Binding of TFIID and MEF2 to the TATA element activates transcription of the Xenopus MyoDa promoter

MEF2C Interacts With c-FOS in PTH-Stimulated Mmp13 Gene Expression in Osteoblastic Cells

Parathyroid hormone (PTH) regulates the transcription of many genes in the osteoblast. One of these genes is Mmp13, which is involved in bone remodeling and early stages of endochondral bone formation. Previously, we reported that PTH induces Mmp13 transcription by regulating the dissociation of histone deacetylase 4 (HDAC4) from runt-related transcription factor 2 (Runx2), and the association of the HATs, p300, and p300/CREB binding protein (CBP)-associated factor. It is known that, in addition to Runx2, HDAC4 binds to the transcription factor, myocyte-specific enhancer factor 2c (MEF2C), and represses its activity. In this work, we investigated whether MEF2C participates in PTH-stimulated Mmp13 gene expression in osteoblastic cells and how it does so. Knockdown of Mef2c in UMR 106-01 cells repressed Mmp13 messenger RNA expression and promoter activity with or without PTH treatment. Chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) assays showed that MEF2C associated with the Mmp13 promoter; this increased after 4 hours of PTH treatment. ChIP-reChIP results indicate that endogenous MEF2C associates with HDAC4 on the Mmp13 promoter; after PTH treatment, this association decreased. From gel shift, ChIP, and promoter-reporter assays, MEF2C was found to associate with the activator protein-1 (AP-1) site without directly binding to DNA and had its stimulatory effect through interaction with c-FOS. In conclusion, MEF2C is necessary for Mmp13 gene expression at the transcriptional level and participates in PTH-stimulated Mmp13 gene expression by increased binding to c-FOS at the AP-1 site in the Mmp13 promoter. The observation of MEF2C interacting with a member of the AP-1 transcription factor family provides knowledge of the functions of HDAC4, c-FOS, and MEF2C.

TBP/TFIID-dependent activation of MyoD target genes in skeletal muscle cells

Change in the identity of the components of the transcription pre-initiation complex is proposed to control cell type-specific gene expression. Replacement of the canonical TFIID-TBP complex with TRF3/TBP2 was reported to be required for activation of muscle-gene expression. The lack of a developmental phenotype in TBP2 null mice prompted further analysis to determine whether TBP2 deficiency can compromise adult myogenesis. We show here that TBP2 null mice have an intact regeneration potential upon injury and that TBP2 is not expressed in established C2C12 muscle cell or in primary mouse MuSCs. While TFIID subunits and TBP are downregulated during myoblast differentiation, reduced amounts of these proteins form a complex that is detectable on promoters of muscle genes and is essential for their expression. This evidence demonstrates that TBP2 does not replace TBP during muscle differentiation, as previously proposed, with limiting amounts of TFIID-TBP being required to promote muscle-specific gene expression.

DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12534.001

The muscles that allow animal’s to move are built predominantly of cells called myofibers. Like other specialized cell types, these myofibers develop via a regulated set of events called differentiation. In adults, this phenomenon occurs when muscles regenerate after an injury, and new myofibers differentiate from so-called satellite cells that already reside within the muscles.

Differentiation is regulated at the genetic level, and the development of myofibers relies on the activation of muscle-specific genes. A gene’s expression is typically controlled via a nearby regulatory region of DNA called a promoter that can be recognized by various molecular machines made from protein complexes. In most adult tissues, such regulatory machineries contain a complex called TFIID.

Previously it was reported that the TFIID complex was eliminated from cells during muscle differentiation, and that an alternative protein complex called TBP2/TAF3 recognizes and regulates the promoters of muscle-specific genes. However, Malecova et al. have now discovered that TFIID is actually present, albeit at reduced amounts, in differentiated muscles and that it drives the activation of muscle-specific genes during differentiation. Further experiments also showed that the TBP2 protein is not required for differentiation of muscle cells or for the regeneration of injured muscles, and is actually absent in muscle cells.

Further studies are now needed to explore how the TFIID-containing complex works with other regulatory protein complexes that are known to help make muscle-specific genes accessible to TFIID. It will also be important to study the relationship between the down-regulation of TFIID components and the activation of muscle-specific genes that typically occurs in mature myofbers. Together these efforts will allow the various aspects of gene regulation to be integrated, which will help provide a more complete understanding of the process of muscle differentiation.

DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12534.002

Severe myopathy in mice lacking the MEF2/SRF-dependent gene leiomodin-3

Maintenance of skeletal muscle structure and function requires a precise stoichiometry of sarcomeric proteins for proper assembly of the contractile apparatus. Absence of components of the sarcomeric thin filaments causes nemaline myopathy, a lethal congenital muscle disorder associated with aberrant myofiber structure and contractility. Previously, we reported that deficiency of the kelch-like family member 40 (KLHL40) in mice results in nemaline myopathy and destabilization of leiomodin-3 (LMOD3). LMOD3 belongs to a family of tropomodulin-related proteins that promote actin nucleation. Here, we show that deficiency of LMOD3 in mice causes nemaline myopathy. In skeletal muscle, transcription of Lmod3 was controlled by the transcription factors SRF and MEF2. Myocardin-related transcription factors (MRTFs), which function as SRF coactivators, serve as sensors of actin polymerization and are sequestered in the cytoplasm by actin monomers. Conversely, conditions that favor actin polymerization de-repress MRTFs and activate SRF-dependent genes. We demonstrated that the actin nucleator LMOD3, together with its stabilizing partner KLHL40, enhances MRTF-SRF activity. In turn, SRF cooperated with MEF2 to sustain the expression of LMOD3 and other components of the contractile apparatus, thereby establishing a regulatory circuit to maintain skeletal muscle function. These findings provide insight into the molecular basis of the sarcomere assembly and muscle dysfunction associated with nemaline myopathy.

Transcriptional regulation of mesoderm genes by MEF2D during early Xenopus development

In Xenopus, specification of the three germ layers is one of the earliest developmental decisions occurring prior to gastrulation. The maternally-expressed vegetally-localized transcription factor VegT has a central role in cell autonomous specification of endoderm and in the generation of mesoderm-inducing signals. Yet, marginally-expressed transcription factors that cooperate with mesoderm-inducing signals are less investigated. Here we report that the transcription factors MEF2A and MEF2D are expressed in the animal hemisphere before mid-blastula transition. At the initiation of zygotic transcription, expression of MEF2D expands into the marginal region that gives rise to mesoderm. Knockdown of MEF2D delayed gastrulation movements, prevented embryo elongation at the subsequent tailbud stage and caused severe defects in axial tissues. At the molecular level, MEF2D knockdown reduced the expression of genes involved in mesoderm formation and patterning. We also report that MEF2D functions with FGF signaling in a positive feedback loop; each augments the expression of the other in the marginal region and both are necessary for mesodermal gene expression. One target of MEF2D is the Nodal-related 1 gene (Xnr1) that mediates some of MEF2D mesodermal activities. Chromatin immunoprecipitation analysis revealed that MEF2D associates with transcriptional regulatory sequences of the Xnr1 gene. Several MEF2 binding sites within the proximal promoter region of Xnr1 were identified by their in vitro association with MEF2D protein. The same promoter region was necessary but not sufficient to mediate MEF2D activity in a reporter gene assay. In sum, our results indicate that the MEF2D protein is a key transcription factor in the marginal zone acting in a positive feedback loop with FGF signaling that promotes mesoderm specification at late blastula stages.

Mef2d acts upstream of muscle identity genes and couples lateral myogenesis to dermomyotome formation in Xenopus laevis

Xenopus myotome is formed by a first medial and lateral myogenesis directly arising from the presomitic mesoderm followed by a second myogenic wave emanating from the dermomyotome. Here, by a series of gain and loss of function experiments, we showed that Mef2d, a member of the Mef2 family of MADS-box transcription factors, appeared as an upstream regulator of lateral myogenesis, and as an inducer of dermomyotome formation at the beginning of neurulation. In the lateral presomitic cells, we showed that Mef2d transactivates Myod expression which is necessary for lateral myogenesis. In the most lateral cells of the presomitic mesoderm, we showed that Mef2d and Paraxis (Tcf15), a member of the Twist family of transcription factors, were co-localized and activate directly the expression of Meox2, which acts upstream of Pax3 expression during dermomyotome formation. Cell tracing experiments confirm that the most lateral Meox2 expressing cells of the presomitic mesoderm correspond to the dermomyotome progenitors since they give rise to the most dorsal cells of the somitic mesoderm. Thus, Xenopus Mef2d couples lateral myogenesis to dermomyotome formation before somite segmentation. These results together with our previous works reveal striking similarities between dermomyotome and tendon formation in Xenopus: both develop in association with myogenic cells and both involve a gene transactivation pathway where one member of the Mef2 family, Mef2d or Mef2c, cooperates with a bHLH protein of the Twist family, Paraxis or Scx (Scleraxis) respectively. We propose that these shared characteristics in Xenopus laevis reflect the existence of a vertebrate ancestral mechanism which has coupled the development of the myogenic cells to the formation of associated tissues during somite compartmentalization.

