factor, and others, suggesting that Thor may be a direct target of Polycomb silencing. We present chromatin immunoprecipitation evidence that PcG proteins are bound to the Thor 5' region in vivo. The Thor gene is normally repressed in imaginal discs, but Thor mRNA and 4E-BP protein levels are elevated in imaginal discs of PRC2 subunit mutant larvae. Deletion of the Thor gene in E(z) mutants partially restores imaginal disc size toward wild-type and results in an increase in the fraction of larvae that pupariate. These results thus suggest that PcG proteins can directly modulate cell growth in Drosophila, in part by regulating Thor expression.

Polycomb group response elements in Drosophila and vertebrates

Polycomb group genes (PcG) encode a group of about 16 proteins that were first identified in Drosophila as repressors of homeotic genes. PcG proteins are present in all metazoans and are best characterized as transcriptional repressors. In Drosophila, these proteins are known as epigenetic regulators because they remember, but do not establish, the patterned expression state of homeotic genes throughout development. PcG proteins, in general, are not DNA binding proteins, but act in protein complexes to repress transcription at specific target genes. How are PcG proteins recruited to the DNA? In Drosophila, there are specific regulatory DNA elements called Polycomb group response elements (PREs) that bring PcG protein complexes to the DNA. Drosophila PREs are made up of binding sites for a complex array of DNA binding proteins. Functional PRE assays in transgenes have shown that PREs act in the context of other regulatory DNA and PRE activity is highly dependent on genomic context. Drosophila PREs tend to regulate genes with a complex array of regulatory DNA in a cell or tissue-specific fashion and it is the interplay between regulatory DNA that dictates PRE function. In mammals, PcG proteins are more diverse and there are multiple ways to recruit PcG complexes, including RNA-mediated recruitment. In this review, we discuss evidence for PREs in vertebrates and explore similarities and differences between Drosophila and vertebrate PREs.

Enhancer-PRE communication contributes to the expansion of gene expression domains in proliferating primordia

Trithorax-group and Polycomb-group proteins interact with chromosomal elements, termed PRE/TREs, to ensure stable heritable maintenance of the transcriptional state of nearby genes. Regulatory elements that bind both groups of proteins are termed maintenance elements (MEs). Some of these MEs maintain the initial activated transcriptional state of a nearby reporter gene through several rounds of mitosis during development. Here, we show that expression of hedgehog in the posterior compartment of the Drosophila wing results from the communication between a previously defined ME and a nearby cis-regulatory element termed the C enhancer. The C enhancer integrates the activities of the Notch and Hedgehog signalling pathways and, from the early wing primordium stage, drives expression to a thin stripe in the posterior compartment that corresponds to the dorsal-ventral compartment boundary. The ME maintains the initial activated transcriptional state conferred by the C enhancer and contributes to the expansion, by growth, of its expression domain throughout the posterior compartment. Communication between the ME and the C enhancer also contributes to repression of gene expression in anterior cells. Most interestingly, we present evidence that enhancers and MEs of different genes are interchangeable modules whose communication is involved in restricting and expanding the domains of gene expression. Our results emphasize the modular role of MEs in regulation of gene expression within growing tissues.

A conserved function of the chromatin ATPase Kismet in the regulation of hedgehog expression

The development of the Drosophila melanogaster wing depends on its subdivision into anterior and posterior compartments, which constitute two independent cell lineages since their origin in the embryonic ectoderm. The anterior-posterior compartment boundary is the place where signaling by the Hedgehog pathway takes place, and this requires pathway activation in anterior cells by ligand expressed exclusively in posterior cells. Several mechanisms ensure the confinement of hedgehog expression to posterior cells, including repression by Cubitus interruptus, the co-repressor Groucho and Master of thick veins. In this work we identified Kismet, a chromodomain-containing protein of the SNF2-like family of ATPases, as a novel component of the hedgehog transcriptional repression mechanism in anterior compartment cells. In kismet mutants, hedgehog is ectopically expressed in a domain of anterior cells close to the anterior-posterior compartment boundary, causing inappropriate activation of the pathway and changes in the development of the central region of the wing. The contribution of Kismet to the silencing of hedgehog expression is limited to anterior cells with low levels of the repressor form of Cubitus interruptus. We also show that knockdown of CHD8, the kismet homolog in Xenopus tropicalis, is also associated with ectopic sonic hedgehog expression and up-regulation of one of its target genes in the eye, Pax2, indicating the evolutionary conservation of Kismet/CHD8 function in negatively controlling hedgehog expression.

