Mapping functional specificity in the Dfd and Ubx homeo domains

A flexible extension of the Drosophila ultrabithorax homeodomain defines a novel Hox/PBC interaction mode

The patterning function of Hox proteins relies on assembling protein complexes with PBC proteins, which often involves a protein motif found in most Hox proteins, the so-called Hexapeptide (HX). Hox/PBC complexes likely gained functional diversity by acquiring additional modes of interaction. Here, we structurally characterize the first HX alternative interaction mode based on the paralogue-specific UbdA motif and further functionally validate structure-based predictions. The UbdA motif folds as a flexible extension of the homeodomain recognition helix and defines Hox/PBC contacts that occur, compared with those mediated by the HX motif, on the opposing side of the DNA double helix. This provides a new molecular facet to Hox/PBC complex assembly and suggests possible mechanisms for the diversification of Hox protein function.

A survey of conservation of sea spider and Drosophila Hox protein activities

Hox proteins have well-established functions in development and evolution, controlling the final morphology of bilaterian animals. The common phylogenetic origin of Hox proteins and the associated evolutionary diversification of protein sequences provide a unique framework to explore the relationship between changes in protein sequence and function. In this study, we aimed at questioning how sequence variation within arthropod Hox proteins influences function. This was achieved by exploring the functional impact of sequence conservation/divergence of the Hox genes, labial, Sex comb reduced, Deformed, Ultrabithorax and abdominalA from two distant arthropods, the sea spider and the well-studied Drosophila. Results highlight a correlation between sequence conservation within the homeodomain and the degree of functional conservation, and identify a novel functional domain in the Labial protein.

Differential pleiotropy and HOX functional organization

Key studies led to the idea that transcription factors are composed of defined modular protein motifs or domains, each with separable, unique function. During evolution, the recombination of these modular domains could give rise to transcription factors with new properties, as has been shown using recombinant molecules. This archetypic, modular view of transcription factor organization is based on the analyses of a few transcription factors such as GAL4, which may represent extreme exemplars rather than an archetype or the norm. Recent work with a set of Homeotic selector (HOX) proteins has revealed differential pleiotropy: the observation that highly-conserved HOX protein motifs and domains make small, additive, tissue specific contributions to HOX activity. Many of these differentially pleiotropic HOX motifs may represent plastic sequence elements called short linear motifs (SLiMs). The coupling of differential pleiotropy with SLiMs, suggests that protein sequence changes in HOX transcription factors may have had a greater impact on morphological diversity during evolution than previously believed. Furthermore, differential pleiotropy may be the genetic consequence of an ensemble nature of HOX transcription factor allostery, where HOX proteins exist as an ensemble of states with the capacity to integrate an extensive array of developmental information. Given a new structural model for HOX functional domain organization, the properties of the archetypic TF may require reassessment.

A combination of activation and repression by a colinear Hox code controls forelimb-restricted expression of Tbx5 and reveals Hox protein specificity

Tight control over gene expression is essential for precision in embryonic development and acquisition of the regulatory elements responsible is the predominant driver for evolution of new structures. Tbx5 and Tbx4, two genes expressed in forelimb and hindlimb-forming regions respectively, play crucial roles in the initiation of limb outgrowth. Evolution of regulatory elements that activate Tbx5 in rostral LPM was essential for the acquisition of forelimbs in vertebrates. We identified such a regulatory element for Tbx5 and demonstrated Hox genes are essential, direct regulators. While the importance of Hox genes in regulating embryonic development is clear, Hox targets and the ways in which each protein executes its specific function are not known. We reveal how nested Hox expression along the rostro-caudal axis restricts Tbx5 expression to forelimb. We demonstrate that Hoxc9, which is expressed in caudal LPM where Tbx5 is not expressed, can form a repressive complex on the Tbx5 forelimb regulatory element. This repressive capacity is limited to Hox proteins expressed in caudal LPM and carried out by two separate protein domains in Hoxc9. Forelimb-restricted expression of Tbx5 and ultimately forelimb formation is therefore achieved through co-option of two characteristics of Hox genes; their colinear expression along the body axis and the functional specificity of different paralogs. Active complexes can be formed by Hox PG proteins present throughout the rostral-caudal LPM while restriction of Tbx5 expression is achieved by superimposing a dominant repressive (Hoxc9) complex that determines the caudal boundary of Tbx5 expression. Our results reveal the regulatory mechanism that ensures emergence of the forelimbs at the correct position along the body. Acquisition of this regulatory element would have been critical for the evolution of limbs in vertebrates and modulation of the factors we have identified can be molecular drivers of the diversity in limb morphology.

The acquisition of limbs during vertebrate evolution was a very successful innovation that enabled this group of species to diversify and colonise land. It has become clear recently that the primary driver behind the evolution of new structures, such as limbs, is the acquisition of novel regulatory elements that control when and where genes are activated rather than the proteins encoded by the genes themselves acquiring novel functions. We have identified the regulatory element from a gene, Tbx5. Activation of Tbx5 in the forelimb-forming region of the developing embryos is essential for forelimbs to form and disruption of human TBX5 causes limb abnormalities. We show that activation of Tbx5 in a restricted territory is achieved through a combination of activation inputs that are present broadly throughout the embryo flank and dominant, repressive inputs present only in more caudal regions of the flank. The sum of these inputs yields restricted activation in the rostral, forelimb-forming flank. Our results explain how the regulatory switches that were harnessed for the acquisition of limbs during evolution operate and how they can be turned off during the evolution of limblessness in species such as the snake.

Binding polymorphism in the DNA bound state of the Pdx1 homeodomain

The subtle effects of DNA-protein recognition are illustrated in the homeodomain fold. This is one of several small DNA binding motifs that, in spite of limited DNA binding specificity, adopts crucial, specific roles when incorporated in a transcription factor. The homeodomain is composed of a 3-helix domain and a mobile N-terminal arm. Helix 3 (the recognition helix) interacts with the DNA bases through the major groove, while the N-terminal arm becomes ordered upon binding a specific sequence through the minor groove. Although many structural studies have characterized the DNA binding properties of homeodomains, the factors behind the binding specificity are still difficult to elucidate. A crystal structure of the Pdx1 homeodomain bound to DNA (PDB 2H1K) obtained previously in our lab shows two complexes with differences in the conformation of the N-terminal arm, major groove contacts, and backbone contacts, raising new questions about the DNA recognition process by homeodomains. Here, we carry out fully atomistic Molecular Dynamics simulations both in crystal and aqueous environments in order to elucidate the nature of the difference in binding contacts. The crystal simulations reproduce the X-ray experimental structures well. In the absence of crystal packing constraints, the differences between the two complexes increase during the solution simulations. Thus, the conformational differences are not an artifact of crystal packing. In solution, the homeodomain with a disordered N-terminal arm repositions to a partially specific orientation. Both the crystal and aqueous simulations support the existence of different stable binding conformers identified in the original crystallographic data with different degrees of specificity. We propose that protein-protein and protein-DNA interactions favor a subset of the possible conformations. This flexibility in DNA binding may facilitate multiple functions for the same transcription factor.

Hox transcription factors influence motoneuron identity through the integrated actions of both homeodomain and non-homeodomain regions

BACKGROUND

Hox transcription factors play a critical role in the specification of motoneuron subtypes within the spinal cord. Our previous work showed that two orthologous members of this family, Hoxd10 and Hoxd11, exert opposing effects on motoneuron development in the lumbosacral (LS) spinal cord of the embryonic chick: Hoxd10 promotes the development of lateral motoneuron subtypes that project to dorsal limb muscles, while Hoxd11 represses the development of lateral subtypes in favor of medial subtypes that innervate ventral limb muscles and axial muscles. The striking degree of homology between the DNA-binding homeodomains of Hoxd10 and Hoxd11 suggested that non-homeodomain regions mediate their divergent effects. In the present study, we investigate the relative contributions of homeodomain and non-homeodomain regions of Hoxd10 and Hoxd11 to motoneuron specification.