A conserved MRF4 promoter drives transgenic expression in Xenopus embryonic somites and adult muscle

The muscle regulatory factor MRF4 is expressed in both embryonic and adult vertebrate skeletal muscle cells. In mammals the MRF4 gene has a complex cis-regulatory structure, with many kilobases (kb) of upstream sequence required for embryonic expression in transgenic mice. Here, initial functional comparison between Xenopus and mammalian MRF4 genes revealed that 610 base pairs (bp) of the XMRF4a proximal promoter drove substantial transgenic expression in X. laevis myogenic cells, from somites of neurula embryos through adult myofibers, and as little as 180 bp gave detectable expression. Over 300 bp of XMRF4a proximal promoter sequence is highly conserved among three X. laevis and X. tropicalis MRF4 genes, but only about 150 bp shows significant identity to mammalian MRF4 genes. This most-conserved XMRF4a region contains a putative MEF2 binding site essential for expression both in transgenic embryos and in transfected mouse muscle cells. A rat MRF4 minimal promoter including the conserved region also was active in transgenic X. laevis embryos, demonstrating a striking difference between the mouse and Xenopus transgenic systems. The longest XMRF4a promoter construct tested, with 9.5 kb of 5'-flanking sequence, produced significantly greater expression in transfected mouse cells than did promoters 4.3-kb or shorter, suggesting that the intervening region contains an enhancer, although no increased expression was evident when this region was included in transgenic X. laevis embryos. Further identification and analysis of Xenopus MRF4 transcriptional control elements will offer insights into the evolution of this gene and of the myogenic gene regulatory network.

Modulation of adverse cardiac remodeling by STARS, a mediator of MEF2 signaling and SRF activity

Cytoskeletal proteins have been implicated in the pathogenesis of cardiomyopathy, but how the cytoskeleton influences the transcriptional alterations associated with adverse cardiac remodeling remains unclear. Striated muscle activator of Rho signaling (STARS) is a muscle-specific actin-binding protein localized to the Z disc that activates serum response factor-dependent (SRF-dependent) transcription by inducing nuclear translocation of the myocardin-related SRF coactivators MRTF-A and -B. We show that STARS expression is upregulated in mouse models of cardiac hypertrophy and in failing human hearts. A conserved region of the STARS promoter containing an essential binding site for myocyte enhancer factor-2 (MEF2), a stress-responsive transcriptional activator, mediates cardiac expression of STARS, which in turn activates SRF target genes. Forced overexpression of STARS in the heart sensitizes the heart to pressure overload and calcineurin signaling, resulting in exaggerated deterioration in cardiac function in response to these hypertrophic stimuli. These findings suggest that STARS modulates the responsiveness of the heart to stress signaling by functioning as a cytoskeletal intermediary between MEF2 and SRF.

Metamorphic T3-response genes have specific co-regulator requirements

Thyroid hormone receptors (TRs) have several regulatory functions in vertebrates. In the absence of thyroid hormone (T3; tri-iodothyronine), apo-TRs associate with co-repressors to repress transcription, whereas in the presence of T3, holo-TRs engage transcriptional coactivators. Although many studies have addressed the molecular mechanisms of T3 action, it is not known how specific physiological responses arise. We used T3-dependent amphibian metamorphosis to analyse how TRs interact with particular co-regulators to differentially regulate gene expression during development. Using chromatin immuno-precipitation to study tissue from pre-metamorphic tadpoles, we found that TRs are physically associated with T3-responsive promoters, whether or not T3 is present. Addition of T3 results in histone H4 acetylation specifically on T3-response genes. Most importantly, we show that individual T3-response genes have distinct co-regulator requirements, the T3-dependent co-repressor-to-coactivator switch being gene-specific for both co-regulator categories.

