|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
| Home Help Feedback Subscriptions Archive Search Table of Contents | ||||
First published online March 6, 2009
doi: 10.1242/10.1242/dev.032383
1 Developmental Biology and Cancer Research, IMRIC, The Hebrew
University-Hadassah Medical School, Jerusalem 91120, Israel.
2 Institut fur Molekularbiologie, Universitat Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 190,
8057 Zurich, Switzerland.
3 Spanish National Cancer Institute (CNIO), Melchor Fernandez Almagro 3, E-28029
Madrid, Spain.
Authors for correspondence (e-mails:
emoreno{at}cnio.es;
offerg{at}ekmd.huji.ac.il)
Accepted 5 February 2009
 |
SUMMARY |
|---|
TOP
SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES |
|---|
Key words: Brinker, Dpp survival signal, Wing development, dMyc (Dm)-induced cell competition, dNAB (Drosophila Nab)
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
TOP
SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES |
|---|
).
One such signaling molecule is Decapentaplegic (Dpp), a member of the
TGFβ superfamily that provides cells of the developing
Drosophila wing with patterning, growth and survival cues.
Dpp functions in the wing primordium as a long-range morphogen specifying
cell fates in a concentration-dependent manner by defining domains of gene
expression centered on its restricted expression domain
(Lecuit et al., 1996;
Nellen et al., 1996). In
addition, Dpp plays a key role in promoting cell proliferation and wing
growth. Mutant cell clones lacking Dpp receptors [Punt or Thickveins (Tkv)]
fail to grow (Burke and Basler,
1996). Conversely, expression of Dpp or its constitutively
activated receptor, TkvQ253D, causes overgrowth
(Burke and Basler, 1996;
Lecuit et al., 1996;
Nellen et al., 1996) due to
excess cell proliferation
(Martin-Castellanos and Edgar,
2002). Dpp signaling is also crucial for cell survival in the wing
disc; thus, impaired Dpp signaling due to Tkv loss-of-function or the
disruption of Dpp intracellular signal transduction induces JNK-mediated
apoptosis (Adachi-Yamada et al.,
1999; Adachi-Yamada and
O'Connor, 2002; Burke and
Basler, 1996; Moreno et al.,
2002). Dpp acts through a well-characterized transduction pathway.
The binding of Dpp to its serine/threonine kinase receptor complex triggers
the phosphorylation of the transcription factor Mad, which together with
associated factors translocates to the nucleus and regulates the expression of
target genes.
The brinker (brk) gene is a key target of the Dpp pathway
that is negatively regulated by Dpp signaling throughout embryonic and larval
development. brk encodes a transcriptional repressor. Loss of Brk
function leads to ectopic expression of Dpp target genes, tissue overgrowth
and cell fate transformations corresponding to elevated levels of Dpp
signaling (Campbell and Tomlinson,
1999; Jazwinska et al.,
1999; Minami et al.,
1999). Moreover, removal of Brk leads to overgrowth and ectopic
expression of Dpp targets even in the absence of Dpp or other essential
components of the pathway, such as Tkv or Mad
(Jazwinska et al., 1999;
Marty et al., 2000),
indicating that to a large extent Dpp signaling acts through negative
regulation of brk expression. Interestingly, although a Dpp gradient
controls differential gene expression by gradually downregulating
brk, the slope of the Dpp gradient is not itself important for
proliferation (Muller et al.,
2003; Schwank et al.,
2008). Brk is a sequence-specific transcriptional repressor that
alternatively requires the co-repressors Groucho (Gro) and CtBP for repressing
some Dpp-responsive genes, but not for others
(Hasson et al., 2001;
Zhang et al., 2001).
In Drosophila imaginal discs, a phenomenon of cell competition has
been described in which normal cells overproliferate at the expense of
neighboring Minute cells that have reduced ribosomal protein gene dose,
eliminating them via apoptosis from developing tissues
(Morata and Ripoll, 1975;
Simpson and Morata, 1981).