RESULTS

Using in ovo electroporation to express chimeric and mutant constructs in LS motoneurons, we find that both the homeodomain and non-homeodomain regions of Hoxd10 are necessary to specify lateral motoneurons. In contrast, non-homeodomain regions of Hoxd11 are sufficient to repress lateral motoneuron fates in favor of medial fates.

CONCLUSIONS

Together, our data demonstrate that even closely related Hox orthologues rely on distinct combinations of homeodomain-dependent and -independent mechanisms to specify motoneuron identity.

Conservation and variation in Hox genes: how insect models pioneered the evo-devo field

Evolutionary developmental biology, or evo-devo, broadly investigates how body plan diversity and morphological novelties have arisen and persisted in nature. The discovery of Hox genes in Drosophila, and their subsequent identification in most other metazoans, led biologists to try to understand how embryonic genes crucial for proper development have changed to promote the vast morphological variation seen in nature. Insects are ideal model systems for studying this diversity and the mechanisms underlying it because phylogenetic relationships are well established, powerful genetic tools have been developed, and there are many examples of evolutionary specializations that have arisen in nature in different insect lineages, such as the jumping leg of orthopterans and the helmet structures of treehoppers. Here, we briefly introduce the field of evo-devo and Hox genes, discuss functional tools available to study early developmental genes in insects, and provide examples in which changes in Hox genes have contributed to changes in body plan or morphology.

Variable motif utilization in homeotic selector (Hox)-cofactor complex formation controls specificity

Homeotic selector (Hox) proteins often bind DNA cooperatively with cofactors such as Extradenticle (Exd) and Homothorax (Hth) to achieve functional specificity in vivo. Previous studies identified the Hox YPWM motif as an important Exd interaction motif. Using a comparative approach, we characterize the contribution of this and additional conserved sequence motifs to the regulation of specific target genes for three Drosophila Hox proteins. We find that Sex combs reduced (Scr) uses a simple interaction mechanism, where a single tryptophan-containing motif is necessary for Exd-dependent DNA-binding and in vivo functions. Abdominal-A (AbdA) is more complex, using multiple conserved motifs in a context-dependent manner. Lastly, Ultrabithorax (Ubx) is the most flexible, in that it uses multiple conserved motifs that function in parallel to regulate target genes in vivo. We propose that using different binding mechanisms with the same cofactor may be one strategy to achieve functional specificity in vivo.

Dissecting the functional specificities of two Hox proteins

Hox proteins frequently select and regulate their specific target genes with the help of cofactors like Extradenticle (Exd) and Homothorax (Hth). For the Drosophila Hox protein Sex combs reduced (Scr), Exd has been shown to position a normally unstructured portion of Scr so that two basic amino acid side chains can insert into the minor groove of an Scr-specific DNA-binding site. Here we provide evidence that another Drosophila Hox protein, Deformed (Dfd), uses a very similar mechanism to achieve specificity in vivo, thus generalizing this mechanism. Furthermore, we show that subtle differences in the way Dfd and Scr recognize their specific binding sites, in conjunction with non-DNA-binding domains, influence whether the target gene is transcriptionally activated or repressed. These results suggest that the interaction between these DNA-binding proteins and the DNA-binding site determines the architecture of the Hox-cofactor-DNA ternary complex, which in turn determines whether the complex recruits coactivators or corepressors.

Regulation of Hox activity: insights from protein motifs

Deciphering the molecular bases of animal body plan construction is a central question in developmental and evolutionary biology. Genome analyses of a number of metazoans indicate that widely conserved regulatory molecules underlie the amazing diversity of animal body plans, suggesting that these molecules are reiteratively used for multiple purposes. Hox proteins constitute a good example of such molecules and provide the framework to address the mechanisms underlying transcriptional specificity and diversity in development and evolution. Here we examine the current knowledge of the molecular bases of Hox-mediated transcriptional control, focusing on how this control is encoded within protein sequences and structures. The survey suggests that the homeodomain is part of an extended multifunctional unit coordinating DNA binding and activity regulation and highlights the need for further advances in our understanding of Hox protein activity.

Non-homeodomain regions of Hox proteins mediate activation versus repression of Six2 via a single enhancer site in vivo

Hox genes control many developmental events along the AP axis, but few target genes have been identified. Whether target genes are activated or repressed, what enhancer elements are required for regulation, and how different domains of the Hox proteins contribute to regulatory specificity are poorly understood. Six2 is genetically downstream of both the Hox11 paralogous genes in the developing mammalian kidney and Hoxa2 in branchial arch and facial mesenchyme. Loss-of-function of Hox11 leads to loss of Six2 expression and loss-of-function of Hoxa2 leads to expanded Six2 expression. Herein we demonstrate that a single enhancer site upstream of the Six2 coding sequence is responsible for both activation by Hox11 proteins in the kidney and repression by Hoxa2 in the branchial arch and facial mesenchyme in vivo. DNA-binding activity is required for both activation and repression, but differential activity is not controlled by differences in the homeodomains. Rather, protein domains N- and C-terminal to the homeodomain confer activation versus repression activity. These data support a model in which the DNA-binding specificity of Hox proteins in vivo may be similar, consistent with accumulated in vitro data, and that unique functions result mainly from differential interactions mediated by non-homeodomain regions of Hox proteins.

Classification of sequence signatures: a guide to Hox protein function

Hox proteins are part of the conserved superfamily of homeodomain-containing transcription factors and play fundamental roles in shaping animal body plans in development and evolution. However, molecular mechanisms underlying their diverse and specific biological functions remain largely enigmatic. Here, we have analyzed Hox sequences from the main evolutionary branches of the Bilateria group. We have found that four classes of Hox protein signatures exist, which together provide sufficient support to explain how different Hox proteins differ in their control and function. The homeodomain and its surrounding sequences accumulate nearly all signatures, constituting an extended module where most of the information distinguishing Hox proteins is concentrated. Only a small fraction of these signatures has been investigated at the functional level, but these show that approaches relying on Hox protein alterations still have a large potential for deciphering molecular mechanisms of Hox differential control.

Hox specificity unique roles for cofactors and collaborators

Hox proteins are well known for executing highly specific functions in vivo, but our understanding of the molecular mechanisms underlying gene regulation by these fascinating proteins has lagged behind. The premise of this review is that an understanding of gene regulation-by any transcription factor-requires the dissection of the cis-regulatory elements that they act upon. With this goal in mind, we review the concepts and ideas regarding gene regulation by Hox proteins and apply them to a curated list of directly regulated Hox cis-regulatory elements that have been validated in the literature. Our analysis of the Hox-binding sites within these elements suggests several emerging generalizations. We distinguish between Hox cofactors, proteins that bind DNA cooperatively with Hox proteins and thereby help with DNA-binding site selection, and Hox collaborators, proteins that bind in parallel to Hox-targeted cis-regulatory elements and dictate the sign and strength of gene regulation. Finally, we summarize insights that come from examining five X-ray crystal structures of Hox-cofactor-DNA complexes. Together, these analyses reveal an enormous amount of flexibility into how Hox proteins function to regulate gene expression, perhaps providing an explanation for why these factors have been central players in the evolution of morphological diversity in the animal kingdom.