Muscle LIM protein promotes myogenesis by enhancing the activity of MyoD

The muscle LIM protein (MLP) is a muscle-specific LIM-only factor that exhibits a dual subcellular localization, being present in both the nucleus and in the cytoplasm. Overexpression of MLP in C2C12 myoblasts enhances skeletal myogenesis, whereas inhibition of MLP activity blocks terminal differentiation. Thus, MLP functions as a positive developmental regulator, although the mechanism through which MLP promotes terminal differentiation events remains unknown. While examining the distinct roles associated with the nuclear and cytoplasmic forms of MLP, we found that nuclear MLP functions through a physical interaction with the muscle basic helix-loop-helix (bHLH) transcription factors MyoD, MRF4, and myogenin. This interaction is highly specific since MLP does not associate with nonmuscle bHLH proteins E12 or E47 or with the myocyte enhancer factor-2 (MEF2) protein, which acts cooperatively with the myogenic bHLH proteins to promote myogenesis. The first LIM motif in MLP and the highly conserved bHLH region of MyoD are responsible for mediating the association between these muscle-specific factors. MLP also interacts with MyoD-E47 heterodimers, leading to an increase in the DNA-binding activity associated with this active bHLH complex. Although MLP lacks a functional transcription activation domain, we propose that it serves as a cofactor for the myogenic bHLH proteins by increasing their interaction with specific DNA regulatory elements. Thus, the functional complex of MLP-MyoD-E protein reveals a novel mechanism for both initiating and maintaining the myogenic program and suggests a global strategy for how LIM-only proteins may control a variety of developmental pathways.

Molecular mechanisms of myogenic coactivation by p300: direct interaction with the activation domain of MyoD and with the MADS box of MEF2C

By searching for molecules that assist MyoD in converting fibroblasts to muscle cells, we have found that p300 and CBP, two related molecules that act as transcriptional adapters, coactivate the myogenic basic-helix-loop-helix (bHLH) proteins. Coactivation by p300 involves novel physical interactions between p300 and the amino-terminal activation domain of MyoD. In particular, disruption of the FYD domain, a group of three amino acids conserved in the activation domains of other myogenic bHLH proteins, drastically diminishes the transactivation potential of MyoD and abolishes both p300-mediated coactivation and the physical interaction between MyoD and p300. Two domains of p300, at its amino and carboxy terminals, independently function to both mediate coactivation and physically interact with MyoD. A truncated segment of p300, unable to bind MyoD, acts as a dominant negative mutation and abrogates both myogenic conversion and transactivation by MyoD, suggesting that endogenous p300 is a required coactivator for MyoD function. The p300 dominant negative peptide forms multimers with intact p300. p300 and CBP serve as coactivators of another class of transcriptional activators critical for myogenesis, myocyte enhancer factor 2 (MEF2). In fact, transactivation mediated by the MEF2C protein is potentiated by the two coactivators, and this phenomenon is associated with the ability of p300 to interact with the MADS domain of MEF2C. Our results suggest that p300 and CBP may positively influence myogenesis by reinforcing the transcriptional autoregulatory loop established between the myogenic bHLH and the MEF2 factors.

Combinatorial control of muscle development by basic helix-loop-helix and MADS-box transcription factors

Members of the MyoD family of muscle-specific basic helix-loop-helix (bHLH) proteins function within a genetic pathway to control skeletal muscle development. Mutational analyses of these factors suggested that their DNA binding domains mediated interaction with a coregulator required for activation of muscle-specific transcription. Members of the myocyte enhancer binding factor 2 (MEF2) family of MADS-box proteins are expressed at high levels in muscle and neural cells and at lower levels in several other cell types. MEF2 factors are unable to activate muscle gene expression alone, but they potentiate the transcriptional activity of myogenic bHLH proteins. This potentiation appears to be mediated by direct interactions between the DNA binding domains of these different types of transcription factors. Biochemical and genetic evidence suggests that MEF2 factors are the coregulators for myogenic bHLH proteins. The presence of MEF2 and cell-specific bHLH proteins in other cell types raises the possibility that these proteins may also cooperate to regulate other programs of cell-specific gene expression. We present a model to account for such cooperative interactions.

