QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s):
Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents

First published online February 18, 2004
doi: 10.1242/10.1242/dev.01074

This Article Summary Figures Only Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Lai, E. C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Lai, E. C. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Notch signaling: control of cell communication and cell fate

Howard Hughes Medical Institute, 545 Life Sciences Addition, Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720-3200, USA e-mail: lai{at}fruitfly.org

SUMMARY

Notch is a transmembrane receptor that mediates local cell-cell communication and coordinates a signaling cascade present in all animal species studied to date. Notch signaling is used widely to determine cell fates and to regulate pattern formation; its dysfunction results in a tremendous variety of developmental defects and adult pathologies. This primer describes the mechanism of Notch signal transduction and how it is used to control the formation of biological patterns.

Introduction

The ability to form biological patterns is key to the orderly and reproducible development of all multicellular life. Pattern formation is made possible by molecular mechanisms of cell-cell signaling, which permit cells to influence each other's fate and behavior. One of the most important mechanisms of cell signaling is mediated by Notch, a transmembrane receptor that coordinates a signaling system known as the Notch pathway. Notch was identified genetically almost 100 years ago by a mutant fly with `notches' in its wings (Morgan, 1917), which indicated its requirement in wing outgrowth. Notch has since been found to be crucial for patterning in a great number of other developmental settings throughout the animal kingdom, from worms to humans.

This primer describes the key molecular features of Notch signaling and some representative biological processes that it controls by first introducing the core players and mechanism of Notch signal transduction; Notch is an unusual protein in that it functions both at the cell surface to receive extracellular signals and in the nucleus to regulate gene expression. In addition, some of the many biological settings where Notch signaling regulates cell fates and pattern formation are discussed, together with molecular strategies that influence Notch signaling in specific developmental locations. Finally, how the knowledge of Notch function and biology from model organism studies has lent insight into human diseases caused by aberrant Notch signaling is also considered.

Notch signaling: key players and mechanism

Core components of Notch signaling
Key components of Notch signaling were originally recognized genetically through mutant animals whose phenotypes resembled those of Notch mutants. In flies, Notch was the founding member of a collection of `neurogenic' mutants (see Box 1), so named because they produce a remarkable excess of neurons at the expense of epidermis (Poulson, 1945; Lehmann et al., 1983). Nematodes have two homologs of Notch (LIN-12 and GLP-1), which were identified by mutations that affect cell lineages and germ-line proliferation. The lin-12/glp-1 double mutant displays an aggregate phenotype that constitutes the full loss of Notch activity in the worm; this phenotype is characteristic of a small class of `LIN and GLP' or `LAG' mutants in worms (Lambie and Kimble, 1991).

These mutants laid the foundation for genetic, molecular and biochemical studies that established the core Notch signaling apparatus. At its heart lies a Delta-type ligand, a Notch-type receptor and a transcription factor of the CBF1/Su(H)/LAG1 (CSL) family (Fig. 1). All metazoan organisms studied to date contain one or more orthologs of each of these proteins, and these are summarized in Table 1. Delta- and Notch-related proteins are all single-pass transmembrane proteins that contain extracellular arrays of epidermal growth factor (EGF) repeats; specific EGF repeats mediate direct contact between ligand and receptor (Rebay et al., 1991). CSL proteins are sequence-specific DNA-binding proteins (Henkel et al., 1994) that function downstream of Notch. Because almost all locations of Notch signaling involve this ligand-receptor-transcription factor trio, they are generally considered as the `core' components of Notch signaling.

View larger version (25K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Basic operation of the Notch pathway. The key players are a Delta-type ligand, the receptor Notch and the CSL transcription factor (see Table 1). Delta and Notch are transmembrane proteins containing extracellular arrays of EGF repeats (depicted by rectangles). Activation of Notch by its ligand triggers two proteolytic cleavages of Notch (S2 and S3, see also Box 2). S3 cleavage releases the Notch intracellular domain (Notchintra), which translocates to the nucleus. Notchintra activates CSL. The CSL co-repressor complex is displaced by a co-activator complex containing Notchintra (Co-A, green icons), which mediates Notch target gene activation. In the absence of nuclear Notchintra, CSL associates with a co-repressor complex (Co-R, red icons), which actively represses the transcription of Notch target genes.

Two homes for the receptor Notch
Some signaling cascades are truly cascades, and involve a complicated sequence of proteins that pass a message from the outside of the cell into the nucleus. At the opposite end of the spectrum lies Notch signaling, which operates by a remarkably direct mechanism. The route towards understanding how Notch works, however, has not been so direct.

For many different types of signal-activated cell-surface receptors, removal of the extracellular domain creates a mutant receptor that is permanently in the active mode. This is the case for Notch: an artificial, truncated Notch protein consisting of only its intracellular domain (Notch^intra) has strong constitutive activity in flies and worms (Lieber et al., 1993; Struhl et al., 1993). Interestingly, these engineered Notch^intra proteins localized to the nuclei of transgenic animals, which indicated that the transmembrane receptor Notch might have a nuclear function. Consistent with this model, a direct protein-protein interaction has been observed between Notch^intra and the CSL transcription factor (Fortini and Artavanis-Tsakonas, 1994). However, a competing model based upon tissue culture data proposed that the purpose of Notch-CSL binding was to hold CSL in the cytoplasm until receptor activation, at which point CSL would be released and travel to the nucleus (Fortini and Artavanis-Tsakonas, 1994).

Both models were challenged by the locations of the natural proteins in tissues engaged in Notch signaling: endogenous nuclear Notch is essentially never seen, while CSL appears constitutively nuclear. Eventually, the evidence came together to support strongly the Notch nuclear translocation model. The key findings were: (1) that Notch is proteolyzed in response to its interaction with ligand, which releases a soluble intracellular fragment (a natural Notch^intra molecule; see Box 2) (Kopan et al., 1996; Schroeter et al., 1998; Struhl and Adachi, 1998); (2) that Notch^intra is a transcriptional co-activator (Jarriault et al., 1995; Hsieh et al., 1996); and (3) that exceedingly small, histochemically invisible, amounts of Notch^intra suffice to activate target genes (Schroeter et al., 1998; Struhl and Adachi, 1998). The current `canonical' view of Notch signaling is that ligand-induced activation of Notch triggers the cleavage and liberation of a small amount of Notch<sup>intra</sup>, which then translocates to the nucleus and serves as a CSL transcriptional co-activator (Fig. 1, but see Box 3 for some examples of `non-canonical' Notch signaling).

Notch^intra flips a CSL transcriptional switch
If CSL proteins reside in the nucleus, do they do anything when Notch is at the cell surface? CSL function was initially perplexing; vertebrate CSL proteins were first characterized as transcriptional repressors (Dou et al., 1994), but genetic tests in flies showed that CSL activated target genes during Notch signaling (Bailey and Posakony, 1995; Lecourtois and Schweisguth, 1995). How can the same protein be both a repressor and an activator?

Insight into this puzzle came from a virus. The EBNA2 protein from Epstein-Barr Virus (EBV) is a transcriptional co-activator that binds to and hijacks CSL in infected B cells. Interestingly, EBNA2 converts CSL from a default repressor into an activator of transcription (Hsieh and Hayward, 1995; Waltzer et al., 1995). Notch^intra was later found to use the same strategy (Jarriault et al., 1995; Hsieh et al., 1996). The basis of this switch involves distinct CSL co-repressor and co-activator complexes (Fig. 1, `nucleus'). In the absence of Notch signaling, CSL associates with transcriptional co-repressors that actively keep target gene expression switched off (Kao et al., 1998). Following Notch activation, the CSL co-repressor complex is replaced by a co-activator complex coordinated by Notch^intra. Active repression of targets in the absence of Notch signaling allows cells to tightly control signaling outputs (see Box 4 for unexpected consequences of this), and this dual mode of regulation is now understood to be a common feature of most of the major signaling cascades (reviewed by Barolo and Posakony, 2002).

Box 2. Notch proteolytic processing Following the suggestion that Notch is cleaved during Notch signaling in the early 1990s, the search for the `Notch-ase' was on. Notch proteolysis turned out to be more complicated than anticipated, and involves successive cleavage events termed S1, S2 and S3 (Fig. 1, note that S1 is not shown) (reviewed by Fortini, 2002). Vertebrate Notch is constitutively cleaved in the Golgi complex (S1) by a furin convertase and is reassembled into a functional heterodimeric receptor at the cell surface, although the evidence for similar processing of invertebrate Notch is equivocal. Physical interactions between specific EGF repeats of the ligand and Notch then trigger the second cleavage of Notch (S2), which releases the majority of the extracellular domain (see Fig. 1). This is mediated by the metalloproteases TACE in vertebrates, and possibly Kuzbanian/SUP-17 in invertebrates. Truncated Notch is then a substrate for -secretase, a multicomponent complex that cleaves Notch within its transmembrane domain (S3) and releases its intracellular domain (Notchintra) (Fig. 1). Functional -secretase has four principal transmembrane components: presenilin, nicastrin, Aph1 and Pen2 (reviewed by De Strooper, 2003). Presenilin is a putative aspartyl protease whose dysfunction also underlies the abnormal cleavage of the transmembrane ß-amyloid precursor protein in Alzheimer's disease.