Shaping segments: Hox gene function in the genomic age

Despite decades of research, morphogenesis along the various body axes remains one of the major mysteries in developmental biology. A milestone in the field was the realisation that a set of closely related regulators, called Hox genes, specifies the identity of body segments along the anterior-posterior (AP) axis in most animals. Hox genes have been highly conserved throughout metazoan evolution and code for homeodomain-containing transcription factors. Thus, they exert their function mainly through activation or repression of downstream genes. However, while much is known about Hox gene structure and molecular function, only a few target genes have been identified and studied in detail. Our knowledge of Hox downstream genes is therefore far from complete and consequently Hox-controlled morphogenesis is still poorly understood. Genome-wide approaches have facilitated the identification of large numbers of Hox downstream genes both in Drosophila and vertebrates, and represent a crucial step towards a comprehensive understanding of how Hox proteins drive morphological diversification. In this review, we focus on the role of Hox genes in shaping segmental morphologies along the AP axis in Drosophila, discuss some of the conclusions drawn from analyses of large target gene sets and highlight methods that could be used to gain a more thorough understanding of Hox molecular function. In addition, the mechanisms of Hox target gene regulation are considered with special emphasis on recent findings and their implications for Hox protein specificity in the context of the whole organism.

Variation in homeodomain DNA binding revealed by high-resolution analysis of sequence preferences

Most homeodomains are unique within a genome, yet many are highly conserved across vast evolutionary distances, implying strong selection on their precise DNA-binding specificities. We determined the binding preferences of the majority (168) of mouse homeodomains to all possible 8-base sequences, revealing rich and complex patterns of sequence specificity and showing that there are at least 65 distinct homeodomain DNA-binding activities. We developed a computational system that successfully predicts binding sites for homeodomain proteins as distant from mouse as Drosophila and C. elegans, and we infer full 8-mer binding profiles for the majority of known animal homeodomains. Our results provide an unprecedented level of resolution in the analysis of this simple domain structure and suggest that variation in sequence recognition may be a factor in its functional diversity and evolutionary success.

The YPWM motif links Antennapedia to the basal transcriptional machinery

HOX genes specify segment identity along the anteroposterior axis of the embryo. They code for transcription factors harbouring the highly conserved homeodomain and a YPWM motif, situated amino terminally to it. Despite their highly diverse functions in vivo, HOX proteins display similar biochemical properties in vitro, raising the question of how this specificity is achieved. In our study, we investigated the importance of the Antennapedia(Antp) YPWM motif for homeotic transformations in adult Drosophila. By ectopic overexpression, the head structures of the fly can be transformed into structures of the second thoracic segment, such as antenna into second leg, head capsule into thorax (notum) and eye into wing. We found that the YPWM motif is absolutely required for the eye-to-wing transformation. Using the yeast two-hybrid system, we were able to identify a novel ANTP-interacting protein, Bric-à-brac interacting protein 2(BIP2), that specifically interacts with the YPWM motif of ANTP in vitro, as well as in vivo, transforming eye to wing tissue. BIP2 is a TATA-binding protein associated factor (also known as dTAFII3) that links ANTP to the basal transcriptional machinery.

The extended arms of DNA-binding domains: a tale of tails

DNA-binding domains (DBDs) frequently have N- or C-terminal tails, rich in lysine and/or arginine and disordered in free solution, that bind the DNA separately from and in the opposite groove to the folded domain. Is their role simply to increase affinity for DNA or do they have a role in specificity, that is, sequence recognition? One approach to answering this question is to analyze the contribution of such tails to the overall energetics of binding. It turns out that, despite similarities of amino acid sequence, three distinct categories of DBD extension exist: (i) those that are purely electrostatic and lack specificity, (ii) those that are largely non-electrostatic with a high contribution to specificity and (iii) those of mixed character that show sequence preference. Because in all cases the tails also increase the affinity for target DNA, they represent a crucial component of the machinery for selective gene activation or repression.

A group 13 homeodomain is neither necessary nor sufficient for posterior prevalence in the mouse limb

Posterior prevalence is the general property attributed to HOX proteins describing the dominant effect of more posterior HOX proteins over the function of anterior orthologs in common areas of expression. To explore the HOX group 13 protein domains required for this property, we used the mouse Prx-1 promoter to drive transgenic expression of Hox constructs throughout the entire limb bud during development. This system allowed us to conclusively demonstrate a hierarchy of Hox function in developing limbs. Furthermore, by substituting the HOXD11 or HOXA9 homeodomain for that of HOXD13, we show that a HOXD13 homeodomain is not necessary for posterior prevalence. Proximal expression of these chimeric proteins unexpectedly caused defects consistent with wild-type HOXD13 mediated posterior prevalence. Moreover, group 13 non-homeodomain residues appear to confer the property as proximal expression of HOXA9 containing the HOXD13 homeodomain did not result in limb reductions characteristic of HOXD13. These data are most compatible with models of posterior prevalence based on protein-protein interactions and support examination of the N-terminal non-homeodomain regions of Hox group 13 proteins as necessary agents for posterior prevalence.

Hox transcription factors and their elusive mammalian gene targets

The Hox family of homeodomain transcription factors regulate numerous pathways during developmental and normal cellular processes. All Hox proteins recognise similar sequences in vitro yet display functional diversity in an in vivo environment. This review focuses on the transcriptional and functional specificity elicited by Hox proteins, giving an overview of homeodomain-DNA interactions and the gain of binding specificity through cooperative binding with cofactors. Furthermore, currently identified mammalian Hox target genes are presented, of which the most striking feature is that very few direct Hox targets have been identified. The direct targets participate in an array of cellular functions including organogenesis and cellular differentiation, cell adhesion and migration and cell cycle and apoptotic pathways. A further assessment of identified mammalian promoter targets and the contribution of bases outside the canonical recognition motif is given, highlighting roles they may play in either trans-activation or repression by Hox proteins.

Assisting Hox proteins in controlling body form: are there new lessons from flies (and mammals)?

Hox proteins regulate specific sets of target genes to give rise to morphological distinctions along the anterior-posterior body axis of metazoans. Though they have high developmental specificity, Hox proteins have low DNA binding specificity, so how they select the appropriate target genes has remained enigmatic. There is general agreement that cofactors provide additional specificity, but a comprehensive model of Hox control of gene expression has not emerged. There is now evidence that a global network of zinc finger transcription factors contributes to patterning of the Drosophila embryo. These zinc finger proteins appear to establish fields in which certain Hox proteins can function. Though the nature of these fields is uncertain at this time, it is possible that these zinc finger proteins are Hox cofactors, providing additional specificity during Hox target-gene selection. Furthermore, these zinc finger proteins are conserved, as are aspects of their anterior-posterior expression, suggesting that their roles might be conserved, as well. Perhaps this layer in the genetic control of body patterning will help bridge some of the chasms that remain in our understanding of the genetic control of pattern formation.

Cofactor-Interaction Motifs and the Cooption of a Homeotic Hox Protein into the Segmentation Pathway of Drosophila melanogaster

Some Drosophila Hox-complex members, including the segmentation gene fushi tarazu (Dm-ftz), have nonhomeotic functions. Characteristic expression in other arthropods supports an ancestral homeotic role for ftz, indicating that ftz function changed during arthropod evolution. Dm-Ftz segmentation function depends on interaction with ftz-F1 via an LXXLL motif and homeodomain N-terminal arm. Hox proteins interact with the cofactor Extradenticle (Exd) via their YPWM motif. Previously, we found that Dm-ftz mediates segmentation but not homeosis, whereas orthologs from grasshopper (Sg-ftz) and beetle (Tc-Ftz), both containing a YPWM motif, have homeotic function. Tc-Ftz, which unlike Sg-Ftz contains an LXXLL motif, displays stronger segmentation function than Sg-Ftz. Cofactor-interaction motifs were mutated in Dm-Ftz and Tc-Ftz and effects were evaluated in Drosophila to assess how these motifs contributed to Ftz evolution. Addition of YPWM to Dm-Ftz confers weak homeotic function, which is increased by simultaneous LXXLL mutation. LXXLL is required for strong segmentation function, which is unimpeded by the YPWM, suggesting that acquisition of LXXLL specialized Ftz for segmentation. Strengthening the Ftz/Ftz-F1 interaction led to degeneration of the YPWM and loss of homeotic activity. Thus, small changes in protein sequence can result in a qualitative switch in function during evolution.