Multiple steps in the regulation of transcription-factor level and activity

This review focuses on the regulation of transcription factors, many of which are DNA-binding proteins that recognize cis-regulatory elements of target genes and are the most direct regulators of gene transcription. Transcription factors serve as integration centres of the different signal-transduction pathways affecting a given gene. It is obvious that the regulation of these regulators themselves is of crucial importance for differential gene expression during development and in terminally differentiated cells. Transcription factors can be regulated at two, principally different, levels, namely concentration and activity, each of which can be modulated in a variety of ways. The concentrations of transcription factors, as of intracellular proteins in general, may be regulated at any of the steps leading from DNA to protein, including transcription, RNA processing, mRNA degradation and translation. The activity of a transcription factor is often regulated by (de) phosphorylation, which may affect different functions, e.g. nuclear localization DNA binding and trans-activation. Ligand binding is another mode of transcription-factor activation. It is typical for the large super-family of nuclear hormone receptors. Heterodimerization between transcription factors adds another dimension to the regulatory diversity and signal integration. Finally, non-DNA-binding (accessory) factors may mediate a diverse range of functions, e.g. serving as a bridge between the transcription factor and the basal transcription machinery, stabilizing the DNA-binding complex or changing the specificity of the target sequence recognition. The present review presents an overview of different modes of transcription-factor regulation, each illustrated by typical examples.

Mutational analysis of the DNA binding, dimerization, and transcriptional activation domains of MEF2C

There are four members of the myocyte enhancer factor 2 (MEF2) family of transcription factors in vertebrates, MEF2A, -B, -C, and -D, which have homology within a MADS box at their amino termini and an adjacent motif known as the MEF2 domain. These factors activate muscle gene expression by binding as homo- and heterodimers to an A/T-rich DNA sequence in the control regions of muscle-specific genes. To understand the mechanisms of muscle gene activation of MEF2 factors, we generated a series of deletion and site-directed mutants of MEF2C. These mutants demonstrated that the MADS and MEF2 domains mediate DNA binding and dimerization, whereas the carboxyl terminus is required for transcriptional activation. Amino acids that are essential for MEF2 site-dependent transcription but which do not affect DNA binding were also identified in the MEF2 domain. This type of positive-control mutant demonstrates that the transcription activation domain of MEF2C, although separate from the MEF2 domain, is dependent on this domain for transcriptional activation through the MEF2 site. MEF2 mutants that are defective for DNA binding act as dominant negative mutants and can inhibit activation of MEF2-dependent genes by wild-type MEF2C.

Expression and activity of serum response factor is required for expression of the muscle-determining factor MyoD in both dividing and differentiating mouse C2C12 myoblasts

To understand the mechanism by which the serum response factor (SRF) is involved in the process of skeletal muscle differentiation, we have assessed the effect of inhibiting SRF activity or synthesis on the expression of the muscle-determining factor MyoD. Inhibition of SRF activity in mouse myogenic C2C12 cells through microinjection of either the SRE oligonucleotide (which acts by displacing SRF proteins from the endogenous SRE sequences), purified SRF-DB (a 30-kDa portion of SRF containing the DNA-binding domain of SRF, which acts as a dominant negative mutant in vivo), or purified anti-SRF antibodies rapidly prevents the expression of MyoD. Moreover, the rapid shutdown of MyoD expression after in vivo inhibition of SRF activity is observed not only in proliferating myoblasts but also in myoblasts cultured under differentiating conditions. Additionally, by using a cellular system expressing a glucocorticoid-inducible antisense-SRF (from aa 74 to 244) we have shown that blocking SRF expression by dexamethasone induction of antisense SRF results in the lack of MyoD expression as probed by both immunofluorescence and Northern blot analysis. Taken together these data demonstrate that SRF expression and activity are required for the expression of the muscle-determining factor MyoD.