 

Although engagement of the Notch^intra/CSL activator complex is normally necessary for a target gene to respond to Notch signaling, it is not always sufficient. Indeed, no Notch target gene is expressed in every location where Notch itself is activated. This specificity is due to co-regulation of Notch target genes by other transcription factors and/or signaling pathways (reviewed by Bray and Furriols, 2001). For example, cone cell-specific expression of pax2 (sv - FlyBase) during Drosophila eye development is achieved through coordinated regulation by at least three inputs - Notch signaling, EGF receptor signaling and Lozenge (Flores et al., 2000). Combinatorial regulation allows for a transcriptional response that is appropriate for each different developmental setting (see also Box 4 for consequences of complex gene regulation).

Regulation of development by Notch signaling

Notch mutant fly embryos are so strongly affected that Donald Poulson, who pioneered the use of mutants to study fly development, was compelled to write that `All in all, a kind of hopeless monster is produced which can not develop beyond the embryonic stage' (Poulson, 1945). We now know that Notch is likely to be involved in the development of most tissues in species throughout the animal kingdom, with myriad effects on cell fate specification, proliferation and cell death (Table 2). The following examples are a brief glimpse into the repertoire of Notch, and illustrate some different types of Notch-regulated patterning events.

View larger version (65K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Inhibitory Notch signaling restricts cell fates. (A) A proposed dynamic of Notch signaling among a group of equipotent cells. Initially, cells that share a special cell fate potential (gray) both send and receive Notch signals, known as `mutual' inhibitory Notch signaling. Later, one cell commits to the specialized fate (black) and inhibits surrounding cells (white) from adopting this fate, a situation known as `lateral' inhibitory Notch signaling. (B) The failure of Notch signaling results in extra cells adopting the special cell fate, while excessive Notch signaling prevents the differentiation of these cells. (C,D) Notch signaling inhibits neurogenesis in the Drosophila embryo. (C) A wild-type embryo stained for the neural marker ELAV (red). (D) An embryo that completely lacks Su(H), the fly CSL transcription factor, displays a strong excess of neurons - the classic `neurogenic' phenotype. (E,F) Notch signaling inhibits neurogenesis in Xenopus (images courtesy of Elise Lamar). Staining for a neural form of tubulin (purple) reveals neuronal differentiation. (E) The lower half of this embryo expresses constitutively active Notchintra, which inhibits neuronal differentiation [compare the number of neurons in the bracketed region in wild type (top) with the starred region in the mutant tissue (bottom)]. (F) The lower half of this embryo expresses an inhibitor of the Notch co-activator complex (dominant negative form of Mastermind). This leads to a failure of Notch signaling and a strong neurogenic phenotype (star).

Many proteins that mediate neural repression in Drosophila are encoded by the Enhancer of split Complex [E(spl)-C]. This genomic region contains multiple genes that are directly turned on by Notch signaling via CSL-binding sites in their promoters (Bailey and Posakony, 1995; Lecourtois and Schweisguth, 1995), including several genes that encode related bHLH repressor proteins. Forced expression of E(spl)bHLH repressors is sufficient to inhibit neural development (Nakao and Campos-Ortega, 1996), possibly by directly inhibiting the expression of bHLH proneural activators (Heitzler et al., 1996).

The same E(spl)bHLH repressors are deployed in other settings where Notch signaling restricts the number of progenitor cells during Drosophila development, including those of the visceral and somatic musculature, midgut and intestine, heart and a host of other internal organs (Hartenstein et al., 1992). Notch signaling in vertebrates also represses neurogenesis and myogenesis (Fig. 2E,F and Table 2) via homologous Hairy/E(spl)-related bHLH repressors known as HES (mammal), HER (fish) or ESR (frog) proteins (Chitnis et al., 1995) (reviewed by Artavanis-Tsakonas et al., 1999). Activation of bHLH repressors by Notch signaling is therefore a general strategy for preventing equipotent cells from all acquiring the same fate, a role sometimes referred to as `inhibitory Notch signaling'.

Notch signaling specifies cell fates and creates boundaries
A second general role of Notch is to promote the development of a given cell type or body region, often by inducing the expression of positively acting regulatory molecules. In many of these cases, Notch signaling creates a new cell type as a result of cell-cell interactions at the boundary between distinct cell populations (Fig. 3A,B). This is sometimes referred to as `inductive' Notch signaling, and contrasts with the `inhibitory' role of Notch where Notch signaling represses a given cell fate among equipotent cells.

View larger version (71K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Notch signaling specifies cell fate and behavior. (A) A schematic of inductive Notch signaling, which typically occurs between non-equivalent cell populations. In this case, the blue cells signal to adjacent white cells to induce a new cell fate or change their behavior (black cells). (B) The failure of inductive Notch signaling results in the absence of this cell fate or behavior, whereas excessive Notch signaling has the reciprocal effect. (C-E) Notch signaling promotes Drosophila wing growth. (C) Wild-type adult wing. (D) Wing containing large Su(H) mutant clones in which loss of the CSL transcription factor causes notching (stars), owing to the failure to specify the wing margin during earlier development. (E) Wing containing clones of cells that misexpress Delta and that induce a large wing overgrowth (image courtesy of Jose F. de Celis). (F,G) Notch signaling is involved in the segmentation clock. Shown are stage 3S zebrafish embryos stained for the Notch ligand DeltaC (images courtesy of Clarissa Henry). (F) In a wild-type embryo, DeltaC oscillates in stripes (arrows) that correlate with the partitioning of somites. (G) An embryo in which the bHLH repressor-encoding Notch target genes her1 and her7 have been inhibited by injection of morpholinos. The oscillatory pattern of DeltaC expression is lost (bracket), and such embryos develop abnormal somites. (G,H) Notch signaling promotes germline proliferation. Shown are C. elegans gonads stained with DAPI (blue) to reveal nuclei (images courtesy of Tim Schedl). (H) In the wild-type gonad, mitotic nuclei are localized to the distal region, while the remainder of the gonad is meiotic and produces germ cells (oocytes). (I) A gain-of-function mutant in the GLP-1 receptor (Notch) shows a `tumorous' phenotype in which mitotic cells are found throughout the gonad and germ cells fail to differentiate.

Notch signaling also works at boundaries during vertebrate somitogenesis. The segmented vertebrate body plan is founded upon regularly spaced blocks of mesoderm known as somites. Somites split off progressively from the presomitic mesoderm, a process driven by periodic oscillations in gene expression that are called the segmentation `clock'. Notch signaling appears to be central to the segmentation clock, as the expression of many Notch pathway components oscillates within the presomitic mesoderm, and mutation of members of the Notch pathway causes defects in clock oscillation and segmentation (Fig. 3F,G) (Conlon et al., 1995; Palmeirim et al., 1997) (reviewed by Bessho and Kageyama, 2003). Oscillating gene expression involves an auto-repressive activity of the Notch-activated bHLH repressors Hes1 and Hes7, which turn their own expression off. As these repressor proteins are short lived, their rapid degradation permits a new cycle of Hes1/7 transcription to begin (reviewed by Bessho and Kageyama, 2003).

It remains to be fully understood, though, how the segmentation clock physically leads to somitogenesis, and whether or not Notch/CSL or Hes proteins directly regulate any genes that mediate somite partitioning. More generally, there are many `inductive' Notch-regulated developmental processes, in which Notch signaling promotes rather than represses a cell type or behavior, for which the relevant target genes remain to be identified. For example, it is not well understood how Notch promotes germline proliferation in C. elegans (Berry et al., 1997) (Fig. 3H,I) or specifies cell fates such as mammalian astrocytes, fly glia and early worm blastomeres (Table 2). Although bHLH repressors are expressed in some `Notch-inductive' settings, most of the well-characterized examples also involve the direct activation of genes that encode positively acting transcriptional regulators or proteins specific to terminally differentiated cells. Whether this is generally true or not will be revealed by a more detailed understanding of genes directly regulated by Notch^intra/CSL during normal development.

Giving direction to Notch signaling

As we have now seen, the major biological role of Notch signaling is to control the developmental fates of cells and to make cells different from one another. Therefore, cells become distinguished from one another according to whether they predominantly send or receive Notch signals. In some cases, this is easily explained by the exclusive distribution of ligand and receptor. For example, during C. elegans gonadal development, the somatic distal tip cell signals to adjacent germline cells to induce their division, which generates the pool of germline cells. The directionality of signaling is due to the fact that the distal tip cell expresses only the ligand LAG-2, while the germline cells express only the Notch receptor GLP-1 (Henderson et al., 1994). Notch ligands often show spatially patterned expression, so this is a general focal point for controlling Notch signaling. However, there are many situations where all of the cells involved in Notch signaling express both ligand and receptor. How is signaling made directional in these cases?