Recognition of distinct target sites by a unique Labial/Extradenticle/Homothorax complex

Hox genes encode evolutionarily conserved transcriptional regulators, which define regional identities along the anteroposterior axis of multicellular animals. In Drosophila, Hox proteins bind to target DNA sequences in association with the Extradenticle (Exd) and Homothorax (Hth) co-factors. The current model of Hox-binding selectivity proposes that the nucleotide sequence identity defines the Hox protein engaged in the trimeric complex, implying that distinct Hox/Exd/Hth complexes select different binding sites and that a given Hox/Exd/Hth complex recognizes a consensus DNA sequence. Here, we report that the regulation of a newly identified Lab target gene does not rely on the previously established consensus Lab/Exd/Hth-binding site, but on a strongly divergent sequence. Thus Lab, and most probably other Hox proteins, selects different DNA sequences in regulating downstream target genes. These observations have implications with regard to the current model of Hox-binding selectivity.

The relative role of the T-domain and flanking sequences for developmental control and transcriptional regulation in protein chimeras of Drosophila OMB and ORG-1

optomotor-blind (omb) and optomotor-blind related-1 (org-1) encode T-domain DNA binding proteins in Drosophila. Members of this family of transcription factors play widely varying roles during early development and organogenesis in both vertebrates and invertebrates. Functional specificity differs in spite of similar DNA binding preferences of all family members. Using a series of domain swap chimeras, in which different parts of OMB and ORG-1 were mutually exchanged, we investigated the relevance of individual domains in vitro and in vivo. In cell culture transfection assays, ORG-1 was a strong transcriptional activator, whereas OMB appeared neutral. The main transcriptional activation function was identified in the C-terminal part of ORG-1. Also in vivo, OMB and ORG-1 showed qualitative differences when the proteins were ectopically expressed during development. Gain-of-function expression of OMB is known to counteract eye formation and resulted in the loss of the arista, whereas ORG-1 had little effect on eye development but caused antenna-to-leg transformations and shortened legs in the corresponding gain-of-function situations. The functional properties of OMB/ORG-1 chimeras in several developmental contexts was dominated by the origin of the C-terminal region, suggesting that the transcriptional activation potential can be one major determinant of developmental specificity. In late eye development, we observed, however, a strong influence of the T-domain on ommatidial differentiation. The specificity of chimeric omb/org-1transgenes, thus, depended on the cellular context in which they were expressed. This suggests that both transcriptional activation/repression properties as well as intrinsic DNA binding specificity can contribute to the functional characteristics of T-domain factors.

In vivo mutagenesis of the Hoxb8 hexapeptide domain leads to dominant homeotic transformations that mimic the loss-of-function mutations in genes of the Hoxb cluster

Hox proteins are transcription factors that control developmental pathways along the anteroposterior axis of vertebrates. On their own, Hox proteins bind DNA weakly, but they gain specificity and affinity by interaction with members of the PBC subfamily of homeobox proteins. In vitro studies indicate that most of these interactions are mediated by the conserved hexapeptide motif of the Hox proteins. To study the significance of these interactions in vivo, we have generated mice that carry mutations in the Hoxb8 hexapeptide motif. Analysis of skeletal features of these mice reveals the presence of a dominant phenotype consisting of homeotic transformations, similar to those observed in mice with a loss-of-function of Hox genes, such as Hoxa7, Hoxb7, and Hoxb9. Genetic tests demonstrate that the mutations in the Hoxb8 hexapeptide motif are affecting the function of other genes located in the Hoxb cluster. The expression pattern of these genes is not affected; rather it appears that the mutant Hoxb8 protein interferes with the function of other Hox genes by binding to their targets. Our findings suggest that the homeotic transformations result from altered DNA binding specificity of the mutant Hoxb8 protein, implicating the cooperative binding between Hoxb8 hexapeptide motif and cofactors as a critical element in the fine-tuning of Hoxb8 protein target specificity. This is the first time the function of the hexapeptide domain has been evaluated in vivo in mouse development.

Interchange of DNA-binding modes in the deformed and ultrabithorax homeodomains: a structural role for the N-terminal arm

The deformed (Dfd) and ultrabithorax (Ubx) homeoproteins regulate developmental gene expression in Drosophila melanogaster by binding to specific DNA sequences within its genome. DNA binding is largely accomplished via a highly conserved helix-turn-helix DNA-binding domain that is known as a homeodomain (HD). Despite nearly identical DNA recognition helices and similar target DNA sequence preferences, the in vivo functions of the two proteins are quite different. We have previously revealed differences between the two HDs in their interactions with DNA. In an effort to define the individual roles of the HD N-terminal arm and recognition helix in sequence-specific binding, we have characterized the structural details of two Dfd/Ubx chimeric HDs in complex with both the Dfd and Ubx-optimal-binding site sequences. We utilized hydroxyl radical cleavage of DNA to assess the positioning of the proteins on the binding sites. The effects of missing nucleosides and purine methylation on HD binding were also analyzed. Our results show that both the Dfd and Ubx HDs have similar DNA-binding modes when in complex with the Ubx-optimal site. There are subtle but reproducible differences in these modes that are completely interchanged when the Dfd N-terminal arm is replaced with the corresponding region of the Ubx HD. In contrast, we showed previously that the Dfd-optimal site sequence elicits a very different binding mode for the Ubx HD, while the Dfd HD maintains a mode similar to that elicited by the Ubx-optimal site. Our current methylation interference studies suggest that this alternate binding mode involves interaction of the Ubx N-terminal arm with the minor groove on the opposite face of DNA relative to the major groove that is occupied by the recognition helix. As judged by hydroxyl radical footprinting and the missing nucleoside experiment, it appears that interaction of the Ubx recognition helix with the DNA major groove is reduced. Replacing the Dfd N-terminal arm with that of Ubx does not elicit a complete interchange of the DNA-binding mode. Although the position of the chimera relative to DNA, as judged by hydroxyl radical footprinting, is similar to that of the Dfd HD, the missing nucleoside and methylation interference patterns resemble those of the Ubx HD. Repositioning of amino acid side-chains without wholesale structural alteration in the polypeptide appears to occur as a function of N-terminal arm identity and DNA-binding site sequence. Complete interchange of binding modes was achieved only by replacement of the Dfd N-terminal arm and the recognition helix plus 13 carboxyl-terminal residues with the corresponding residues of Ubx. The position of the N-terminal arm in the DNA minor groove appears to differ in a manner that depends on the two base-pair differences between the Dfd and Ubx-optimal-binding sites. Thus, N-terminal arm position dictates the binding mode and the interaction of the recognition helix with nucleosides in the major groove.