Regulation of Gax homeobox gene transcription by a combination of positive factors including myocyte-specific enhancer factor 2

Homeobox-containing genes play an essential role in basic processes during embryogenesis and development, but little is known about the regulation of their expression. To elucidate regulatory networks that govern homeobox gene expression, we defined the core promoter of the mouse Gax homeobox gene and characterized its interactions with cellular proteins. Transient transfection experiments revealed Gax promoter activity in several cell types. Deletion analysis defined a 138-bp minimal promoter fragment between positions -125 and +13 relative to the transcription initiation site. Mutagenesis and protein-DNA binding assays suggested that at least three positive factors interact with this fragment and are required for transcriptional activity. One of these factors, HRF-1, recognizes a cis element consisting of an inverted palindromic motif. A second factor is Sp1, that binds to a G/C-rich element. The third is the MADS box factor referred to as MEF2 or RSRF. Mutations in the MEF2/RSRF site had the greatest effect on transcription in cell types that expressed the highest levels of endogenous MEF2 activity. Conversely, overexpression of MEF2A transactivated the Gax promoter more efficiently in cells lacking endogenous MEF2. These data provide evidence for a direct transcriptional link between members of the MADS and homeobox families of transcription factors.

Myogenin and MEF2 function synergistically to activate the MRF4 promoter during myogenesis

The basic helix-loop-helix muscle regulatory factor (MRF) gene family encodes four distinct muscle-specific transcription factors known as MyoD, myogenin, Myf-5, and MRF4. These proteins represent key regulatory factors that control many aspects of skeletal myogenesis. Although the MRFs often exhibit overlapping functional activities, their distinct expression patterns during embryogenesis suggest that each protein plays a unique role in controlling aspects of muscle development. As a first step in determining how MRF4 gene expression is developmentally regulated, we examined the ability of the MRF4 gene to be expressed in a muscle-specific fashion in vitro. Our studies show that the proximal MRF4 promoter contains sufficient information to direct muscle-specific expression. Located within the proximal promoter are a single MEF2 site and E box that are required for maximum MRF4 expression. Mutation of the MEF2 site or E box severely impairs the ability of this promoter to produce a muscle-specific response. In addition, the MEF2 site and E box function in concert to synergistically activate the MRF4 gene in nonmuscle cells coexpressing MEF2 and myogenin proteins. Thus, the MRF4 promoter is regulated by the MEF2 and basic helix-loop-helix MRF protein family through a cross-regulatory circuitry. Surprisingly, the MRF4 promoter itself is not transactivated by MRF4, suggesting that this MRF gene is not subject to an autoregulatory pathway as previously implied by other studies. Understanding the molecular mechanisms regulating expression of each MRF gene is central to fully understanding how these factors control developmental events.

Synergistic interactions between heterologous upstream activation elements and specific TATA sequences in a muscle-specific promoter

Previous investigations have defined three upstream activation elements--CCAC, A/T, and TATA sequences--necessary for muscle-specific transcription of the myoglobin gene. In the present study, we demonstrate that these three sequences elements, prepared as synthetic oligonucleotide cassettes, function synergistically to constitute a cell-type-specific transcription unit. Previously, cognate binding factors that recognize the CCAC and TATA elements were identified. In this study we determine that the A/T element binds two nuclear factors, including myocyte enhancer factor-2 (MEF-2) and an apparently unknown factor we provisionally termed ATF35 (A/T-binding factor, 35 kDa). Mutations that alter in vitro binding of either MEF-2 or ATF35 to this site diminish promoter function in vivo. Functional synergism between factors binding the CCAC and A/T elements is sensitive to subtle mutations in the TATA sequence, recapitulating the unusual preference for specific TATA variants exhibited by the native myoglobin promoter. These results provide new insights into mechanisms that underlie the distinctive pattern of myoglobin gene regulation in mammalian muscle development and lay a foundation for further studies to elucidate general principles of transcriptional control of complex mammalian promoters through combinatorial actions of heterologous transcriptional factors.