Similar competitive interactions occur when cells that express more dMyc
[Diminutive (Dm) - FlyBase] or cells that are mutant for components of the
Hippo/Warts pathway, behave as super-competitors that both outgrow adjacent
wild-type cells and induce their death (de
la Cova et al., 2004; Moreno
and Basler, 2004; Tyler et
al., 2007). Competition for the Dpp survival signal appears to be
the driving force behind cell competition. This notion is based on the finding
that outcompeted cells exhibit reduced Dpp signaling
(Moreno and Basler, 2004;
Moreno et al., 2002;
Tyler et al., 2007) and their
elimination can be prevented by forced expression of either Dpp or its
activated receptors (Moreno and Basler,
2004; Moreno et al.,
2002). At the molecular level, reduced Dpp signaling activity
results in failure to repress the expression of Brk, the upregulation of which
triggers apoptosis through activation of the JNK pathway.
Elimination of underperforming cells from a developing field may be a general feature of morphogen gradients that circumvents misspecification and the accumulation of detrimental developmental mistakes that would otherwise lead to embryonic malformation. Here, we find that the transcriptional co-regulator dNAB (Nab - FlyBase) is a target of Dpp in the wing primordium that interacts with Brk to promote JNK-mediated elimination of cells with impaired Dpp signaling. We further demonstrate that both dNAB and Brk are required for dMyc-induced cell competition. In contrast to Gro, a known co-repressor of Brk, dNAB is not required for Dpp-dependent patterning, whereas Gro does not promote JNK-mediated cell death.
|
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
TOP
SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES |
|---|
)
essentially as described by Sepp and Auld
(Sepp and Auld, 1999).
Transgenes were expressed using the Gal4/UAS binary system with the following
drivers: hh-Gal4, sd-Gal4 and C765-Gal4.
Generation of Flp-out and loss-of-function clones
We generated overexpressing Flp-out clones using either the
abx-ubx>forked>Gal4-IRES-lacZ or the
act>CD2>Gal4 cassette, recombined to a
UAS-GFP construct for the detection of the clones. Larvae
were subjected to a 37°C heat shock for 10 minutes. Genotypes of dissected
larvae were as follows. TkvQ235D-overexpressing clones: yw
hsp70-flp;; act>CD2>Gal4 UAS-GFP/dnab-lacZ
UAS-tkvQ235D. Brk-overexpressing clones: yw hsp70-flp;
UAS-brk/abx-ubx>forked>Gal4-IRES-lacZ; UAS-GFP. dNAB-overexpressing
clones: yw hsp70-flp;; act>CD2>Gal4 UAS-GFP/EP-dnab
puc-lacZE69 or yw hsp70-flp brk-lacZX47;;
act>CD2>Gal4 UAS-GFP/EP-dnab. dNAB- and Puc-overexpressing
clones: yw hsp70-flp;; act>CD2>Gal4 UAS-GFP/EP-dnab
UAS-puc. Gro-overexpressing clones: yw hsp70-flp;;
act>CD2>Gal4 UAS-GFP/UAS-gro.
We generated mutant clones using Flp-mediated mitotic recombination and identified them by the loss of the GFP or β-galactosidase (β-gal) markers. Clones were induced either with hh-Gal4/UAS-flp or by heat shock (60 minutes at 37°C). Genotypes of dissected larvae were as follows. dnab loss-of-function clones: yw hsp70-flp/omb-lacZ;; dnabR6H8 FRT80/ubi-GFP FRT80. hsp70-flp; vg-lacZ; dnabR6H8 FRT80/ubi-GFP FRT80. dnab overexpression and brk loss-of-function clones: arm-lacZ FRT18A/yw brkM68 FRT 18A; UAS-flp/UAS-GFP; hh-Gal4/EP-dnab.
For MARCM experiments, genotypes of dissected larvae were as follows: sd-Gal4/hs-flp; UAS-Dad/UAS-GFP; tubP-Gal80 FRT80/dnabR6H8 FRT80 and sd-Gal4/hs-flp; UAS-Dad/UAS-GFP; tubP-Gal80 FRT80/FRT80. Clones were induced by heat shock for 60 minutes at 37°C. Larvae were dissected at 48, 72 and 96 hours after clone induction.
Wild-type clones in a tub>dmyc background
Larvae of genotype yw hsp70-flp; tub>dmyc>Gal4; UAS-GFP with
or without UAS-RNAi constructs
(Dietzl et al., 2007) to knock
down dnab (#6273) or brk (#2919), were heat shocked for 15
minutes at 37°C and dissected after 24, 48 or 72 hours. UAS-RNAi
constructs against other Drosophila genes (more than 50 different
genes) were also used and most of them (>90%) did not cause the rescue that
was observed when knocking down either brk or dnab.