Box 3. `Non-canonical' Notch signaling In the vast majority of developmental settings, Notch signaling involves the activation of the receptor Notch by a Delta-type ligand, which leads to changes in gene expression via the CSL transcription factor. However, every rule has its exception, and Notch signaling does not always operate as this canonical trio. Other ligands? Although Delta proteins are the major in vivo ligands for Notch, other proteins have been suggested to act as Notch ligands. Convincing evidence indicates that F3/contactin, a member of the immunoglobulin superfamily, is also a Notch ligand. Like Delta-type ligands, F3 binds Notch directly and induces Notch cleavage, nuclear translocation and a specific target gene response (Hu et al., 2003). Notch signaling via F3 specifically promotes oligodendrocyte maturation and myelination in the vertebrate central nervous system. Do Notch and CSL have other signaling partners? The existence of CSL-independent Notch signaling is controversial, but genetic and physical interactions between members of the Notch and Wingless signaling pathways have suggested an alternate path for Notch signal transduction via components of the Wingless pathway (Axelrod et al., 1996; Ramain et al., 2001). The converse situation of Notch-independent gene activation by CSL occurs during EBV infection (and CSL co-option by EBNA2) (Henkel et al., 1994). In addition, Notch-independent CSL auto-activation occurs in socket cells of Drosophila peripheral sense organs, where it is required for socket cell physiology (Barolo et al., 2000). Non-nuclear mechanisms? Notch is present on growth cones and can regulate axon guidance. It has been proposed that Notch may directly regulate the actin cytoskeleton via components of protein complex that includes the tyrosine kinase Abl (Giniger, 1998).

 

Box 4. Notch signaling defies expectation The concept of a `Notch pathway' implies a straightforward signaling cascade with straightforward consequences on gene expression. However, things are always more intricate in reality, and it is worth considering some non-intuitive behaviors of Notch target genes in response to experimental manipulations. First, the dual function of CSL as both a repressor and activator of target gene transcription complicates experimental interpretation. The observation that mutation of CSL can have milder effects than mutation of Notch was initially consistent with the idea that Notch might regularly operate via other transcription factors. In retrospect, the slightly milder phenotype of CSL mutation is likely to reflect the canceling effects of removing both its repressor and activator function, while Notch mutants selectively affect the activator function of CSL. Second, the combinatorial regulation of Notch target genes produces unexpected consequences. For example, it might be reasonably supposed that a loss of Notch signaling should result in a loss of Notch target gene expression. However, Notch target genes in the Drosophila E(spl)-Complex are instead expressed at higher levels in CSL mutants (Bailey and Posakony, 1995). This is a result of their direct regulation by both CSL and proneural bHLH proteins. As proneural bHLH protein levels increase when Notch signaling is compromised, the expression of these Notch target genes persists without Notch signaling. Third, some Notch target genes are expressed ectopically in response to forced expression of Notchintra. However, other Notch target genes require that multiple criteria be satisfied in order to be expressed (such as the presence of other transcription activators or the absence of specific repressors). Therefore, it is neither the case that all Notch target genes are `off' in Notch mutants, or `on' in the presence of constitutive Notch signaling.

 

Feedback regulation in Notch signaling
Notch signaling sometimes shows a remarkable ability to amplify small differences in the signaling capacities of different cells. One tactic is for signaling to regulate receptor and/or ligand transcription. In this way, the degree to which a cell activates Notch signaling has a dynamic effect on how well it sends and/or responds to Notch signals in return.

A clear example of this occurs during the anchor cell/ventral uterine cell (AC/VU) decision in C. elegans gonadal development. Although the destiny of almost all nematode cells is predetermined by lineage, AC and VU acquire their identity through a Notch-mediated discussion between two cells, referred to as Z1.ppp and Z4.aaa. Initially, LIN-12 (Notch) and LAG-2 (ligand) are expressed by both cells, and they engage in `mutual' bi-directional Notch signaling. However, random fluctuation in expression of LIN-12 and LAG-2 is amplified by positive feedback; activation of LIN-12 promotes its own expression and inhibits the expression of LAG-2 by the cell. In the end, one cell expresses only the ligand and differentiates as AC, while the other cell expresses only receptor and turns into VU (Wilkinson et al., 1994; Christensen et al., 1996). A directional signaling situation like this is sometimes called `lateral' signaling.

Similar `mutual' to `lateral' Notch signaling is seen during the selection of Drosophila neural precursors from groups of equipotent proneural cluster cells discussed earlier (Fig. 2A), a process known to be very sensitive to the levels of ligand and receptor in each individual cell (Heitzler and Simpson, 1991). A proposed mechanism for Notch-mediated regulation of ligand incorporated the finding that the expression of Delta can be activated by proneural proteins, which are, in turn, inhibited by Notch-activated bHLH repressors (Heitzler et al., 1996). However, this regulatory chain does not fully explain how signaling becomes directional, as increased levels of proneural proteins in neural precursors and decreased levels of proneural proteins in the inhibited cells are not well correlated with changes in Delta or Notch levels during normal development (Parks et al., 1997). Thus, post-transcriptional mechanisms to amplify differences in Delta-Notch signaling must also exist, some of which are discussed in the next section.

Modulating ligand and receptor activity
A second way to influence Notch signaling among cells that co-express ligand and receptor involves post-translational modifications. Two molecules that target the Delta ligand are Neuralized and Mindbomb. Although they are not related to one another structurally, both are RING-type E3 ubiquitin ligases that directly ubiquitinate Delta and cause it to be internalized from the plasma membrane. Recent studies show that the effect of Neuralized and Mindbomb is actually to increase the ability of Delta to activate Notch signaling in neighboring cells (Itoh et al., 2003) (reviewed by Le Borgne and Schweisguth, 2003). One way in which this might work is if the extracellular domain of Notch is co-internalized with Delta into the Delta-expressing cell, which might facilitate the `S2' cleavage of Notch in the Notch expressing cell (Fig. 1). The expression of these ubiquitin ligases is initiated in a subset of Notch-dependent processes, including neurogenesis, and may be responsible for making Notch signaling directional during the neural/epidermal fate decision.

Notch activity is regulated by sequential glycosylation of particular EGF repeats (reviewed by Schweisguth, 2004). Notch modification by the glycosyltransferase Fringe has complex effects. Fringe inhibits the ability of Notch to be activated by Serrate- and Jagged-type ligands, but stimulates the response of Notch to Delta-type ligands (Panin et al., 1997). In vitro data suggest that Fringe enhances Notch-Delta binding and decreases Notch-Serrate binding. Fringe is often deployed in a spatially restricted pattern to position or create directional Notch signaling during cell fate-inductive events. Some examples of this occur during development of the fly wing margin, at the dorsoventral boundary of the fly eye, at the dorsoventral limb borders of vertebrate limbs and in developing vertebrate somites (reviewed by Irvine, 1999).

Inherited factors bias inhibitory Notch signaling
A special type of directional inhibitory Notch signaling occurs during many instances of asymmetric cell divisions (Fig. 4A). In this situation, although both sister cells are capable of sending and receiving Notch signals, directionality is imposed by the asymmetric segregation of factors that influence Notch signaling. Such factors localize to a crescent centered at one end of the mitotic spindle in the mother cell (Fig. 4B).

View larger version (138K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Notch-mediated asymmetric cell divisions are influenced by localized determinants. (A) An asymmetric cell division in which one cell divides to give two daughters that adopt different fates; Notch signaling is `on' in the green cell and `off' in the red cell. Although both cells express Notch and Delta, signaling is directional because the red cell inherits determinants [such as Numb (red crescent in the mother cell)] that inhibit Notch signaling in that cell. (B) Crescents are centered on one end of the mitotic spindle and segregated into only one daughter cell. Here, a crescent of Partner of Numb-GFP is visualized along with the spindle, which is labeled with tau-GFP (image courtesy of Fabrice Roegiers). (C) The two exterior cells of a Drosophila mechanosensory bristle are produced by the lineage shown in A. The shaft cell (sh) activates Notch signaling in its sister, the socket cell (so); the shaft cell does not have activated Notch because it inherits Numb. Activation of Notch in both cells results in two sockets (D), whereas a failure to activate Notch in either cell results in two shafts (E) (images courtesy of Scott Barolo).

Aberrant Notch signaling in human disease

Given the profound and widespread roles of Notch signaling across a range of tissues, it is perhaps no surprise that deviant Notch signaling underlies some human diseases. Consistent with the roles of Notch signaling in development and neural behavior, relevant heriditary conditions include Alagille syndrome (where mutations in the Notch ligand JAG1 affect the development of many organs, including that of the liver, skeleton, heart and eye) (Li et al., 1997; Oda et al., 1997), certain forms of spondylocostal dysostosis (where mutations in the ligand DLL3 result in rib fusions and trunk dwarfism) (Bulman et al., 2000) and cerebral autosomal dominant arteriopathy with subcortical infarcts and leukoencephalopathy (CADASIL) (where mutations in the extracellular EGF repeats of NOTCH3 predispose individuals to dementia, migraines and strokes) (Joutel et al., 1996). In addition, a mild decrease in Notch signaling in mice causes specific defects in spatial learning and memory, which might make Notch a more general culprit in cognitive deficits (Costa et al., 2003).