Alternative epigenetic chromatin states of polycomb target genes

Polycomb (PcG) regulation has been thought to produce stable long-term gene silencing. Genomic analyses in Drosophila and mammals, however, have shown that it targets many genes, which can switch state during development. Genetic evidence indicates that critical for the active state of PcG target genes are the histone methyltransferases Trithorax (TRX) and ASH1. Here we analyze the repertoire of alternative states in which PcG target genes are found in different Drosophila cell lines and the role of PcG proteins TRX and ASH1 in controlling these states. Using extensive genome-wide chromatin immunoprecipitation analysis, RNAi knockdowns, and quantitative RT-PCR, we show that, in addition to the known repressed state, PcG targets can reside in a transcriptionally active state characterized by formation of an extended domain enriched in ASH1, the N-terminal, but not C-terminal moiety of TRX and H3K27ac. ASH1/TRX N-ter domains and transcription are not incompatible with repressive marks, sometimes resulting in a "balanced" state modulated by both repressors and activators. Often however, loss of PcG repression results instead in a "void" state, lacking transcription, H3K27ac, or binding of TRX or ASH1. We conclude that PcG repression is dynamic, not static, and that the propensity of a target gene to switch states depends on relative levels of PcG, TRX, and activators. N-ter TRX plays a remarkable role that antagonizes PcG repression and preempts H3K27 methylation by acetylation. This role is distinct from that usually attributed to TRX/MLL proteins at the promoter. These results have important implications for Polycomb gene regulation, the "bivalent" chromatin state of embryonic stem cells, and gene expression in development.

Lineage-specific cell death in postembryonic brain development of Drosophila

The Drosophila central brain is composed of thousands of neurons that derive from approximately 100 neuroblasts per hemisphere. Functional circuits in the brain require precise neuronal wiring and tight control of neuronal numbers. How this accurate control of neuronal numbers is achieved during neural development is largely unclear. Specifically, the role of programmed cell death in control of cell numbers has not been studied in the central brain neuroblast lineages. Here, we focus on four postembryonic neuroblast lineages in the central brain identified on the basis that they express the homeobox gene engrailed (en). For each lineage,we determine the total number of adult-specific neurons generated as well as number and pattern of en-expressing cells. We then demonstrate that programmed cell death has a pronounced effect on the number of cells in the four lineages; approximately half of the immature adult-specific neurons in three of the four lineages are eliminated by cell death during postembryonic development. Moreover, we show that programmed cell death selectively affects en-positive versus en-negative cells in a lineage-specific manner and, thus, controls the relative number of en-expressing neurons in each lineage. Furthermore, we provide evidence that Notch signaling is involved in the regulation of en expression. Based on our findings, we conclude that lineage-specific programmed cell death plays a prominent role in the generation of neuronal number and lineage diversity in the Drosophila brain.

Genetic and epigenetic mechanisms regulating hedgehog expression in the Drosophila wing

Stable subdivision of Drosophila limbs into Anterior (A) and Posterior (P) compartments is a consequence of asymmetric signaling by Hedgehog (Hh) from P to A cells. The activity of the homeodomain protein Engrailed (En) in P cells has been reported to help to generate this asymmetry by inducing the expression of hedgehog and simultaneously repressing the expression of the essential downstream component of the Hh signaling pathway Cubitus interruptus (Ci). In A cells, Ci has a major role in the repression of hh. Here we have revised the genetic and epigenetic mechanisms involved in the regulation of hh in the P compartment. First, we present evidence that hh expression in P cells is a consequence of the repression of ci by the activity of En. Thus, in the absence of Ci and En activities, cells do express hh. We also present data supporting the maintenance of hh expression in P cells through epigenetic mechanisms, and a permissive role of Notch signaling in this process. Notch and Trithorax (TrxG) group of proteins exert their action through a previously defined hh Polycomb Responsive Element (PRE).