Immunohistochemistry
Imaginal discs from third instar larvae were fixed and stained by standard
techniques. The specific primary antibodies used were: mouse anti-β-gal
(1:1000; Promega), rabbit anti-Spalt [1:1000; a gift from A. Salzberg
(Halachmi et al., 2007)],
rabbit anti-dNAB [1:500; a gift from J. Díaz-Benjumea
(Terriente Felix et al.,
2007)], rat anti-Brk (1:1000; a gift from F. A. Martín and
G. Morata, CDBM University Autonoma De Madrid, Madrid, Spain) and rabbit
anti-cleaved Caspase 3 (1:40; Cell Signaling). Images were taken on a TE2000-E
confocal microscope (Nikon) using a 203 objective.
Plasmid construction
Molecular manipulations were conducted according to standard protocols.
Constructs containing full-length dnab cDNA and its derivatives were
prepared by standard PCR amplification. Following sequencing, these were
inserted in-frame into the pGEX-2T vector. A PCR-amplified full-length
brk was cloned into the pET17b vector.
A 9.5 kb genomic rescue construct containing the dnab transcription unit and flanking endogenous regulatory sequences was prepared by PCR amplification and subsequent cloning into a pCaSpeR4 vector (details provided on request).
Cleaning of the R6H8 chromosome and rescue experiment
In order to clean the chromosomal region distal and proximal to the
dnabR6H8 mutation
(Nairz et al., 2004), two
y+-marked P-insertions located in close proximity to the
dnab gene (W158 at 63B and W55 at 65D, our
unpublished results) were sequentially first recombined on to the
dnabR6H8 mutant chromosome and then removed by
recombination.
Two independent P[genomic dnab] insertions on the third chromosome rescued the lethality of homozygous dnab mutant flies (S149 and dnabR6H8). Flies carrying the P[genomic dnab] and the dnab mutations on the third chromosome lost the Tm6B balancer chromosome.
RNA in situ hybridizations
RNA in situ hybridizations were carried out according to standard
protocols. DIG (Roche) RNA probes were synthesized from a template derived by
PCR from genomic DNA using the following primers: dNAB_fw,
5'-AGACCATCTGGCTGCTGACC-3' and dNAB_rev,
5'-AATTAACCCTCACTAAAGGTCTGGTGAAGCAGCACTCC-3'.
GST pull-down experiments
GST pull-down experiments were carried out according to standard protocols,
essentially as described by Hasson et al.
(Hasson et al., 2001).
|
RESULTS |
|---|
|
TOP
SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES |
|---|
) with a UAS-GFP reporter for lines that exhibit
expression patterns centered on the stripe of dpp expression at the
anterior-posterior compartment boundary. The responsiveness of each of the
selected enhancer-trap lines to changes in Dpp signaling was then assessed
using UAS transgenic lines of either a constitutively active form of the
type-I Dpp receptor thickveins (tkvQ235D)
(Nellen et al., 1996), or of
Daughters against dpp (Dad)
(Tsuneizumi et al., 1997), an
inhibitor of the Dpp pathway. Using this selection process, we identified
S149, a lethal Gal4 insertion, the expression of which is confined to the
presumptive wing blade (Fig.
1A). Through plasmid rescue of the mutagenic P-element and RNA in
situ hybridization (Fig. 1B),
we identified this insertion as a hypomorphic mutant allele of Drosophila
nab (dnab) (Clements et al.,
2003), a member of the NAB family of transcriptional co-repressors
(Russo et al., 1995;
Svaren et al., 1996).
Complementation crosses with a known lethal deletion allele
(dnabR6H8) (Nairz et
al., 2004) and introduction of a 9.5 kb genomic rescue construct
of dnab confirmed that the observed lethality is due to disruption of
dnab. We further found that the expression of a dnab-lacZ
reporter gene (SH143) (Oh et al.,
2003) is ectopically induced by misexpression of
TkvQ235D and is abolished by overexpression of either Dad
or brk (Fig. 1E-J),
establishing that dnab expression is positively regulated by Dpp
signaling in the developing wing. We have no indication as to whether this
regulation is direct or indirect. Interestingly, the reduction of
dnab-lacZ expression resulting from Brk overexpression was not as
robust as that resulting from Dad overexpression (compare Fig.