E-box- and MEF-2-independent muscle-specific expression, positive autoregulation, and cross-activation of the chicken MyoD (CMD1) promoter reveal an indirect regulatory pathway

Members of the MyoD family of gene-regulatory proteins (MyoD, myogenin, myf5, and MRF4) have all been shown not only to regulate the transcription of numerous muscle-specific genes but also to positively autoregulate and cross activate each other's transcription. In the case of muscle-specific genes, this transcriptional regulation can often be correlated with the presence of a DNA consensus in the regulatory region CANNTG, known as an E box. Little is known about the regulatory interactions of the myogenic factors themselves; however, these interactions are thought to be important for the activation and maintenance of the muscle phenotype. We have identified the minimal region in the chicken MyoD (CMD1) promoter necessary for muscle-specific transcription in primary cultures of embryonic chicken skeletal muscle. The CMD1 promoter is silent in primary chick fibroblast cultures and in muscle cell cultures treated with the thymidine analog bromodeoxyuridine. However, CMD1 and chicken myogenin, as well as, to a lesser degree, chicken Myf5 and MRF4, expressed in trans can activate transcription from the minimal CMD1 promoter in these primary fibroblast cultures. Here we show that the CMD1 promoter contains numerous E-box binding sites for CMD1 and the other myogenic factors, as well as a MEF-2 binding site. Surprisingly, neither muscle-specific and the other myogenic factors, as well as a MEF-2 binding site. Surprisingly, neither muscle-specific expression, autoregulation, or cross activation depends upon the presence of of these E-box or MEF-2 binding sites in the CMD1 promoter. These results demonstrate that the autoregulation and cross activation of the chicken MyoD promoter through the putative direct binding of the myogenic basic helix-loop-helix regulatory factors is mediated through an indirect pathway that involves unidentified regulatory elements and/or ancillary factors.

E-box- and MEF-2-independent muscle-specific expression, positive autoregulation, and cross-activation of the chicken MyoD (CMD1) promoter reveal an indirect regulatory pathway

Members of the MyoD family of gene-regulatory proteins (MyoD, myogenin, myf5, and MRF4) have all been shown not only to regulate the transcription of numerous muscle-specific genes but also to positively autoregulate and cross activate each other's transcription. In the case of muscle-specific genes, this transcriptional regulation can often be correlated with the presence of a DNA consensus in the regulatory region CANNTG, known as an E box. Little is known about the regulatory interactions of the myogenic factors themselves; however, these interactions are thought to be important for the activation and maintenance of the muscle phenotype. We have identified the minimal region in the chicken MyoD (CMD1) promoter necessary for muscle-specific transcription in primary cultures of embryonic chicken skeletal muscle. The CMD1 promoter is silent in primary chick fibroblast cultures and in muscle cell cultures treated with the thymidine analog bromodeoxyuridine. However, CMD1 and chicken myogenin, as well as, to a lesser degree, chicken Myf5 and MRF4, expressed in trans can activate transcription from the minimal CMD1 promoter in these primary fibroblast cultures. Here we show that the CMD1 promoter contains numerous E-box binding sites for CMD1 and the other myogenic factors, as well as a MEF-2 binding site. Surprisingly, neither muscle-specific and the other myogenic factors, as well as a MEF-2 binding site. Surprisingly, neither muscle-specific expression, autoregulation, or cross activation depends upon the presence of of these E-box or MEF-2 binding sites in the CMD1 promoter. These results demonstrate that the autoregulation and cross activation of the chicken MyoD promoter through the putative direct binding of the myogenic basic helix-loop-helix regulatory factors is mediated through an indirect pathway that involves unidentified regulatory elements and/or ancillary factors.

D-MEF2: a MADS box transcription factor expressed in differentiating mesoderm and muscle cell lineages during Drosophila embryogenesis

The myocyte enhancer factor (MEF) 2 family of transcription factors has been implicated in the regulation of muscle transcription in vertebrates. We have cloned a protein from Drosophila, termed D-MEF2, that shares extensive amino acid homology with the MADS (MCM1, Agamous, Deficiens, and serum-response factor) domains of the vertebrate MEF2 proteins. D-mef2 gene expression is first detected during Drosophila embryogenesis within mesodermal precursor cells prior to specification of the somatic and visceral muscle lineages. Expression of D-mef2 is dependent on the mesodermal determinants twist and snail but independent of the homeobox-containing gene tinman, which is required for visceral muscle and heart development. D-mef2 expression precedes that of the MyoD homologue, nautilus, and, in contrast to nautilus, D-mef2 appears to be expressed in all somatic and visceral muscle cell precursors. Its temporal and spatial expression patterns suggest that D-mef2 may play an important role in commitment of mesoderm to myogenic lineages.