Specificity of Distalless repression and limb primordia development by abdominal Hox proteins

In Drosophila, differences between segments, such as the presence or absence of appendages, are controlled by Hox transcription factors. The Hox protein Ultrabithorax (Ubx) suppresses limb formation in the abdomen by repressing the leg selector gene Distalless, whereas Antennapedia (Antp), a thoracic Hox protein, does not repress Distalless. We show that the Hox cofactors Extradenticle and Homothorax selectively enhance Ubx, but not Antp, binding to a Distalless regulatory sequence. A C-terminal peptide in Ubx stimulates binding to this site. However, DNA binding is not sufficient for Distalless repression. Instead, an additional alternatively spliced domain in Ubx is required for Distalless repression but not DNA binding. Thus, the functional specificities of Hox proteins depend on both DNA binding-dependent and -independent mechanisms.

Functional comparison of the Hoxa 4, Hoxa 10, and Hoxa 11 homeoboxes

A number of models attempt to explain the functional relationships of Hox genes. The functional equivalence model states that mammalian Hox-encoded proteins are largely functionally equivalent, and that Hox quantity is more important than Hox quality. In this report, we describe the results of two homeobox swaps. In one case, the homeobox of Hoxa 11 was replaced with that of the very closely related Hoxa 10. Developmental function was assayed by analyzing the phenotypes of all possible allele combinations, including the swapped allele, and null alleles for Hoxa 11 and Hoxd 11. This chimeric gene provided wild-type function in the development of the axial skeleton and male reproductive tract, but served as a hypomorph allele in the development of the appendicular skeleton, kidneys, and female reproductive tract. In the other case, the Hoxa 11 homeobox was replaced with that of the divergent Hoxa 4 gene. This chimeric gene provided near recessive null function in all tissues except the axial skeleton, which developed normally. These results demonstrate that even the most conserved regions of Hox genes, the homeoboxes, are not functionally interchangeable in the development of most tissues. In some cases, developmental function tracked with the homeobox, as previously seen in simpler organisms. Homeoboxes with more 5' cluster positions were generally dominant over more 3' homeoboxes, consistent with phenotypic suppression seen in Drosophila. Surprisingly, however, all Hox homeoboxes tested did appear functionally equivalent in the formation of the axial skeleton. The determination of segment identity is one of the most evolutionarily ancient functions of Hox genes. It is interesting that Hox homeoboxes are interchangeable in this process, but are functionally distinct in other aspects of development.

Conserved function of Caenorhabditis elegans UNC-30 and mouse Pitx2 in controlling GABAergic neuron differentiation

We are taking a cross-species approach to identify genes that are required for mammalian GABAergic neuron differentiation. On the basis of homeodomain similarity, the vertebrate Pitx genes appear to be orthologs of unc-30, a Caenorhabditis elegans gene necessary for differentiation of the GABAergic phenotype of type D neurons. One of the Pitx genes, Pitx2, is expressed in regions of GABAergic neurogenesis in the mammalian brain. These observations led us to test the functional conservation of the mouse Pitx2 and worm unc-30 genes using a rescue assay. Pitx2 rescues the GABAergic differentiation defect and partially rescues the axon guidance and behavioral phenotypes of unc-30 mutants, indicating a high degree of functional conservation between these evolutionarily related genes. Previous studies show that UNC-30 directly regulates the unc-25/glutamate decarboxylase gene that encodes the enzyme for GABA synthesis. We find that the promoter regions of the mouse and human genes coding for the 67 kDa glutamate decarboxylase (Gad1) also contain binding sites matching the UNC-30/Pitx2 consensus binding site sequence. We show that these sites specifically bind to Pitx2 protein in vitro and that in transfected neuroblastoma cells, the Pitx2 binding sites contribute to the basal activity of the Gad1 promoter. Furthermore, in cotransfection experiments, we find that Pitx2 strongly activates the Gad1 promoter. These results indicate that Pitx2 may regulate Gad1 expression in mammals, suggesting a new role for this key developmental transcription factor as a regulator of GABAergic differentiation during mammalian neural development. Our results suggest that some of the mechanisms regulating GABAergic differentiation are evolutionarily conserved.

Drosophila fushi tarazu. a gene on the border of homeotic function

BACKGROUND

Hox genes specify cell fate and regional identity during animal development. These genes are present in evolutionarily conserved clusters thought to have arisen by gene duplication and divergence. Most members of the Drosophila Hox complex (HOM-C) have homeotic functions. However, a small number of HOM-C genes, such as the segmentation gene fushi tarazu (ftz), have nonhomeotic functions. If these genes arose from a homeotic ancestor, their functional properties must have changed significantly during the evolution of modern Drosophila.

RESULTS

Here, we have asked how Drosophila ftz evolved from an ancestral homeotic gene to obtain a novel function in segmentation. We expressed Ftz proteins at various developmental stages to assess their potential to regulate segmentation and to generate homeotic transformations. Drosophila Ftz protein has lost the inherent ability to mediate homeosis and functions exclusively in segmentation pathways. In contrast, Ftz from the primitive insect Tribolium (Tc-Ftz) has retained homeotic potential, generating homeotic transformations in larvae and adults and retaining the ability to repress homothorax, a hallmark of homeotic genes. Similarly, Schistocerca Ftz (Sg-Ftz) caused homeotic transformations of antenna toward leg. Primitive Ftz orthologs have moderate segmentation potential, reflected by weak interactions with the segmentation-specific cofactor Ftz-F1. Thus, Ftz orthologs represent evolutionary intermediates that have weak segmentation potential but retain the ability to act as homeotic genes.

CONCLUSIONS

ftz evolved from an ancestral homeotic gene as a result of changes in both regulation of expression and specific alterations in the protein-coding region. Studies of ftz orthologs from primitive insects have provided a "snap-shot" view of the progressive evolution of a Hox protein as it took on segmentation function and lost homeotic potential. We propose that the specialization of Drosophila Ftz for segmentation resulted from loss and gain of specific domains that mediate interactions with distinct cofactors.

The developmental and molecular biology of genes that subdivide the body of Drosophila

During the past decade, much progress has been made in understanding how the adult fly is built. Some old concepts such as those of compartments and selector genes have been revitalized. In addition, recent work suggests the existence of genes involved in the regionalization of the adult that do not have all the features of selector genes. Nevertheless, they generate morphological distinctions within the body plan. Here we re-examine some of the defining criteria of selector genes and suggest that these newly characterized genes fulfill many, but not all, of these criteria. Further, we propose that these genes can be classified according to the domains in which they function. Finally, we discuss experiments that address the molecular mechanisms by which selector and selector-like gene products function in the fly.

The Dlx3 protein harbors basic residues required for nuclear localization, transcriptional activity and binding to Msx1

The murine Dlx3 protein is a putative transcriptional activator that has been implicated during development and differentiation of epithelial tissue. Dlx3 contains a homeodomain and mutational analysis has revealed two regions, one N-terminal and one C-terminal to the homeodomain, that act as transcriptional activators in a yeast one-hybrid assay. In addition to transactivation, data are presented to demonstrate specific DNA binding and an association between Dlx3 and the Msx1 protein in vitro. Immunohistochemical analysis confirmed coexpression of Dlx3 and Msx1 proteins in the differentiated layers of murine epidermal tissues. Transcription factor function requires nuclear localization. In this study, the intracellular localization of the green fluorescent protein fused to Dlx3 was examined in keratinocytes induced to differentiate by calcium and is shown to localize to the nucleus. A bipartite nuclear localization signal (NLS) was identified by mutational analysis and shown to be sufficient for nuclear localization. This was demonstrated by insertion of the Dlx3 bipartite NLS sequence into a cytoplasmic fusion protein, GFP-keratin 14, which functionally redirected GFP-keratin 14 expression to the nucleus. Further analysis of Dlx3 NLS mutants revealed that the Dlx3 NLS sequences are required for specific DNA binding, transactivation potential and interactions with the Msx1 protein.