Aberrant Notch signaling is also intimately involved in several human cancers. This was first demonstrated in a recurrent t(7;9) translocation that is associated with certain pre-T cell acute lymphoblastic leukemias (T-ALL) (Ellisen et al., 1991). This chromosomal rearrangement results in constitutive Notch activity in T cells. Conversely, cells that are mutant for Notch1 form skin and corneal tumors in mice, indicating that Notch also suppresses tumorigenesis (Nicolas et al., 2003). Many other human and murine cancers, including certain neuroblastomas, and mammary, skin, cervical and prostate cancers, are correlated with alterations in expression of Notch proteins and/or ligands. Although causal relationships in many cases await better characterization, these observations suggest broad roles for Notch dysfunction in cellular transformation.

The CSL transcription factor is a particular victim of viruses that redirect CSL function towards their own ends. Multiple proteins from Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), Kaposi's sarcoma-associated herpesvirus (KSHV), and adenovirus type 5 bind CSL directly and modulate CSL-dependent transcription of both viral and host target genes in a Notch-independent fashion (reviewed by Allenspach et al., 2002). A majority of humans are latently infected with EBV and adenovirus, but, as is the case for KSHV, initial infection is usually asymptomatic. A serious problem arises in immunocompromised individuals, though, where opportunistic behavior of EBV and KSHV causes oncogenic transformation and malignancy.

The molecular elucidation of these diseases is now the basis of diagnostic tools. However, it is hoped that knowledge of the mechanism of Notch signaling will be relevant for therapeutic design. This hope remains to be realized, but one can imagine that conditions that arise from Notch pathway gain-of-function might be alleviated by small molecule antagonists of genetic inhibitors of Notch processing/Notch^intra-co-activator function, while conditions that arise from Notch pathway loss-of-function might be treated with targeted delivery of soluble Notch ligands or other strategies that either locally activate Notch activity or suppress CSL co-repressor activity. A variety of relevant mouse disease models are now available to help test these strategies. Of course, given the very general functions of the Notch pathway, minimization of collateral or non-specific effects will be necessary to make such therapies clinically useful.

Concluding remarks

A clear theme of developmental and evolutionary biology is that nature is frugal: useful proteins and signaling pathways are reused in diverse settings. Notch signaling is an example of a particularly successful signaling cascade that is used repeatedly throughout the development of all metazoan organisms. Many Notch-mediated affairs are highly analogous; for example, Notch signaling mediates the inhibition of many different cell fates through the same bHLH repressor proteins. However, the redeployment of this pathway during evolution has resulted in diverse outcomes to Notch activation in different situations. Depending on the setting, Notch can inhibit, delay or induce differentiation, and can variously promote apoptosis, cell division or a static state (Table 2). Things become more complicated when one considers how signaling pathways interact with one another. For example, Notch signaling and EGF receptor signaling can work in parallel or in series to regulate a given process, and can either cooperate or antagonize each other during transcriptional regulation of a given target. Notch signaling is also influenced by a great number of other factors in specific settings, only some of which have been addressed in this primer (reviewed by Greenwald, 1998; Schweisguth, 2004). All of these considerations mean that although one can be guided by previous studies, it is imperative to evaluate each new example of Notch signaling carefully.

Given the pervasive use of the Notch pathway in animal development, how was this signaling cascade originally assembled during evolution? Although only metazoans are known to use Notch signaling, certain `prospective' components of the Notch pathway are found in other types of eukaryotes. A striking example is the definitive existence of CSL homologs in some fungi. If these species never had a Notch pathway, they may shed light on ancestral functions of CSL transcription factors. Will they be found to be transcriptional activators or repressors, or both? And are there any species in which both Notch and CSL are present, but are not associated in a common signaling process? It will be a great future challenge to understand when and how functional connections arose between components of a presumptive Notch pathway during evolution.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Elise Lamar, Jose F. de Celis, Tim Schedl, Clarissa Henry, Fabrice Roegiers and Scott Barolo graciously contributed images.

REFERENCES

Allenspach, E. J., Maillard, I., Aster, J. C. and Pear, W. S. (2002). Notch signaling in cancer. Cancer Biol Ther. 1,466 -476.[Medline]

Artavanis-Tsakonas, S., Rand, M. D. and Lake, R. J. (1999). Notch signaling: Cell fate control and signal integration in development. Science 284,770 -776.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Axelrod, J. D., Matsuno, K., Artavanis-Tsakonas, S. and Perrimon, N. (1996). Interaction between Wingless and Notch signaling pathways mediated by dishevelled. Science 271,1826 -1832.[Abstract]

Bailey, A. M. and Posakony, J. W. (1995). Suppressor of Hairless directly activates transcription of Enhancer of split Complex genes in response to Notch receptor activity. Genes Dev. 9,2609 -2622.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Barolo, S. and Posakony, J. W. (2002). Three habits of highly effective signaling pathways: principles of transcriptional control by developmental cell signaling. Genes Dev. 16,1167 -1181.[Free Full Text]

Barolo, S., Walker, R., Polyanovsky, A., Freschi, G., Keil, T. and Posakony, J. W. (2000). A Notch-independent activity of Suppressor of Hairless is required for normal mechanoreceptor physiology. Cell 103,957 -969.[CrossRef][Medline]

Berry, L. W., Westlund, B. and Schedl, T. (1997). Germ-line tumor formation caused by activation of glp-1, a Caenorhabditis elegans member of the Notch family of receptors. Development 124,925 -936.[Abstract]

Bessho, Y. and Kageyama, R. (2003). Oscillations, clocks and segmentation. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 13,379 -384.[CrossRef][Medline]

Bray, S. and Furriols, M. (2001). Notch pathway: making sense of suppressor of hairless. Curr. Biol. 11,R217 -R221.[CrossRef][Medline]

Bulman, M. P., Kusumi, K., Frayling, T. M., McKeown, C., Garrett, C., Lander, E. S., Krumlauf, R., Hattersley, A. T., Ellard, S. and Turnpenny, P. D. (2000). Mutations in the human delta homologue, DLL3, cause axial skeletal defects in spondylocostal dysostosis. Nat. Genet. 24,438 -441.[CrossRef][Medline]

Chitnis, A., Henrique, D., Lewis, J., Ish-Horowicz, D. and Kintner, C. (1995). Primary neurogenesis in Xenopus embryos regulated by a homologue of the Drosophila neurogenic gene Delta. Nature 375,761 -766.[CrossRef][Medline]

Christensen, S., Kodoyianni, V., Bosenberg, M., Friedman, L. and Kimble, J. (1996). lag-1, a gene required for lin-12 and glp-1 signaling in Caenorhabditis elegans, is homologous to human CBF1 and Drosophila Su(H). Development 122,1373 -1383.[Abstract]

Conlon, R. A., Reaume, A. G. and Rossant, J. (1995). Notch1 is required for the coordinate segmentation of somites. Development 121,1533 -1545.[Abstract]

Costa, R. M., Honjo, T. and Silva, A. J. (2003). Learning and memory deficits in Notch mutant mice. Curr. Biol. 13,1348 -1354.[CrossRef][Medline]

De Strooper, B. (2003). Aph-1, Pen-2, and Nicastrin with Presenilin generate an active gamma-Secretase complex. Neuron 38,9 -12.[CrossRef][Medline]

Dou, S., Zeng, X., Cortes, P., Erdjument-Bromage, H., Tempst, P., Honjo, T. and Vales, L. D. (1994). The recombination signal sequence-binding protein RBP-2N functions as a transcriptional repressor. Mol. Cell. Biol. 14,3310 -3319.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Ellisen, L. W., Bird, J., West, D. C., Soreng, A. L., Reynolds, T. C., Smith, S. D. and Sklar, J. (1991). TAN-1, the human homolog of the Drosophila notch gene, is broken by chromosomal translocations in T lymphoblastic neoplasms. Cell 66,649 -661.[CrossRef][Medline]

Flores, G. V., Duan, H., Yan, H., Nagaraj, R., Fu, W., Zou, Y., Noll, M. and Banerjee, U. (2000). Combinatorial signaling in the specification of unique cell fates. Cell 103, 75-85.[CrossRef][Medline]

Fortini, M. E. (2002). Gamma-secretase-mediated proteolysis in cell-surface-receptor signalling. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 3,673 -684.[CrossRef][Medline]

Fortini, M. E. and Artavanis-Tsakonas, S. (1994). The Suppressor of Hairless protein participates in Notch receptor signaling. Cell 79,273 -282.[CrossRef][Medline]

Giniger, E. (1998). A role for Abl in Notch signaling. Neuron 20,667 -681.[CrossRef][Medline]

Greenwald, I. (1998). LIN-12/Notch signaling: lessons from worms and flies. Genes Dev. 12,1751 -1762.[Free Full Text]

Hartenstein, A. Y., Rugendorff, A., Tepass, U. and Hartenstein, V. (1992). The function of the neurogenic genes during epithelial development in the Drosophila embryo. Development 116,1203 -1220.[Abstract]

Heitzler, P., Bourouis, M., Ruel, L., Carteret, C. and Simpson, P. (1996). Genes of the Enhancer of split and achaete-scute complexes are required for a regulatory loop between Notch and Delta during lateral signalling in Drosophila. Development 122,161 -171.[Abstract]