1G,H with
1I,J), suggesting that
dnab expression is regulated by Dpp/Mad signaling and not only
through the removal of brk repression. It is important to note that,
as with other wing-specific genes, dnab expression has been shown to
depend on Vestigial (Vg) (Terriente Felix
et al., 2007). Since vg is a Dpp target, it is possible
that Dpp regulates dnab expression at least in part through
regulation of vg. The fact that not every
TkvQ235D-expressing clone was able to induce dnab
expression (Fig. 1E) might
indicate that dnab expression requires inputs from both Vg and Dpp
signaling, as is the case for other Dpp target genes such as spalt
(sal; salm - FlyBase)
(Halder et al., 1998).
|
dNAB induces JNK-mediated cell death
Dpp is essential for cell survival in the wing disc, and mutant cells
impaired for Dpp reception or transduction are lost from the wing epithelium
(Adachi-Yamada and O'Connor,
2002; Burke and Basler,
1996; Moreno et al.,
2002). To test the possibility that dNAB is involved in processes
that regulate cell viability, we generated cell clones overexpressing dNAB in
a wild-type background and followed their descendents at various time points
after induction. We found that these cells undergo apoptosis, as shown by the
dramatic increase in the levels of activated Caspase 3, and that they are
gradually eliminated first from the periphery of the wing disc where
brk levels are high, and subsequently from the medial region
(Fig. 3A-D).
The JNK pathway mediates apoptosis in various developmental contexts
(Adachi-Yamada et al., 1999;
McEwen and Peifer, 2005),
including the elimination of cells with impaired Dpp signaling
(Adachi-Yamada et al., 1999;
Adachi-Yamada and O'Connor,
2002; Moreno et al.,
2002). We asked whether JNK activation is involved in dNAB-induced
cell death. The extent of activation of the JNK pathway can be monitored
through the expression of the target gene puckered (puc),
which encodes a protein phosphatase that negatively regulates the pathway
(Martin-Blanco et al., 1998).
We found that overexpression of dNAB induces the expression of puc
(Fig. 3E,F), indicating that
JNK signaling is activated in the dying cells. Furthermore, when JNK signaling
was experimentally downregulated in clones of cells overexpressing dNAB by
co-expression of puc, Caspase 3 activation was to a large extent
inhibited (Fig. 3G,H), and the
clones were distributed randomly throughout the wing disc. These results
demonstrate that dNAB induces cell death through induction of the JNK pathway,
which in turn triggers Caspase-3-mediated apoptosis.
dNAB-induced apoptosis is Brk-dependent
In order to elucidate whether dNAB promotes cell death through the Dpp
signaling pathway, dNAB overexpression was combined with Brk loss-of-function,
a dedicated downstream effector of the Dpp pathway. To this end, clones mutant
for brk were generated in the posterior compartment where dNAB was
overexpressed using a hedgehog (hh)-Gal4 driver
(Fig. 4A-C). We found that
dNAB-induced apoptosis is completely nullified by loss of Brk function, as
evidenced by the reduction of activated Caspase 3 to normal levels
(Fig. 4B). Thus, the cell
death-promoting activity of dNAB is Brk-dependent, and therefore functions
through the Dpp signaling pathway.
|
We next tested whether dNAB acts through transcriptional repression of
brk (Marty et al.,
2000; Muller et al.,
2003) at the level of Mad, similar to the mode of action of the
inhibitory Smad, Dad (Tsuneizumi et al.,
1997). According to this possibility, excess dNAB should interfere
at the level of brk transcriptional repression and lead to its
accumulation. On the contrary, we found that dNAB overexpression, while
inducing apoptosis, had no effect on the expression levels of a
brk-lacZ reporter (Fig.