Target selectivity of bicoid is dependent on nonconsensus site recognition and protein-protein interaction

We describe experiments to compare the activities of two Drosophila homeodomain proteins, Bicoid (Bcd) and an altered-specificity mutant of Fushi tarazu, Ftz(Q50K). Although the homeodomains of these proteins share a virtually indistinguishable ability to recognize a consensus Bcd site, only Bcd can activate transcription from natural enhancer elements when assayed in both yeast and Drosophila Schneider S2 cells. Our analysis of chimeric proteins suggests that both the homeodomain of Bcd and sequences outside the homeodomain contribute to its ability to recognize natural enhancer elements. We further show that, unlike the Bcd homeodomain, the Ftz(Q50K) homeodomain fails to recognize nonconsensus sites found in natural enhancer elements. The defect of a chimeric protein containing the homeodomain of Ftz(Q50K) in place of that of Bcd can be preferentially restored by converting the nonconsensus sites in natural enhancer elements to consensus sites. Our experiments suggest that the biological specificity of Bcd is determined by combinatorial contributions of two important mechanisms: the nonconsensus site recognition function conferred by the homeodomain and the cooperativity function conferred primarily by sequences outside the homeodomain. A systematic comparison of different assay methods and enhancer elements further suggests a fluid nature of the requirements for these two Bcd functions in target selection.

Beta-cell differentiation factor Nkx6.1 contains distinct DNA binding interference and transcriptional repression domains

beta-Cell differentiation factor Nkx6.1 is a homeodomain protein expressed in developing and mature beta-cells in the pancreatic islets of Langerhans. To understand how it contributes to beta-cell development and function, we characterized its DNA binding and transactivation properties. A single copy of the homeodomain of Nkx6. 1 binds to a strictly conserved 8-base pair DNA consensus sequence, TTAATTAC; even minor variations to this consensus reduce DNA binding affinity significantly. Full-length Nkx6.1, however, has markedly reduced DNA binding affinity due to an acidic domain at the carboxyl end of the molecule that functions as a mobile binding interference domain capable of interrupting the interaction between DNA and DNA binding domains of the helix-turn-helix type. When expressed in fibroblast cell lines, Nkx6.1 represses transcription through isolated Nkx6.1 binding sites; in beta-cell lines, Nkx6.1 specifically represses the intact insulin promoter through TAAT-containing sequences. In Gal4 one-hybrid fusion studies, transcriptional repression maps to a discreet region within the amino terminus. Our findings suggest a model in which Nkx6.1, regulated by interactions through its carboxyl terminus, directs the repression of specific genes in developing and mature beta-cells.

Distinct hox protein sequences determine specificity in different tissues

Hox genes encode evolutionarily conserved transcription factors that control the morphological diversification along the anteroposterior (A/P) body axis. Expressed in precise locations in the ectoderm, mesoderm, and endoderm, Hox proteins have distinct regulatory activities in different tissues. How Hox proteins achieve tissue-specific functions and why cells lying at equivalent A/P positions but in different germ layers have distinctive responses to the same Hox protein remains to be determined. Here, we examine this question by identifying parts of Hox proteins necessary for Hox function in different tissues. Available genetic markers allow the regulatory effects of two Hox proteins, Abdominal-A (AbdA) and Ultrabithorax (Ubx), to be distinguished in the Drosophila embryonic epidermis and visceral mesoderm (VM). Chimeric Ubx/AbdA proteins were tested in both tissues and used to identify protein sequences that endow AbdA with a different target gene specificity from Ubx. We found that distinct protein sequences define AbdA, as opposed to Ubx, function in the epidermis vs. the VM. These sequences lie mostly outside the homeodomain (HD), emphasizing the importance of non-HD residues for specific Hox activities. Hox tissue specificity is therefore achieved by sensing distinct Hox protein structures in different tissues.

The design and analysis of a homeotic response element

We have shown that the 26 bp bx1 element from the regulatory region of Distal-less is capable of imposing control by the homeotic genes Ultrabithorax and abdominal-A on a general epidermal activator in Drosophila. This provides us with an assay to analyze the sequence requirements for specific repression by these Hox genes. Both the core Hox binding site, 5'-TAAT, and the adjacent EXD 5'-TGAT core site are required for repression by Ultrabithorax and abdominal-A. The Distal-less bx1 site thus fits with the model of Hox protein binding specificity based on the consensus PBX/HOX-family site TGATNNAT[g/t][g/a], where the key elements of binding specificity are proposed to lie in the two base pairs following the TGAT. A single base pair deletion in the bx1 sequence generates a site, bx1:A(-)mut, that on the consensus PBX/HOX model would be expected to be regulated by the Deformed Hox gene. We observed, however, that the bx1:A(-)mut site was regulated predominantly by Sex combs reduced, Ultrabithorax and abdominal-A. The analysis of this site indicates that the specificity of action of Hox proteins may depend not only on selective DNA binding but also on specific post-binding interactions.

Functional evolution of the Ultrabithorax protein

The Hox genes have been implicated as central to the evolution of animal body plan diversity. Regulatory changes both in Hox expression domains and in Hox-regulated gene networks have arisen during the evolution of related taxa, but there is little knowledge of whether functional changes in Hox proteins have also contributed to morphological evolution. For example, the evolution of greater numbers of differentiated segments and body parts in insects, compared with the simpler body plans of arthropod ancestors, may have involved an increase in the spectrum of biochemical interactions of individual Hox proteins. Here, we compare the in vivo functions of orthologous Ultrabithorax (Ubx) proteins from the insect Drosophila melanogaster and from an onychophoran, a member of a sister phylum with a more primitive and homonomous body plan. These Ubx proteins, which have been diverging in sequence for over 540 million years, can generate many of the same gain-of-function tissue transformations and can activate and repress many of the same target genes when expressed during Drosophila development. However, the onychophora Ubx (OUbx) protein does not transform the segmental identity of the embryonic ectoderm or repress the Distal-less target gene. This functional divergence is due to sequence changes outside the conserved homeodomain region. The inability of OUbx to function like Drosophila Ubx (DUbx) in the embryonic ectoderm indicates that the Ubx protein may have acquired new cofactors or activity modifiers since the divergence of the onychophoran and insect lineages.

The control of trunk Hox specificity and activity by Extradenticle

We characterize a 37-bp element (fkh[250]) derived from the fork head (fkh) gene, a natural target of the Hox gene Sex combs reduced (Scr). In vitro, Scr cooperatively binds to this DNA with the Hox cofactor Extradenticle (Exd), and the activation of this enhancer in vivo requires Scr and exd. Other Hox/Exd heterodimers do not activate this element in vivo and do not bind this element with high affinity in vitro. The amino-terminal arm of the Scr homeodomain is crucial for the specific activation of this element in vivo. By mutating two base pairs within this element, we can convert the Scr/Exd-binding site to a Hox/Exd consensus site that binds several different Hox/Exd heterodimers. This element, fkh[250(con)], is activated by Scr, Antennapedia (Antp), and Ultrabithorax (Ubx) but repressed by abdominal-A (abd-A). We also show that Scr and Exd are only able to activate the fkh[250] element during the early stages of embryogenesis because, by stage 11, Scr negatively regulates the gene homothorax (hth), which is required for the nuclear localization of Exd. These results suggest that Exd is a specificity cofactor for the trunk Hox genes, and that the control of Exd subcellular localization is a mechanism to regulate Hox activity during development.