Heitzler, P. and Simpson, P. (1991). The choice of cell fate in the epidermis of Drosophila. Cell 64,1083 -1092.[CrossRef][Medline]

Henderson, S. T., Gao, D., Lambie, E. J. and Kimble, J. (1994). lag-2 may encode a signaling ligand for the GLP-1 and LIN-12 receptors of C. elegans. Development 120,2913 -2924.[Abstract]

Henkel, T., Ling, P. D., Hayward, S. D. and Peterson, M. G. (1994). Mediation of Epstein-Barr virus EBNA2 transactivation by recombination signal-binding protein J. Science 265, 92-95.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Hsieh, J. J., Henkel, T., Salmon, P., Robey, E., Peterson, M. G. and Hayward, S. D. (1996). Truncated mammalian Notch1 activates CBF1/RBPJ-repressed genes by a mechanism resembling that of Epstein-Barr virus EBNA2. Mol. Cell. Biol. 16,952 -959.[Abstract]

Hsieh, J. J.-D. and Hayward, S. D. (1995). Masking of the CBF1/RBPJ transcriptional repression domain by Epstein-Barr virus EBNA2. Science 268,560 -563.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Hu, Q.-D., Ang, B.-T., Karsak, W.-P., Cui, X.-Y., Duka, T., Takeda, Y., Chia, W., Sankar, N., Ng, Y.-K., Ling, E.-A. et al. (2003). F3/Contactin acts as a functional ligand for Notch during oligodendrocyte maturation. Cell 115,163 -175.[CrossRef][Medline]

Irvine, K. D. (1999). Fringe, Notch, and making developmental boundaries. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 9, 434-441.[CrossRef][Medline]

Itoh, M., Kim, C. H., Palardy, G., Oda, T., Jiang, Y. J., Maust, D., Yeo, S. Y., Lorick, K., Wright, G. J., Ariza-McNaughton, L. et al. (2003). Mind bomb is a ubiquitin ligase that is essential for efficient activation of Notch signaling by Delta. Dev. Cell 4,67 -82.[CrossRef][Medline]

Jarriault, S., Brou, C., Logeat, F., Schroeter, E. H., Kopan, R. and Israel, A. (1995). Signalling downstream of activated mammalian Notch. Nature 377,355 -358.[CrossRef][Medline]

Joutel, A., Corpechot, C., Ducros, A., Vahedi, K., Chabriat, H., Mouton, P., Alamowitch, S., Domenga, V., Cecillion, M., Marechal, E. et al. (1996). Notch3 mutations in CADASIL, a hereditary adult-onset condition causing stroke and dementia. Nature 383,707 -710.[CrossRef][Medline]

Kao, H. Y., Ordentlich, P., Koyano-Nakagawa, N., Tang, Z., Downes, M., Kintner, C. R., Evans, R. M. and Kadesch, T. (1998). A histone deacetylase corepressor complex regulates the Notch signal transduction pathway. Genes Dev. 12,2269 -2277.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Kim, J., Sebring, A., Esch, J. J., Kraus, M. E., Vorwerk, K., Magee, J. and Carroll, S. B. (1996). Integration of positional signals and regulation of wing formation and identity by Drosophila vestigial gene. Nature 382,133 -138.[CrossRef][Medline]

Kopan, R., Schroeter, E. H., Weintraub, H. and Nye, J. S. (1996). Signal transduction by activated mNotch: importance of proteolytic processing and its regulation by the extracellular domain. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 93,1683 -1688.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Lambie, E. J. and Kimble, J. (1991). Two homologous regulatory genes,lin-12 and glp-1, have overlapping functions. Development 112,231 -240.[Abstract]

Le Borgne, R. and Schweisguth, F. (2003). Unequal segregation of Neuralized biases Notch activation during asymmetric cell division. Dev. Cell 5, 139-148.[CrossRef][Medline]

Lecourtois, M. and Schweisguth, F. (1995). The neurogenic Suppressor of Hairless DNA-binding protein mediates the transcriptional activation of the Enhancer of split Complex genes triggered by Notch signaling. Genes Dev. 9,2598 -2608.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Lehmann, R., Jiménez, F., Dietrich, U. and Campos-Ortega, J. (1983). On the phenotype and development of mutants of early neurogenesis in Drosophila melanogaster. Roux's Arch. Dev. Biol. 192,62 -74.[CrossRef]

Li, L., Krantz, I. D., Deng, Y., Genin, A., Banta, A. B., Collins, C. C., Qi, M., Trask, B. J., Kuo, W. L., Cochran, J. et al. (1997). Alagille syndrome is caused by mutations in human Jagged1, which encodes a ligand for Notch1. Nat. Genet. 16,243 -251.[CrossRef][Medline]

Lieber, T., Kidd, S., Alcamo, E., Corbin, V. and Young, M. W. (1993). Antineurogenic phenotypes induced by truncated Notch proteins indicate a role in signal transduction and may point to a novel function for Notch in nuclei. Genes Dev. 7,1949 -1965.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Morgan, T. H. (1917). The theory of the gene. Am. Nat. 51,513 -544.[CrossRef]

Nakao, K. and Campos-Ortega, J. A. (1996). Persistent expression of genes of the Enhancer of split complex suppresses neural development in Drosophila. Neuron 16,275 -286.[CrossRef][Medline]

Nicolas, M., Wolfer, A., Raj, K., Kummer, J. A., Mill, P., van Noort, M., Hui, C. C., Clevers, H., Dotto, G. P. and Radtke, F. (2003). Notch1 functions as a tumor suppressor in mouse skin. Nat. Genet. 33,416 -421.[CrossRef][Medline]

Oda, T., Elkahloun, A. G., Pike, B. L., Okajima, K., Krantz, I. D., Genin, A., Piccoli, D. A., Meltzer, P. S., Spinner, N. B., Collins, F. S. et al. (1997). Mutations in the human Jagged1 gene are responsible for Alagille syndrome. Nat. Genet. 16,235 -242.[CrossRef][Medline]

Palmeirim, I., Henrique, D., Ish-Horowicz, D. and Pourquie, O. (1997). Avian hairy gene expression identifies a molecular clock linked to vertebrate segmentation and somitogenesis. Cell 91,639 -648.[CrossRef][Medline]

Panin, V. M., Papayannopoulos, V., Wilson, R. and Irvine, K. D. (1997). Fringe modulates Notch-ligand interactions. Nature 387,908 -912.[CrossRef][Medline]

Parks, A. L., Huppert, S. S. and Muskavitch, M. A. (1997). The dynamics of neurogenic signalling underlying bristle development in Drosophila melanogaster. Mech. Dev. 63,61 -74.[CrossRef][Medline]

Posakony, J. W. (1994). Nature versus nurture: asymmetric cell divisions in Drosophila bristle development. Cell 76,415 -418.[CrossRef][Medline]

Poulson, D. (1945). Chromosomal control of embryogenesis in Drosophila. Am. Nat. 79,340 -363.[CrossRef]

Ramain, P., Khechumian, K., Seugnet, L., Arbogast, N., Ackermann, C. and Heitzler, P. (2001). Novel Notch alleles reveal a Deltex-dependent pathway repressing neural fate. Curr. Biol. 11,1729 -1738.[CrossRef][Medline]

Rebay, I., Fleming, R. J., Fehon, R. G., Cherbas, L., Cherbas, P. and Artavanis-Tsakonas, S. (1991). Specific EGF repeats of Notch mediate interactions with Delta and Serrate: Implications for Notch as a multifunctional receptor. Cell 67,687 -699.[CrossRef][Medline]

Rhyu, M. S., Jan, L. Y. and Jan, Y. N. (1994). Asymmetric distribution of numb protein during division of the sensory organ precursor cell confers distinct fates to daughter cells. Cell 76,477 -491.[CrossRef][Medline]

Schroeter, E. H., Kisslinger, J. A. and Kopan, R. (1998). Notch-1 signalling requires ligand-induced proteolytic release of intracellular domain. Nature 393,382 -386.[CrossRef][Medline]

Schweisguth, F. (2004). Regulation of Notch receptor signaling. Curr Biol. (in press).