A mechanistic view of genomic imprinting

Genomic imprinting results in the expression of genes in a parent-of-origin-dependent manner. The mechanism and developmental consequences of genomic imprinting are most well characterized in mammals, plants, and certain insect species (e.g., sciarid flies and coccid insects). However, researchers have observed imprinting phenomena in species in which imprinting of endogenous genes is not known to exist or to be developmentally essential. In this review, I survey the known mechanisms of imprinting, focusing primarily on examples from mammals, where imprinting is relatively well characterized. Where appropriate, I draw attention to imprinting mechanisms in other organisms to compare and contrast how diverse organisms employ different strategies to perform the same process. I discuss how the various mechanisms come into play in the context of the imprint life cycle. Finally, I speculate why imprinting may be more widely prevalent than previously thought.

Stability and dynamics of polycomb target sites in Drosophila development

Polycomb-group (PcG) and Trithorax-group proteins together form a maintenance machinery that is responsible for stable heritable states of gene activity. While the best-studied target genes are the Hox genes of the Antennapedia and Bithorax complexes, a large number of key developmental genes are also Polycomb (Pc) targets, indicating a widespread role for this maintenance machinery in cell fate determination. We have studied the linkage between the binding of PcG proteins and the developmental regulation of gene expression using whole-genome mapping to identify sites bound by the PcG proteins, Pc and Pleiohomeotic (Pho), in the Drosophila embryo and in a more restricted tissue, the imaginal discs of the third thoracic segment. Our data provide support for the idea that Pho is a general component of the maintenance machinery, since the majority of Pc targets are also associated with Pho binding. We find, in general, considerable developmental stability of Pc and Pho binding at target genes and observe that Pc/Pho binding can be associated with both expressed and inactive genes. In particular, at the Hox complexes, both active and inactive genes have significant Pc and Pho binding. However, in comparison to inactive genes, the active Hox genes show reduced and altered binding profiles. During development, Pc target genes are not simply constantly associated with Pc/Pho binding, and we identify sets of genes with clear differential binding between embryo and imaginal disc. Using existing datasets, we show that for specific fate-determining genes of the haemocyte lineage, the active state is characterised by lack of Pc binding. Overall, our analysis suggests a dynamic relationship between Pc/Pho binding and gene transcription. Pc/Pho binding does not preclude transcription, but levels of Pc/Pho binding change during development, and loss of Pc/Pho binding can be associated with both stable gene activity and inactivity.

Cells make fate decisions as they progressively differentiate into specific cell types during development. The stability of these decisions is important and is achieved, in part, by changes to the chromatin that packages DNA in the nucleus. A key set of protein complexes that together constitute the Polycomb-group/Trithorax-group (PcG/TrxG) machinery is involved in chromatin modification and is known to operate at a large number of genes involved in developmental decisions. The PcG proteins establish stable gene repression, whereas the TrxG counteract the PcG to enable gene activation. How this PcG/TrxG balance works is not understood. By mapping PcG protein binding to chromatin in vivo, we show, in general, a relatively constant association of PcG protein at target genes during development. However, we also find changes in binding at specific genes. While some of these changes are consistent with a loss of PcG proteins associated with gene expression, we also find examples where PcG proteins are present at active genes and not present at inactive genes. Our analysis supports the idea that simply the presence of PcG proteins at a target gene does not necessarily result in gene repression and suggests a more dynamic balance between PcG protein binding and gene expression.

