Analysis of Drosophila salivary gland, epidermis and CNS development suggests an additional function of brinker in anterior-posterior cell fate specification

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.

Brinker possesses multiple mechanisms for repression because its primary co-repressor, Groucho, may be unavailable in some cell types

Transcriptional repressors function primarily by recruiting co-repressors, which are accessory proteins that antagonize transcription by modifying chromatin structure. Although a repressor could function by recruiting just a single co-repressor, many can recruit more than one, with Drosophila Brinker (Brk) recruiting the co-repressors CtBP and Groucho (Gro), in addition to possessing a third repression domain, 3R. Previous studies indicated that Gro is sufficient for Brk to repress targets in the wing, questioning why it should need to recruit CtBP, a short-range co-repressor, when Gro is known to be able to function over longer distances. To resolve this we have used genomic engineering to generate a series of brk mutants that are unable to recruit Gro, CtBP and/or have 3R deleted. These reveal that although the recruitment of Gro is necessary and can be sufficient for Brk to make an almost morphologically wild-type fly, it is insufficient during oogenesis, where Brk must utilize CtBP and 3R to pattern the egg shell appropriately. Gro insufficiency during oogenesis can be explained by its downregulation in Brk-expressing cells through phosphorylation downstream of EGFR signaling.

Comparative genomic analysis of Drosophila melanogaster and vector mosquito developmental genes

Genome sequencing projects have presented the opportunity for analysis of developmental genes in three vector mosquito species: Aedes aegypti, Culex quinquefasciatus, and Anopheles gambiae. A comparative genomic analysis of developmental genes in Drosophila melanogaster and these three important vectors of human disease was performed in this investigation. While the study was comprehensive, special emphasis centered on genes that 1) are components of developmental signaling pathways, 2) regulate fundamental developmental processes, 3) are critical for the development of tissues of vector importance, 4) function in developmental processes known to have diverged within insects, and 5) encode microRNAs (miRNAs) that regulate developmental transcripts in Drosophila. While most fruit fly developmental genes are conserved in the three vector mosquito species, several genes known to be critical for Drosophila development were not identified in one or more mosquito genomes. In other cases, mosquito lineage-specific gene gains with respect to D. melanogaster were noted. Sequence analyses also revealed that numerous repetitive sequences are a common structural feature of Drosophila and mosquito developmental genes. Finally, analysis of predicted miRNA binding sites in fruit fly and mosquito developmental genes suggests that the repertoire of developmental genes targeted by miRNAs is species-specific. The results of this study provide insight into the evolution of developmental genes and processes in dipterans and other arthropods, serve as a resource for those pursuing analysis of mosquito development, and will promote the design and refinement of functional analysis experiments.

A combinatorial enhancer recognized by Mad, TCF and Brinker first activates then represses dpp expression in the posterior spiracles of Drosophila

A previous genetic analysis of a reporter gene carrying a 375-bp region from a dpp intron (dppMX-lacZ) revealed that the Wingless and Dpp pathways are required to activate dpp expression in posterior spiracle formation. Here we report that within the dppMX region there is an enhancer with binding sites for TCF and Mad that are essential for activating dppMX expression in posterior spiracles. There is also a binding site for Brinker likely employed to repress dppMX expression. This combinatorial enhancer may be the first identified with the ability to integrate temporally distinct positive (TCF and Mad) and negative (Brinker) inputs in the same cells. Cuticle studies on a unique dpp mutant lacking this enhancer showed that it is required for viability and that the Filzkorper are U-shaped rather than straight. Together with gene expression data from these mutants and from brk mutants, our results suggest that there are two rounds of Dpp signaling in posterior spiracle development. The first round is associated with dorsal-ventral patterning and is necessary for designating the posterior spiracle field. The second is governed by the combinatorial enhancer and begins during germ band retraction. The second round appears necessary for proper spiracle internal morphology and fusion with the remainder of the tracheal system. Intriguingly, several aspects of dpp posterior spiracle expression and function are similar to demonstrated roles for Wnt and BMP signaling in proximal-distal outgrowth of the mammalian embryonic lung.

Salivary glands of second and third instars of Dermatobia hominis (Diptera: Oestridae)

Salivary glands of Dermatobia hominis (L., Jr.) (Diptera: Oestridae) larvae were studied under light and electron microscopy. The salivary glands of second (L2) and third instars (L3) are similar and consist of pairs of translucent tubules. The individual efferent ducts unite to form a single deferent duct, which inserts dorsally into the cephalopharingeal skeleton. Each gland has a monolayer of epithelial cells surrounded by basement membrane and connective tissue. The cellular plasma membrane is enfolded at its base, forming a labyrinthine area. The cell surface is linked to the basement membrane (BM) by hemidesmosomes and to adjacent cells by septet junctions and desmosomes. Irregular channels with several vesicles occur between the cytoplasm and BM. Golgi complex, rough and smooth endoplasmic reticulum, ribosome, lysosomes, multivesicular bodies, and myelin figures are usually present in the cells. The nucleus is large, with diffuse chromatin. The connective tissue circling the BM contains collagen fibrils, muscle fibers and tracheal tubes. Lined cuticle encloses the efferent and deferent ductal cells, which have few, widely dispersed mitochondria, free ribosomes, microtubules, and a large nucleus with diffuse chromatin.