Struhl, G. and Adachi, A. (1998). Nuclear access and action of Notch in vivo. Cell 93,649 -660.[CrossRef][Medline]

Struhl, G., Fitzgerald, K. and Greenwald, I. (1993). Intrinsic activity of the Lin-12 and Notch intracellular domains in vivo. Cell 74,331 -345.[CrossRef][Medline]

Waltzer, L., Bourillot, P. Y., Sergeant, A. and Manet, E. (1995). RBP-J kappa repression activity is mediated by a co-repressor and antagonized by the Epstein-Barr virus transcription factor EBNA2. Nucleic Acids Res. 23,4939 -4945.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Wilkinson, H. A., Fitzgerald, K. and Greenwald, I. (1994). Reciprocal changes in expression of the receptor lin-12 and its ligand lag-2 prior to commitment in a C. elegans cell fate decision. Cell 79,1187 -1198.[CrossRef][Medline]

CiteULike

Complore

Connotea

Del.icio.us

Digg

Reddit

Technorati

Twitter

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C. Wang, R. Qi, N. Li, Z. Wang, H. An, Q. Zhang, Y. Yu, and X. Cao Notch1 Signaling Sensitizes Tumor Necrosis Factor-related Apoptosis-inducing Ligand-induced Apoptosis in Human Hepatocellular Carcinoma Cells by Inhibiting Akt/Hdm2-mediated p53 Degradation and Up-regulating p53-dependent DR5 Expression J. Biol. Chem., June 12, 2009; 284(24): 16183 - 16190. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. Roegiers, J. Kavaler, N. Tolwinski, Y.-T. Chou, H. Duan, F. Bejarano, D. Zitserman, and E. C. Lai Frequent Unanticipated Alleles of lethal giant larvae in Drosophila Second Chromosome Stocks Genetics, May 1, 2009; 182(1): 407 - 410. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				V. Rodilla, A. Villanueva, A. Obrador-Hevia, A. Robert-Moreno, V. Fernandez-Majada, A. Grilli, N. Lopez-Bigas, N. Bellora, M. M. Alba, F. Torres, et al. Jagged1 is the pathological link between Wnt and Notch pathways in colorectal cancer PNAS, April 14, 2009; 106(15): 6315 - 6320. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A.-C. Tien, A. Rajan, and H. J. Bellen A Notch updated J. Cell Biol., March 9, 2009; 184(5): 621 - 629. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Xu, X. Liu, J. Chen, A. Zacharek, X. Cui, S. Savant-Bhonsale, Z. Liu, and M. Chopp Simvastatin enhances bone marrow stromal cell differentiation into endothelial cells via notch signaling pathway Am J Physiol Cell Physiol, March 1, 2009; 296(3): C535 - C543. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Y. Olswang-Kutz, Y. Gertel, S. Benjamin, O. Sela, O. Pekar, E. Arama, H. Steller, M. Horowitz, and D. Segal Drosophila Past1 is involved in endocytosis and is required for germline development and survival of the adult fly J. Cell Sci., February 15, 2009; 122(4): 471 - 480. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. J. Trombly, T. K. Woodruff, and K. E. Mayo Suppression of Notch Signaling in the Neonatal Mouse Ovary Decreases Primordial Follicle Formation Endocrinology, February 1, 2009; 150(2): 1014 - 1024. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. Orr, O. C. Grace, G. Vanpoucke, G. R. Ashley, and A. A. Thomson A Role for Notch Signaling in Stromal Survival and Differentiation during Prostate Development Endocrinology, January 1, 2009; 150(1): 463 - 472. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. L. Pepple, M. Atkins, K. Venken, K. Wellnitz, M. Harding, B. Frankfort, and G. Mardon Two-step selection of a single R8 photoreceptor: a bistable loop between senseless and rough locks in R8 fate Development, December 15, 2008; 135(24): 4071 - 4079. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				I. Graziani, S. Eliasz, M. A. De Marco, Y. Chen, H. I. Pass, R. M. De May, P. R. Strack, L. Miele, and M. Bocchetta Opposite Effects of Notch-1 and Notch-2 on Mesothelioma Cell Survival under Hypoxia Are Exerted through the Akt Pathway Cancer Res., December 1, 2008; 68(23): 9678 - 9685. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. Tang, J. Brennan, J. Karl, Y. Hamada, L. Raetzman, and B. Capel Notch signaling maintains Leydig progenitor cells in the mouse testis Development, November 15, 2008; 135(22): 3745 - 3753. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				X. Wang, H. A. Pasolli, T. Williams, and E. Fuchs AP-2 factors act in concert with Notch to orchestrate terminal differentiation in skin epidermis J. Cell Biol., October 6, 2008; 183(1): 37 - 48. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A.-C. Tien, A. Rajan, K. L. Schulze, H. D. Ryoo, M. Acar, H. Steller, and H. J. Bellen Ero1L, a thiol oxidase, is required for Notch signaling through cysteine bridge formation of the Lin12-Notch repeats in Drosophila melanogaster J. Cell Biol., September 22, 2008; 182(6): 1113 - 1125. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A.-S. Tseng and M. Levin Tail Regeneration in Xenopus laevis as a Model for Understanding Tissue Repair Journal of Dental Research, September 1, 2008; 87(9): 806 - 816. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. del Alamo and M. Mlodzik Self-modulation of Notch signaling during ommatidial development via the Roughened eye transcriptional repressor Development, September 1, 2008; 135(17): 2895 - 2904. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. A. Murphy, M. T. Y. Lam, X. Wu, T. N. Kim, S. M. Vartanian, A. W. Bollen, T. R. Carlson, and R. A. Wang Endothelial Notch4 signaling induces hallmarks of brain arteriovenous malformations in mice PNAS, August 5, 2008; 105(31): 10901 - 10906. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. S. Jayasena, T. Ohyama, N. Segil, and A. K. Groves Notch signaling augments the canonical Wnt pathway to specify the size of the otic placode Development, July 1, 2008; 135(13): 2251 - 2261. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. Salat, R. Liefke, J. Wiedenmann, T. Borggrefe, and F. Oswald ETO, but Not Leukemogenic Fusion Protein AML1/ETO, Augments RBP-J{kappa}/SHARP-Mediated Repression of Notch Target Genes Mol. Cell. Biol., May 15, 2008; 28(10): 3502 - 3512. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Ben-Yair and C. Kalcheim Notch and bone morphogenetic protein differentially act on dermomyotome cells to generate endothelium, smooth, and striated muscle J. Cell Biol., February 6, 2008; 180(3): 607 - 618. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. Ogino, M. Fisher, and R. M. Grainger Convergence of a head-field selector Otx2 and Notch signaling: a mechanism for lens specification Development, January 15, 2008; 135(2): 249 - 258. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Xu, N. Haines, M. Dlugosz, N. A. Rana, H. Takeuchi, R. S. Haltiwanger, and K. D. Irvine In Vitro Reconstitution of the Modulation of Drosophila Notch-Ligand Binding by Fringe J. Biol. Chem., November 30, 2007; 282(48): 35153 - 35162. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Jia, M. Lin, L. Zhang, J. P. York, and P. Zhang The Notch Signaling Pathway Controls the Size of the Ocular Lens by Directly Suppressing p57Kip2 Expression Mol. Cell. Biol., October 15, 2007; 27(20): 7236 - 7247. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Roca and R. H. Adams Regulation of vascular morphogenesis by Notch signaling Genes & Dev., October 15, 2007; 21(20): 2511 - 2524. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Hudson, S. Lotito, and H. Yasuo Sequential and combinatorial inputs from Nodal, Delta2/Notch and FGF/MEK/ERK signalling pathways establish a grid-like organisation of distinct cell identities in the ascidian neural plate Development, October 1, 2007; 134(19): 3527 - 3537. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. De Smedt, T. Taghon, I. Van de Walle, G. De Smet, G. Leclercq, and J. Plum Notch signaling induces cytoplasmic CD3{epsilon} expression in human differentiating NK cells Blood, October 1, 2007; 110(7): 2696 - 2703. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. M. Janz, T. P. Sakmar, and K. C. Min A Novel Interaction between Atrophin-interacting Protein 4 and beta-p21-activated Kinase-interactive Exchange Factor Is Mediated by an SH3 Domain J. Biol. Chem., September 28, 2007; 282(39): 28893 - 28903. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M.-Y. Kim, E.-J. Ann, J.-Y. Kim, J.-S. Mo, J.-H. Park, S.-Y. Kim, M.-S. Seo, and H.-S. Park Tip60 Histone Acetyltransferase Acts as a Negative Regulator of Notch1 Signaling by Means of Acetylation Mol. Cell. Biol., September 15, 2007; 27(18): 6506 - 6519. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				U. Ganapati, H. T. Tan, M. Lynch, M. Dolezal, S. de Vos, and J. C. Gasson Modeling Notch Signaling in Normal and Neoplastic Hematopoiesis: Global Gene Expression Profiling in Response to Activated Notch Expression Stem Cells, August 1, 2007; 25(8): 1872 - 1880. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Fischer and M. Gessler Delta Notch and then? Protein interactions and proposed modes of repression by Hes and Hey bHLH factors Nucleic Acids Res., July 14, 2007; 35(14): 4583 - 4596. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. J. Macdonald and A. D. Long Joint Estimates of Quantitative Trait Locus Effect and Frequency Using Synthetic Recombinant Populations of Drosophila melanogaster Genetics, June 1, 2007; 176(2): 1261 - 1281. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. Sun, L. Li, C. Vercherat, N. T. Gulbagci, S. Acharjee, J. Li, T.-K. Chung, T. H. Thin, and R. Taneja Stra13 regulates satellite cell activation by antagonizing Notch signaling J. Cell Biol., May 21, 2007; 177(4): 647 - 657. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. Yugawa, K. Handa, M. Narisawa-Saito, S.-i. Ohno, M. Fujita, and T. Kiyono Regulation of Notch1 Gene Expression by p53 in Epithelial Cells Mol. Cell. Biol., May 15, 2007; 27(10): 3732 - 3742. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Xin, E. M. Small, E. van Rooij, X. Qi, J. A. Richardson, D. Srivastava, O. Nakagawa, and E. N. Olson Essential roles of the bHLH transcription factor Hrt2 in repression of atrial gene expression and maintenance of postnatal cardiac function PNAS, May 8, 2007; 104(19): 7975 - 7980. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Y. Zhang, Y.-T. Chen, S. Xie, L. Wang, Y.-F. Lee, S.-S. Chang, and C. Chang Loss of Testicular Orphan Receptor 4 Impairs Normal Myelination in Mouse Forebrain Mol. Endocrinol., April 1, 2007; 21(4): 908 - 920. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. Sasamura, H. O. Ishikawa, N. Sasaki, S. Higashi, M. Kanai, S. Nakao, T. Ayukawa, T. Aigaki, K. Noda, E. Miyoshi, et al. The O-fucosyltransferase O-fut1 is an extracellular component that is essential for the constitutive endocytic trafficking of Notch in Drosophila Development, April 1, 2007; 134(7): 1347 - 1356. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. Assa-Kunik, I. L. Torres, E. D. Schejter, D. S. Johnston, and B.-Z. Shilo Drosophila follicle cells are patterned by multiple levels of Notch signaling and antagonism between the Notch and JAK/STAT pathways Development, March 15, 2007; 134(6): 1161 - 1169. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				X. Song, G. B. Call, D. Kirilly, and T. Xie Notch signaling controls germline stem cell niche formation in the Drosophila ovary Development, March 15, 2007; 134(6): 1071 - 1080. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. Vasyutina, D. C. Lenhard, H. Wende, B. Erdmann, J. A. Epstein, and C. Birchmeier RBP-J (Rbpsuh) is essential to maintain muscle progenitor cells and to generate satellite cells PNAS, March 13, 2007; 104(11): 4443 - 4448. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Garcia-Rudaz, F. Luna, V. Tapia, B. Kerr, L. Colgin, F. Galimi, G. A. Dissen, N. D. Rawlings, and S. R. Ojeda Fxna, a novel gene differentially expressed in the rat ovary at the time of folliculogenesis, is required for normal ovarian histogenesis Development, March 1, 2007; 134(5): 945 - 957. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. Niimi, K. Pardali, M. Vanlandewijck, C.-H. Heldin, and A. Moustakas Notch signaling is necessary for epithelial growth arrest by TGF-{beta} J. Cell Biol., February 26, 2007; 176(5): 695 - 707. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. B. Thomas and D. J. van Meyel The glycosyltransferase Fringe promotes Delta-Notch signaling between neurons and glia, and is required for subtype-specific glial gene expression Development, February 1, 2007; 134(3): 591 - 600. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. C. Murtaugh Pancreas and beta-cell development: from the actual to the possible Development, February 1, 2007; 134(3): 427 - 438. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Tsuji, R. Shinkura, K. Kuroda, D. Yabe, and T. Honjo Msx2-interacting nuclear target protein (Mint) deficiency reveals negative regulation of early thymocyte differentiation by Notch/RBP-J signaling PNAS, January 30, 2007; 104(5): 1610 - 1615. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. K. Takeuchi, H. Lickert, B. W. Bisgrove, X. Sun, M. Yamamoto, K. Chawengsaksophak, H. Hamada, H. J. Yost, J. Rossant, and B. G. Bruneau Baf60c is a nuclear Notch signaling component required for the establishment of left-right asymmetry PNAS, January 16, 2007; 104(3): 846 - 851. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. Dyczynska, D. Sun, H. Yi, A. Sehara-Fujisawa, C. P. Blobel, and A. Zolkiewska Proteolytic Processing of Delta-like 1 by ADAM Proteases J. Biol. Chem., January 5, 2007; 282(1): 436 - 444. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Chen, A. Crabbe, V. Van Duppen, and H. Vankelecom The Notch Signaling System Is Present in the Postnatal Pituitary: Marked Expression and Regulatory Activity in the Newly Discovered Side Population Mol. Endocrinol., December 1, 2006; 20(12): 3293 - 3307. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. R. Boverhof, L. D. Burgoon, C. Tashiro, B. Sharratt, B. Chittim, J. R. Harkema, D. L. Mendrick, and T. R. Zacharewski Comparative Toxicogenomic Analysis of the Hepatotoxic Effects of TCDD in Sprague Dawley Rats and C57BL/6 Mice Toxicol. Sci., December 1, 2006; 94(2): 398 - 416. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Song, B.-K. Koo, K.-J. Yoon, M.-J. Yoon, K.-W. Yoo, H.-T. Kim, H.-J. Oh, Y.-Y. Kim, J.-K. Han, C.-H. Kim, et al. Neuralized-2 Regulates a Notch Ligand in Cooperation with Mind Bomb-1 J. Biol. Chem., November 24, 2006; 281(47): 36391 - 36400. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Blanpain, W. E. Lowry, H. A. Pasolli, and E. Fuchs Canonical notch signaling functions as a commitment switch in the epidermal lineage. Genes & Dev., November 1, 2006; 20(21): 3022 - 3035. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. Bheeshmachar, D. Purushotaman, H. Sade, V. Gunasekharan, A. Rangarajan, and A. Sarin Evidence for a Role for Notch Signaling in the Cytokine-Dependent Survival of Activated T Cells J. Immunol., October 15, 2006; 177(8): 5041 - 5050. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. D. Carroll, W. Bu, D. Palmeri, S. Spadavecchia, S. J. Lynch, S. A. E. Marras, S. Tyagi, and D. M. Lukac Kaposi's Sarcoma-Associated Herpesvirus Lytic Switch Protein Stimulates DNA Binding of RBP-Jk/CSL To Activate the Notch Pathway J. Virol., October 1, 2006; 80(19): 9697 - 9709. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				X. Zhu, J. Zhang, J. Tollkuhn, R. Ohsawa, E. H. Bresnick, F. Guillemot, R. Kageyama, and M. G. Rosenfeld Sustained Notch signaling in progenitors is required for sequential emergence of distinct cell lineages during organogenesis Genes & Dev., October 1, 2006; 20(19): 2739 - 2753. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. Weinmaster and R. Kopan A garden of Notch-ly delights Development, September 1, 2006; 133(17): 3277 - 3282. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Proweller, L. Tu, J. J. Lepore, L. Cheng, M. M. Lu, J. Seykora, S. E. Millar, W. S. Pear, and M. S. Parmacek Impaired Notch Signaling Promotes De novo Squamous Cell Carcinoma Formation. Cancer Res., August 1, 2006; 66(15): 7438 - 7444. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Hudson and H. Yasuo A signalling relay involving Nodal and Delta ligands acts during secondary notochord induction in Ciona embryos Development, August 1, 2006; 133(15): 2855 - 2864. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Wang, G. Cortina, S. V. Wu, R. Tran, J.-H. Cho, M.-J. Tsai, T. J. Bailey, M. Jamrich, M. E. Ament, W. R. Treem, et al. Mutant neurogenin-3 in congenital malabsorptive diarrhea. N. Engl. J. Med., July 20, 2006; 355(3): 270 - 280. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Souilhol, S. Cormier, K. Tanigaki, C. Babinet, and M. Cohen-Tannoudji RBP-J{kappa}-Dependent Notch Signaling Is Dispensable for Mouse Early Embryonic Development. Mol. Cell. Biol., July 1, 2006; 26(13): 4769 - 4774. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. A. Noggle, D. Weiler, and B. G. Condie Notch Signaling Is Inactive but Inducible in Human Embryonic Stem Cells Stem Cells, July 1, 2006; 24(7): 1646 - 1653. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. Yoshimatsu, D. Kawaguchi, K. Oishi, K. Takeda, S. Akira, N. Masuyama, and Y. Gotoh Non-cell-autonomous action of STAT3 in maintenance of neural precursor cells in the mouse neocortex Development, July 1, 2006; 133(13): 2553 - 2563. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				X. Zhang, M. Candas, N. B. Griko, R. Taussig, and L. A. Bulla Jr. A mechanism of cell death involving an adenylyl cyclase/PKA signaling pathway is induced by the Cry1Ab toxin of Bacillus thuringiensis PNAS, June 27, 2006; 103(26): 9897 - 9902. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Klinakis, M. Szabolcs, K. Politi, H. Kiaris, S. Artavanis-Tsakonas, and A. Efstratiadis From the Cover: Myc is a Notch1 transcriptional target and a requisite for Notch1-induced mammary tumorigenesis in mice PNAS, June 13, 2006; 103(24): 9262 - 9267. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. F. Hezel, A. C. Kimmelman, B. Z. Stanger, N. Bardeesy, and R. A. DePinho Genetics and biology of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Genes & Dev., May 15, 2006; 20(10): 1218 - 1249. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. J. Hagedorn, J. L. Bayraktar, V. R. Kandachar, T. Bai, D. M. Englert, and H. C. Chang Drosophila melanogaster auxilin regulates the internalization of Delta to control activity of the Notch signaling pathway J. Cell Biol., May 8, 2006; 173(3): 443 - 452. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Cormier, S. Le Bras, C. Souilhol, S. Vandormael-Pournin, B. Durand, C. Babinet, P. Baldacci, and M. Cohen-Tannoudji The Murine Ortholog of Notchless, a Direct Regulator of the Notch Pathway in Drosophila melanogaster, Is Essential for Survival of Inner Cell Mass Cells. Mol. Cell. Biol., May 1, 2006; 26(9): 3541 - 3549. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. Jafar-Nejad, A.-C. Tien, M. Acar, and H. J. Bellen Senseless and Daughterless confer neuronal identity to epithelial cells in the Drosophila wing margin Development, May 1, 2006; 133(9): 1683 - 1692. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Yamasaki, S. Eimer, M. Okochi, A. Smialowska, C. Kaether, R. Baumeister, C. Haass, and H. Steiner The GxGD motif of presenilin contributes to catalytic function and substrate identification of gamma-secretase. J. Neurosci., April 5, 2006; 26(14): 3821 - 3828. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Brooker, K. Hozumi, and J. Lewis Notch ligands with contrasting functions: Jagged1 and Delta1 in the mouse inner ear Development, April 1, 2006; 133(7): 1277 - 1286. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				O. Yaron, C. Farhy, T. Marquardt, M. Applebury, and R. Ashery-Padan Notch1 functions to suppress cone-photoreceptor fate specification in the developing mouse retina Development, April 1, 2006; 133(7): 1367 - 1378. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. G. Leong and A. Karsan Recent insights into the role of Notch signaling in tumorigenesis Blood, March 15, 2006; 107(6): 2223 - 2233. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Gause, J. C. Eissenberg, A. F. MacRae, M. Dorsett, Z. Misulovin, and D. Dorsett Nipped-A, the Tra1/TRRAP Subunit of the Drosophila SAGA and Tip60 Complexes, Has Multiple Roles in Notch Signaling during Wing Development. Mol. Cell. Biol., March 1, 2006; 26(6): 2347 - 2359. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. Ohyama, O. A. Mohamed, M. M. Taketo, D. Dufort, and A. K. Groves Wnt signals mediate a fate decision between otic placode and epidermis Development, March 1, 2006; 133(5): 865 - 875. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. Miele Notch Signaling Clin. Cancer Res., February 15, 2006; 12(4): 1074 - 1079. [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. Oswald, M. Winkler, Y. Cao, K. Astrahantseff, S. Bourteele, W. Knochel, and T. Borggrefe RBP-J{kappa}/SHARP Recruits CtIP/CtBP Corepressors To Silence Notch Target Genes Mol. Cell. Biol., December 1, 2005; 25(23): 10379 - 10390. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Akai, P. A. Halley, and K. G. Storey FGF-dependent Notch signaling maintains the spinal cord stem zone Genes & Dev., December 1, 2005; 19(23): 2877 - 2887. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. J. Macdonald, T. Pastinen, and A. D. Long The Effect of Polymorphisms in the Enhancer of split Gene Complex on Bristle Number Variation in a Large Wild-Caught Cohort of Drosophila melanogaster Genetics, December 1, 2005; 171(4): 1741 - 1756. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				I. Alvarez-Garcia and E. A. Miska MicroRNA functions in animal development and human disease Development, November 1, 2005; 132(21): 4653 - 4662. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Leri, J. Kajstura, and P. Anversa Cardiac Stem Cells and Mechanisms of Myocardial Regeneration Physiol Rev, October 1, 2005; 85(4): 1373 - 1416. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. E. Kiernan, R. Cordes, R. Kopan, A. Gossler, and T. Gridley The Notch ligands DLL1 and JAG2 act synergistically to regulate hair cell development in the mammalian inner ear Development, October 1, 2005; 132(19): 4353 - 4362. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Pitsouli and C. Delidakis The interplay between DSL proteins and ubiquitin ligases in Notch signaling Development, September 15, 2005; 132(18): 4041 - 4050. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Xu, L. Lei, and K. D. Irvine Regions of Drosophila Notch That Contribute to Ligand Binding and the Modulatory Influence of Fringe J. Biol. Chem., August 26, 2005; 280(34): 30158 - 30165. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. Castro, S. Barolo, A. M. Bailey, and J. W. Posakony Lateral inhibition in proneural clusters: cis-regulatory logic and default repression by Suppressor of Hairless Development, August 1, 2005; 132(15): 3333 - 3344. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B.-K. Koo, H.-S. Lim, R. Song, M.-J. Yoon, K.-J. Yoon, J.-S. Moon, Y.-W. Kim, M.-c. Kwon, K.-W. Yoo, M.-P. Kong, et al. Mind bomb 1 is essential for generating functional Notch ligands to activate Notch Development, August 1, 2005; 132(15): 3459 - 3470. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. A. Armstrong, A. S. Sperling, R. Deuring, L. Manning, S. L. Moseley, O. Papoulas, C. I. Piatek, C. Q. Doe, and J. W. Tamkun Genetic Screens for Enhancers of brahma Reveal Functional Interactions Between the BRM Chromatin-Remodeling Complex and the Delta-Notch Signal Transduction Pathway in Drosophila Genetics, August 1, 2005; 170(4): 1761 - 1774. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. Mizuhara, T. Nakatani, Y. Minaki, Y. Sakamoto, Y. Ono, and Y. Takai MAGI1 Recruits Dll1 to Cadherin-based Adherens Junctions and Stabilizes It on the Cell Surface J. Biol. Chem., July 15, 2005; 280(28): 26499 - 26507. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. R. Carlson, Y. Yan, X. Wu, M. T. Lam, G. L. Tang, L. J. Beverly, L. M. Messina, A. J. Capobianco, Z. Werb, and R. Wang Endothelial expression of constitutively active Notch4 elicits reversible arteriovenous malformations in adult mice PNAS, July 12, 2005; 102(28): 9884 - 9889. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. S. Vetrivel, H. Cheng, S.-H. Kim, Y. Chen, N. Y. Barnes, A. T. Parent, S. S. Sisodia, and G. Thinakaran Spatial Segregation of {gamma}-Secretase and Substrates in Distinct Membrane Domains J. Biol. Chem., July 8, 2005; 280(27): 25892 - 25900. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Yamaguchi, N. Tonou-Fujimori, A. Komori, R. Maeda, Y. Nojima, H. Li, H. Okamoto, and I. Masai Histone deacetylase 1 regulates retinal neurogenesis in zebrafish by suppressing Wnt and Notch signaling pathways Development, July 1, 2005; 132(13): 3027 - 3043. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				V. E. Vought, M. Ohmachi, M.-H. Lee, and E. M. Maine EGO-1, a Putative RNA-Directed RNA Polymerase, Promotes Germline Proliferation in Parallel With GLP-1/Notch Signaling and Regulates the Spatial Organization of Nuclear Pore Complexes and Germline P Granules in Caenorhabditis elegans Genetics, July 1, 2005; 170(3): 1121 - 1132. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. A. Berset, E. F. Hoier, and A. Hajnal The C. elegans homolog of the mammalian tumor suppressor Dep-1/Scc1 inhibits EGFR signaling to regulate binary cell fate decisions Genes & Dev., June 1, 2005; 19(11): 1328 - 1340. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. C. Nehring, A. Miyamoto, P. W. Hein, G. Weinmaster, and J. M. Shipley The Extracellular Matrix Protein MAGP-2 Interacts with Jagged1 and Induces Its Shedding from the Cell Surface J. Biol. Chem., May 27, 2005; 280(21): 20349 - 20355. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. Pan, S. T. Glenn, C. A. Jones, and K. W. Gross Activation of the Rat Renin Promoter by HOXD10{middle dot}PBX1b{middle dot}PREP1, Ets-1, and the Intracellular Domain of Notch J. Biol. Chem., May 27, 2005; 280(21): 20860 - 20866. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. C. Lai, F. Roegiers, X. Qin, Y. N. Jan, and G. M. Rubin The ubiquitin ligase Drosophila Mind bomb promotes Notch signaling by regulating the localization and activity of Serrate and Delta Development, May 15, 2005; 132(10): 2319 - 2332. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. C. Lai, B. Tam, and G. M. Rubin Pervasive regulation of Drosophila Notch target genes by GY-box-, Brd-box-, and K-box-class microRNAs Genes & Dev., May 1, 2005; 19(9): 1067 - 1080. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Le Borgne, A. Bardin, and F. Schweisguth The roles of receptor and ligand endocytosis in regulating Notch signaling Development, April 15, 2005; 132(8): 1751 - 1762. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K.-i. Mizutani and T. Saito Progenitors resume generating neurons after temporary inhibition of neurogenesis by Notch activation in the mammalian cerebral cortex Development, March 15, 2005; 132(6): 1295 - 1304. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Robert-Moreno, L. Espinosa, J. L. de la Pompa, and A. Bigas RBPj{kappa}-dependent Notch function regulates Gata2 and is essential for the formation of intra-embryonic hematopoietic cells Development, March 1, 2005; 132(5): 1117 - 1126. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article Summary Figures Only Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Lai, E. C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Lai, E. C. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?