Activity regulation of Hox proteins, a mechanism for altering functional specificity in development and evolution

The closely related Hox transcription factors Ultrabithorax (Ubx) and Antennapedia (Antp) respectively direct first abdominal (A1) and second thoracic (T2) segment identities in Drosophila. It has been proposed that their functional differences derive from their differential occupancy of DNA target sites. Here we show that a hybrid version of Ubx (Ubx-VP16), which possesses an enhanced transcriptional activation function, no longer directs A1 denticle pattern in embryonic epidermal cells. Instead, it mimics Antp in directing T2 denticle pattern, and it can rescue the cuticular loss-of-function phenotype of Antp mutants. In cells that do not produce denticles, Ubx-VP16 appears to have largely retained its normal repressive regulatory functions. These results suggest that the modulation of Hox activation and repression functions can account for segment-specific morphological differences that are controlled by different members of the Hox family. Our results also are consistent with the idea that activity regulation underlies the phenotypic suppression phenomenon in which a more posterior Hox protein suppresses the function of a more anterior member of the Hox cluster. The acquisition of novel activation and repression potentials in Hox proteins may be an important mechanism underlying the generation of subtle morphological differences during evolution.

The SKN-1 amino-terminal arm is a DNA specificity segment

The Caenorhabditis elegans SKN-1 protein binds DNA through a basic region like those of bZIP proteins and through a flexible amino-terminal arm segment similar to those with which numerous helix-turn-helix proteins bind to bases in the minor groove. A recent X-ray crystallographic structure suggests that the SKN-1 amino-terminal arm provides only nonspecific DNA binding. In this study, however, we demonstrate that this segment mediates recognition of an AT-rich element that is part of the preferred SKN-1 binding site and thereby significantly increases the sequence specificity with which SKN-1 binds DNA. Mutagenesis experiments show that multiple amino acid residues within the arm are involved in binding. These residues provide binding affinity through distinct but partially redundant interactions and enhance specificity by discriminating against alternate sites. The AT-rich element minor groove is important for binding of the arm, which appears to affect DNA conformation in this region. This conformational effect does not seem to involve DNA bending, however, because the arm does not appear to affect a modest DNA bend that is induced by SKN-1. The data illustrate an example of how a small, flexible protein segment can make an important contribution to DNA binding specificity through multiple interactions and mechanisms.

Site-directed mutations in the vnd/NK-2 homeodomain. Basis of variations in structure and sequence-specific DNA binding

Secondary structures, DNA binding properties, and thermal denaturation behavior of six site-directed mutant homeodomains encoded by the vnd/NK-2 gene from Drosophila melanogaster are described. Three single site H52R, Y54M, and T56W mutations, two double site H52R/T56W and Y54M/T56W mutations, and one triple site H52R/Y54M/T56W mutation were investigated. These positions were chosen based on their variability across homeodomains displaying differences in secondary structure and DNA binding specificity. Multidimensional NMR, electrophoretic mobility shift assays, and circular dichroism spectropolarimetry studies were carried out on recombinant 80-amino acid residue proteins containing the homeodomain. Position 56, but more importantly position 56 in combination with position 52, plays an important role in determining the length of the recognition helix. The H52R mutation alone does not affect the length of this helix but does increase the thermal stability. Introduction of site mutations at positions 52 and 56 in vnd/NK-2 does not modify their high affinity binding to the 18-base pair DNA fragment containing the vnd/NK-2 consensus binding sequence, CAAGTG. Site mutations involving position 54 (Y54M, Y54M/T56W, and H52R/Y54M/T56W) all show a decrease of 1 order of magnitude in their binding affinity. The roles in structure and sequence specificity of individual atom-atom interactions are described.

Two distinct types of repression domain in engrailed: one interacts with the groucho corepressor and is preferentially active on integrated target genes

Active transcriptional repression has been characterized as a function of many regulatory factors. It facilitates combinatorial regulation of gene expression by allowing repressors to be dominant over activators under certain conditions. Here, we show that the Engrailed protein uses two distinct mechanisms to repress transcription. One activity is predominant under normal transient transfection assay conditions in cultured cells. A second activity is predominant in an in vivo active repression assay. The domain mediating the in vivo activity (eh1) is highly conserved throughout several classes of homeoproteins and interacts specifically with the Groucho corepressor. While eh1 shows only weak activity in transient transfections, much stronger activity is seen in culture when an integrated target gene is used. In this assay, the relative activities of different repression domains closely parallel those seen in vivo, with eh1 showing the predominant activity. Reducing the amounts of repressor and target gene in a transient transfection assay also increases the sensitivity of the assay to the Groucho interaction domain, albeit to a lesser extent. This suggests that it utilizes rate-limiting components that are relatively low in abundance. Since Groucho itself is abundant in these cells, the results suggest that a limiting component is recruited effectively by the repressor-corepressor complex only on integrated target genes.

A phosphorylation site in the ftz homeodomain is required for activity

The Drosophila homeodomain-containing protein Fushi tarazu (Ftz) is expressed sequentially in the embryo, first in alternate segments, then in specific neuroblasts and neurons in the central nervous system, and finally in parts of the gut. During these different developmental stages, the protein is heavily phosphorylated on different subsets of Ser and Thr residues. This stage-specific phosphorylation suggests possible roles for signal transduction pathways in directing tissue-specific Ftz activities. Here we show that one of the Ftz phosphorylation sites, T263 in the N-terminus of the Ftz homeodomain, is phosphorylated in vitro by Drosophila embryo extracts and protein kinase A. In the embryo, mutagenesis of this site to the non-phosphorylatable residue Ala resulted in loss of ftz-dependent segments. Conversely, substitution of T263 with Asp, which is also non-phosphorylatable, but which successfully mimics phosphorylated residues in a number of proteins, rescued the mutant phenotype. This suggests that T263 is in the phosphorylated state when functioning normally in vivo. We also demonstrate that the T263 substitutions of Ala and Asp do not affect Ftz DNA-binding activity in vitro, nor do they affect stability or transcriptional activity in transfected S2 cells. This suggests that T263 phosphorylation is most likely required for a homeodomain-mediated interaction with an embryonically expressed protein.

A regulatory element of the empty spiracles homeobox gene is composed of three distinct conserved regions that bind regulatory proteins

Homeobox genes encode a class of highly evolutionarily conserved transcription factors that control embryonic development. The Drosophila melanogaster empty spiracles gene is the homolog of the two human homeobox genes EMX1 and EMX2. These genes are necessary for central nervous system development. We used a regulatory element of the empty spiracles gene to study the control of homeobox gene expression. The 1.2-kilobase (kb) cis-regulatory element located 3 kb 5' of the transcription start site of the empty spiracles gene was analyzed by evolutionary sequence comparisons, gel mobility shift assays, DNase footprinting, and the generation of transgenic flies. The corresponding element from a related species, Drosophila hydei, was cloned. Three discrete, approximately 100 base pair (bp) regions of sequence homology were identified. Each had two blocks of 10 to 40 bp of near perfect sequence identity. Fusion proteins were produced containing the Abdominal-B homeodomain or the empty spiracles homeodomain, known regulators of empty spiracles gene expression. Gel mobility shift assays showed that each of the three regions is bound by both proteins. DNase footprinting revealed closely linked empty spiracles and Abdominal-B binding sites. We then generated transgenic flies containing a reporter linked to individual conserved regions of the enhancer. Reporter expression was evident only outside of the usual empty spiracles expression domain. These elements are not sufficient alone; a combinatorial model is proposed. Conserved discrete areas within a homeobox gene regulatory element, which function as homeodomain protein transcription factor binding sites, are used in a combinatorial fashion to regulate these developmentally important genes.