Drosophila SnoN modulates growth and patterning by antagonizing TGF-beta signalling

Signalling by TGF-beta ligands through the Smad family of transcription factors is critical for developmental patterning and growth. Disruption of this pathway has been observed in various cancers. In vertebrates, members of the Ski/Sno protein family can act as negative regulators of TGF-beta signalling, interfering with the Smad machinery to inhibit the transcriptional output of this pathway. In some contexts ski/sno genes function as tumour suppressors, but they were originally identified as oncogenes, whose expression is up-regulated in many tumours. These growth regulatory effects and the normal physiological functions of Ski/Sno proteins have been proposed to result from changes in TGF-beta signalling. However, this model is controversial and may be over-simplified, because recent findings indicate that Ski/Sno proteins can affect other signalling pathways. To address this issue in an in vivo context, we have analyzed the function of the Drosophila Ski/Sno orthologue, SnoN. We found that SnoN inhibits growth when overexpressed, indicating a tumour suppressor role in flies. It can act in multiple tissues to selectively and cell autonomously antagonise signalling by TGF-beta ligands from both the BMP and Activin sub-families. By contrast, analysis of a snoN mutant indicates that the gene does not play a global role in TGF-beta-mediated functions, but specifically inhibits TGF-beta-induced wing vein formation. We propose that SnoN normally functions redundantly with other TGF-beta pathway antagonists to finely adjust signalling levels, but that it can behave as an extremely potent inhibitor of TGF-beta signalling when highly expressed, highlighting the significance of its deregulation in cancer cells.

Repression of Dpp targets in the Drosophila wing by Brinker

Patterning along developing body axes is regulated by gradients of transcription factors, which activate or repress different genes above distinct thresholds. Understanding differential threshold responses requires knowledge of how these factors regulate transcription. In the Drosophila wing, expression of genes such as omb and sal along the anteroposterior axis is restricted by lateral-to-medial gradients of the transcriptional repressor Brinker (Brk). omb is less sensitive to repression by Brk than sal and is consequently expressed more laterally. Contrary to previous suggestions, we show that Brk cannot repress simply by competing with activators, but requires specific repression domains along with its DNA-binding domain. Brk possesses at least three repression domains, but these are not equivalent; one, 3R, is sufficient to repress omb but not sal. Thus, although sal and omb show quantitative differences in their response to Brk, there are qualitative differences in the mechanisms that Brk uses to repress them.

Differing strategies for the establishment and maintenance ofteashirtandhomothoraxrepression in theDrosophilawing

Secreted signaling molecules such as Wingless (Wg) and Decapentaplegic(Dpp) organize positional information along the proximodistal (PD) axis of the Drosophila wing imaginal disc. Responding cells activate different downstream targets depending on the combination and level of these signals and other factors present at the time of signal transduction. Two such factors, teashirt (tsh) and homothorax (hth), are initially co-expressed throughout the entire wing disc, but are later repressed in distal cells, permitting the subsequent elaboration of distal fates. Control of tsh and hth repression is, therefore,crucial for wing development, and plays a role in shaping and sizing the adult appendage. Although both Wg and Dpp participate in this control, their specific contributions remain unclear. In this report, we analyze tshand hthregulation in the wing disc, and show that Wg and Dpp act independently as the primary signals for the repression of tsh and hth, respectively. In cells that receive low levels of Dpp, hth repression also requires Vestigial (Vg). Furthermore, although Dpp is required continuously for hth repression throughout development, Wg is only required for the initiation of tshrepression. Instead, the maintenance of tsh repression requires Polycomb group (PcG) mediated gene silencing, which is dispensable for hth repression. Thus, despite their overall similar expression patterns, tsh and hth repression in the wing disc is controlled by two very different mechanisms.