Polycomb/Trithorax response elements and epigenetic memory of cell identity

Polycomb/Trithorax group response elements (PRE/TREs) are fascinating chromosomal pieces. Just a few hundred base pairs long, these elements can remember and maintain the active or silent transcriptional state of their associated genes for many cell generations, long after the initial determining activators and repressors have disappeared. Recently, substantial progress has been made towards understanding the nuts and bolts of PRE/TRE function at the molecular level and in experimentally mapping PRE/TRE sites across whole genomes. Here we examine the insights, controversies and new questions that have been generated by this recent flood of data.

Polycomb response elements and targeting of Polycomb group proteins in Drosophila

Polycomb group (PcG) proteins are conserved regulatory proteins that repress transcription of particular target genes in animals and plants. Studies over the past decade have established that most PcG proteins are not classic DNA binding factors but that they exist in multisubunit protein complexes that bind to and modify chromatin. Nevertheless, PcG repression of target genes in Drosophila requires specific cis-regulatory sequences, called Polycomb response elements (PREs), and chromatin immunoprecipitation studies have shown that, in vivo, most PcG proteins are specifically bound at the PREs of target genes. However, the mechanisms by which these PcG protein complexes are recruited to PREs and how they repress transcription are still poorly understood. Recent studies challenge earlier models that invoke covalent histone modifications and chromatin binding as the key steps in the recruitment of PcG proteins to PREs. The available evidence suggests that PREs are largely devoid of nucleosomes and that PRE DNA serves as an assembly platform for many different PcG protein complexes through DNA-protein and protein-protein interactions. The emerging picture suggests that the binding and modification of chromatin by PcG proteins is needed for interaction of PRE-tethered PcG protein complexes with nucleosomes in the flanking chromatin in order to maintain a Polycomb-repressed chromatin state at promoters and coding regions of target genes.

Polycomb group-dependent Cyclin A repression in Drosophila

Polycomb group (PcG) and trithorax group (trxG) proteins are well known for their role in the maintenance of silent and active expression states of homeotic genes. However, PcG proteins may also be required for the control of cellular proliferation in vertebrates. In Drosophila, PcG factors act by associating with specific DNA regions termed PcG response elements (PREs). Here, we have investigated whether Drosophila cell cycle genes are directly regulated by PcG proteins through PREs. We have isolated a PRE that regulates Cyclin A (CycA) expression. This sequence is bound by the Polycomb (PC) and Polyhomeotic (PH) proteins of the PcG, and also by GAGA factor (GAF), a trxG protein that is usually found associated with PREs. This sequence causes PcG- and trxG-dependent variegation of the mini-white reporter gene in transgenic flies. The combination of FISH with PC immunostaining in embryonic cells shows that the endogenous CycA gene colocalizes with PC at foci of high PC concentration named PcG bodies. Finally, loss of function of the Pc gene and overexpression of Pc and ph trigger up-regulation and down-regulation, respectively, of CycA expression in embryos. These results demonstrate that CycA is directly regulated by PcG proteins, linking them to cell cycle control in vivo.

Chromosomal distribution of PcG proteins during Drosophila development

Polycomb group (PcG) proteins are able to maintain the memory of silent transcriptional states of homeotic genes throughout development. In Drosophila, they form multimeric complexes that bind to specific DNA regulatory elements named PcG response elements (PREs). To date, few PREs have been identified and the chromosomal distribution of PcG proteins during development is unknown. We used chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) with genomic tiling path microarrays to analyze the binding profile of the PcG proteins Polycomb (PC) and Polyhomeotic (PH) across 10 Mb of euchromatin. We also analyzed the distribution of GAGA factor (GAF), a sequence-specific DNA binding protein that is found at most previously identified PREs. Our data show that PC and PH often bind to clustered regions within large loci that encode transcription factors which play multiple roles in developmental patterning and in the regulation of cell proliferation. GAF co-localizes with PC and PH to a limited extent, suggesting that GAF is not a necessary component of chromatin at PREs. Finally, the chromosome-association profile of PC and PH changes during development, suggesting that the function of these proteins in the regulation of some of their target genes might be more dynamic than previously anticipated.