The DNA binding specificity of engrailed homeodomain

The engrailed gene of Drosophila melanogaster is an integral member of the highly complex cascade which results in a fully developed fruitfly. The gene product of engrailed contains a homeodomain which is responsible for DNA binding via a helix-turn-helix motif. The crystal structure of this 60 amino acid residue domain complexed to DNA is analogous to structures of other homeodomain-DNA complexes, consistent with the high degree of sequence conservation within both protein and DNA. Despite the high degree of homology, homeodomains do exhibit distinct preferences for certain DNA sequences. Such specificity may be at least partly responsible for the interactions necessary for normal development. Using the hydroxyl radical as a chemical probe, we have examined complexes of Engrailed homeodomain with several DNA sequences to determine the protein's binding specificity in solution. We find that Engrailed forms a single, specific complex with a unique DNA binding site which is analogous to the complex seen in the co-crystal structure. In contrast, our chemical probe experiments show that the binding site of Engrailed that was determined by in vitro selection and that also was present in the co-crystal structure contains two possible binding sites. Modification of the sequence of this site to yield single binding sites removes the ambiguity, and results in two different, well-behaved Engrailed-DNA complexes. Our results underscore the utility of chemical probe experiments for defining the variety of modes of interaction of proteins with DNA that can occur in solution, but that might not be apparent in a crystal structure.

Homeodomain-DNA interactions of the Pho2 protein are promoter-dependent

The homeodomain (HD) is a conserved sequence-specific DNA-binding motif found in many eukaryotic transcriptional regulatory proteins. Despite the wealth of in vitro data on the mechanism HD proteins use to bind DNA, comparatively little is known about the roles of individual residues in these domains in vivo . The Saccharomyces cerevisiae Pho2 protein contains a HD that shares significant sequence identity with the Drosophila Engrailed protein. We have used the co-crystal structure of Engrailed as a model to predict how Pho2 might contact DNA and have examined how individual residues of the Pho2 HD contribute to transcriptional activation in vivo and to DNA binding in vitro. Our results demonstrate that Pho2 and Engrailed share many similar DNA-binding characteristics. However, our results also show that some highly conserved residues, which contact the DNA in many HD structures, make relatively small contributions to the DNA-binding affinity and in vivo activity of the Pho2 protein. We also show that the N-terminal arm of the Pho2 HD is a critical component in determining the DNA-binding specificity of the protein and that the requirements for residues in the N-terminal arm are promoter-dependent for Pho2 transcriptional activation and DNA binding.

Protein and DNA contact surfaces that mediate the selective action of the Phox1 homeodomain at the c-fos serum response element

The human homeodomain protein Phox1 can impart serum-responsive transcriptional activity to the c-fos serum response element (SRE) by interacting with serum response factor (SRF). This activity is shared with other Paired class homeodomains but not with more distantly related homeodomains. To understand the mechanism of action of Phox1 at the SRE and the basis for the selective activity of Paired class homeodomains in this context, we performed a detailed mutagenesis of the Phox1 homeodomain. We found that amino acid residues that contact the major groove of the DNA are required for SRE activation in vivo, suggesting an in vivo requirement for major-groove DNA contact by the homeodomain. In contrast, substitution of a lysine residue in the N-terminal arm of the Phox1 homeodomain appeared to abolish DNA binding without affecting activity in vivo. Certain substitutions on the exposed surfaces of helices 1 and 2, not required for DNA binding, abolished activity in vivo, suggesting that these surfaces contact an accessory protein(s) required for this activity. We also found that transfer of a single amino acid residue from the surface of Phox1 helix 1 to the corresponding position in the distantly related Deformed (Dfd) homeodomain imparts to Dfd the ability to activate the SRE in vivo. We propose that Phox1 interacts with one or more factors at the SRE, in addition to SRF, and that the specificity of this interaction is determined by residues on the surfaces of helices 1 and 2.

Anf: a novel class of vertebrate homeobox genes expressed at the anterior end of the main embryonic axis

Five novel genes homologous to the homeobox-containing genes Xanf-1 and Xanf-2 of Xenopus and Hesx-1/Rpx of mouse have been identified as a result of a PCR survey of cDNA in sturgeon, zebrafish, newt, chicken and human. Comparative analysis of the homeodomain primary structure of these genes revealed that they belong to a novel class of homeobox genes, which we name Anf. All genes of this class investigated so far have similar patterns of expression during early embryogenesis, characterized by maximal transcript levels being present at the anterior extremity of the main embryonic body axis. The data obtained also suggest that, despite considerable high structural divergence between their homeodomains, all known Anf genes may be orthologues, and thus represent one of the most quickly evolving classes of vertebrate homeobox genes.

Pbx raises the DNA binding specificity but not the selectivity of antennapedia Hox proteins

We have used a binding site selection strategy to determine the optimal binding sites for Pbx proteins by themselves and as heterodimeric partners with various Hox gene products. Among the Pbx proteins by themselves, only Pbx3 binds with high affinity, as a monomer or as a homodimer, to an optimal binding site, TGATTGATTTGAT. An inhibitory domain located N terminal of the Pbx1 homeodomain prevents intrinsic Pbx1 binding to this sequence. When complexed with Hoxc-6, each of the Pbx gene products binds the same consensus sequence, TGATTTAT, which differs from the site bound by Pbx3 alone. Three members of the Antennapedia family, Hoxc-6, Hoxb-7, and Hoxb-8, select the same binding site in conjunction with Pbx1. The affinities of these proteins as heterodimeric partners with Pbx1 for the selected optimal binding site are similar. However, the binding specificity of Hox proteins for optimal binding sites is increased, compared to nonspecific DNA, in the presence of Pbx proteins. Thus, while cooperative DNA binding involving heterodimers of Pbx and Hox gene products derived from members within the Antennapedia family does not increase binding site selectivity, DNA binding specificity of the Hox gene products is significantly enhanced in the presence of Pbx.

A conserved cluster of homeodomain binding sites in the mouse Hoxa-4 intron functions in Drosophila embryos as an enhancer that is directly regulated by Ultrabithorax

The evolutionary conservation of the homeodomains suggests that their in vivo DNA binding sites may also be conserved between vertebrates and invertebrates. The regulatory function of the mouse Hoxa-4 and Hoxb-4 introns were analyzed in Drosophila since they both contain a cluster of three homeodomain binding sites, the HB1 element, which was also found in the introns of other Hox genes ranging from fish to humans as well as in the Ultrabithorax (Ubx) and decapentaplegic (dpp) genes of Drosophila. The enhancer of the Hoxa-4 intron was found to respond to several homeobox genes activating a lacZ reporter gene in particular cells of the epidermis in Drosophila embryos. The enhancer activity was found to be similar to previously described autoregulatory elements of Deformed (Dfd), the Drosophila homolog of Hoxa-4, but additional expression was observed in more posterior segments activated by Ubx and repressed by abdominal-A (abd-A). Point mutations in the homeodomain binding sites in HB1 abolished the enhancer activity. A second site suppression experiment showed that UBX interacts directly with the HB1 element. When the HB1 element in the Hoxa-4 intron was replaced by that of the mesodermal enhancer of dpp, which was previously shown to be directly controlled by Ubx, Ubx-dependent activation was retained, but repression by abd-A was lost. The same result was obtained when the third binding site of HB1 was altered, suggesting that this site is responsible for abd-A-dependent repression. Finally, deletion of potential cofactor binding sites flanking the HB1 element that are also conserved in the medaka, chicken, and mouse genes revealed that they are important for enhancer function in Drosophila and that the Dfd-dependent and the Ubx-dependent expression requires different sites. The evolutionary and functional conservation of the HB1 elements indicates that not only the homeodomains but also some of their in vivo binding sites are conserved between vertebrates and invertebrates.