The transcriptional repressor Brinker antagonizes Wingless signaling

In the embryonic midgut of Drosophila, Wingless (Wg) signaling elicits threshold-specific transcriptional response, that is, low-signaling levels activate target genes, whereas high-signaling levels repress them. Wg-mediated repression of the HOX gene Ultrabithorax (Ubx) is conferred by a response sequence within the Ubx B midgut enhancer, called WRS-R. It further depends on the Teashirt (Tsh) repressor, which acts through the WRS-R without binding to it. Here, we show that Wg-mediated repression of Ubx B depends on Brinker, which binds to the WRS-R. Furthermore, Brinker blocks transcriptional activation by ubiquitous Wg signaling. Brinker binds to Tsh in vitro, recruits Tsh to the WRS-R, and we find mutual physical interactions between Brinker, Tsh, and the corepressor dCtBP. This suggests that the three proteins may form a ternary repressor complex at the WRS-R to quench the activity of the nearby-bound dTCF/Armadillo transcription complex. Finally, brinker and tsh produce similar mutant phenotypes in the ventral epidermis, and double mutants mimic overactive Wg signaling in this tissue. This suggests that Brinker may have a widespread function in antagonizing Wg signaling.

Notch signalling and the initiation of neural development in the Drosophila eye

Neural determination in the Drosophila eye occurs progressively. A diffusible signal, Dpp, causes undetermined cells first to adopt a ‘pre-proneural’ state in which they are primed to start differentiating. A second signal is required to trigger the activation of the transcription factor Atonal, which causes the cells to initiate overt photoreceptor neurone differentiation. Both Dpp and the second signal are dependent on Hedgehog (Hh) signalling. Previous work has shown that the Notch signalling pathway also has a proneural role in the eye (as well as a later, opposite function when it restricts the number of cells becoming photoreceptors – a process of lateral inhibition). It is not clear how the early proneural role of Notch integrates with the other signalling pathways involved. We provide evidence that Notch activation by its ligand Delta is the second Hh-dependent signal required for neural determination. Notch activity normally only triggers Atonal expression in cells that have adopted the pre-proneural state induced by Dpp. We also report that Notch drives the transition from pre-proneural to proneural by downregulating two repressors of Atonal: Hairy and Extramacrochaetae.

Organ formation in Drosophila: specification and morphogenesis of the salivary gland

The Drosophila salivary gland has emerged as an outstanding model system for the process of organ formation. Many of the component steps, from initial regional specification through cell specialization and morphogenesis, are known and many of the genes required for these different processes have been identified. The salivary gland is a relatively simple organ; the entire gland comprises of only two major cell types, which derive from a single contiguous primordium. Salivary cells cease dividing once they are specified, and organ growth is achieved simply by an increase in size of individual cells, thus eliminating concerns about the potential unequal distribution of determinants during mitosis. Drosophila salivary glands form by the same cellular mechanisms as organs in higher organisms, including regulated cell shape changes, cell intercalation and directed cell migration. Thus, learning how these events are coordinated for tissue morphogenesis in an organism for which the genetic and molecular tools are unsurpassed should provide excellent paradigms for dissecting related processes in the more intricate organs of more complicated species.

The transcription factor Schnurri plays a dual role in mediating Dpp signaling during embryogenesis

Decapentaplegic (Dpp), a homolog of vertebrate bone morphogenic protein 2/4, is crucial for embryonic patterning and cell fate specification in Drosophila. Dpp signaling triggers nuclear accumulation of the Smads Mad and Medea, which affect gene expression through two distinct mechanisms: direct activation of target genes and relief of repression by the nuclear protein Brinker (Brk). The zinc-finger transcription factor Schnurri (Shn) has been implicated as a co-factor for Mad, based on its DNA-binding ability and evidence of signaling dependent interactions between the two proteins. A key question is whether Shn contributes to both repression of brk as well as to activation of target genes. We find that during embryogenesis, brk expression is derepressed in shn mutants. However, while Mad is essential for Dpp-mediated repression of brk, the requirement for shn is stage specific. Analysis of brk; shn double mutants reveals that upregulation of brk does not account for all aspects of the shn mutant phenotype. Several Dpp target genes are expressed at intermediate levels in double mutant embryos, demonstrating that shn also provides a brk-independent positive input to gene activation. We find that Shn-mediated relief of brk repression establishes broad domains of gene activation, while the brk-independent input from Shn is crucial for defining the precise limits and levels of Dpp target gene expression in the embryo.

Direct competition between Brinker and Drosophila Mad in Dpp target gene transcription

Brinker is a nuclear protein that antagonizes Dpp signalling in Drosophila. Its expression is negatively regulated by Dpp. Here, we show that Brinker represses Ultrabithorax (Ubx) in the embryonic midgut, a HOX gene that activates, and responds to, the localized expression of Dpp during endoderm induction. We find that the functional target for Brinker repression coincides with the Dpp response sequence in the Ubx midgut enhancer, namely a tandem of binding sites for the Dpp effector Mad. We show that Brinker efficiently competes with Mad in vitro, preventing the latter from binding to these sites. Brinker also competes with activated Mad in vivo, blocking the stimulation of the Ubx enhancer in response to simultaneous Dpp signalling. These results indicate how Brinker acts as a dominant repressor of Dpp target genes, and explain why Brinker is a potent antagonist of Dpp.