4J-L). Thus, dNAB acts downstream of brk transcriptional
regulation.
dNAB and Brk physically interact in vitro
The fact that overexpression of dNAB represses Dpp/Brk target genes and
that dNAB has been shown to act as a transcriptional co-regulator in
Drosophila (Terriente Felix et
al., 2007; Tsuji et al.,
2008) prompted us to assess the possibility that dNAB physically
interacts with Brk. Using a GST pull-down assay, we found that like Gro, a
known Brk co-repressor, dNAB binds directly to the Brk protein
(Fig. 5A). We then used
sequential fragments of the dNAB protein to narrow down the Brk-binding region
of dNAB to the NAB conserved domain 2 (NCD2)
(Fig. 5B,C), a region found in
the C-terminal half of all NAB proteins that contains a bipartite-like nuclear
localization sequence and the transcriptional repression function
(Swirnoff et al., 1998). Taken
together, our results demonstrate that dNAB acts together with the Brk
repressor, apparently through direct protein-protein interactions.
dNAB promotes cell elimination induced by impaired Dpp signaling
It is well documented that cells impaired for Dpp signaling, due to removal
of the Dpp receptor or to forced expression of the Dpp pathway inhibitor Dad,
or of Brk, are first eliminated from the center of the wing disc and
subsequently from lateral regions, where normally brk is expressed
and dnab is not (Adachi-Yamada and
O'Connor, 2002; Burke and
Basler, 1996; Moreno et al.,
2002). Thus, dNAB is not essential for cell elimination induced by
very high levels of Brk. We investigated whether loss of dNAB function affects
cell removal from the wing pouch region induced by reduced Dpp signaling.
Using the MARCM system (Lee and Luo,
2001) in combination with a wing Gal4 driver [scalloped
(sd)-Gal4], we generated dnab loss-of-function
clones that overexpressed the Dpp pathway inhibitor Dad in the wing disc. We
favored this experimental set-up because activation of the UAS transgene is
dependent on Gal80 perdurance, and therefore should allow dNAB protein to
dissipate in the loss-of-function clones prior to Dad accumulation and the
subsequent upregulation of brk. Seventy-two hours after clone
induction, we found a greater than 2-fold increase (two-tailed test,
P<0.005) in the number of dnab loss-of-function clones
that survived in the wing pouch region compared with control clones
(Fig. 6A-E). In addition, in
many cases we observed higher levels of active Caspase 3 in control clones as
compared with dnab loss-of-function clones
(Fig. 6B,D). We conclude that
dNAB promotes the elimination of cells with reduced Dpp signaling.
The fact that dNAB expression is regulated by Dpp/Brk signaling raises the question of how clones impaired for Dpp signaling, such as Dad-overexpressing clones, die in a dNAB-dependent manner, for one might expect that in such clones dnab expression would be lost when brk expression is gained. The simplest explanation is that the dNAB protein is stable and has a high perdurance, so that under conditions in which Brk expression is gained there is enough dNAB protein to allow for interaction. Consistently, we found that dNAB protein was present in Brk-overexpressing clones that survived in the wing pouch region 30 hours after induction (Fig. 6I,J). Significantly, the expression of the Dpp/Brk target gene sal was completely lost in such clones (Fig. 6K,L), indicating that Brk is upregulated and active when dNAB is still present.
|
dNAB and Brk are both required for dMyc-induced cell competition
Recent studies, in which apposing cell populations with different levels of
dMyc or of a Minute gene product were generated in the wing disc,
established Dpp as a crucial survival factor for which cells continuously
compete to prevent apoptosis (Moreno and
Basler, 2004; Moreno et al.,
2002). Reduced Dpp signaling activity in outcompeted cells results
in the upregulation of Brk, which in turn triggers apoptosis through
activation of the JNK pathway. The results presented so far prompted us to
investigate whether dNAB could also play a positive role in cell elimination
driven by different levels of dMyc. Using the transgene
tub>dmyc>Gal4, we generated wild-type cells surrounded by cells
expressing extra dMyc and found, in accordance with previous results
(de la Cova et al., 2004;
Moreno and Basler, 2004), that
they were rapidly lost from the wing primordium
(Fig. 6M; see Fig. S1 in the
supplementary material). However, knocking down the expression of either
dnab or brk specifically in the wild-type cells [using the
appropriate UAS-RNAis (Dietzl et
al., 2007)] led, remarkably, to their rescue and reversed their
proliferation deficit (Fig.
6N-P). Notably, dnab RNAi appeared to result in
ragged-edge clones, whereas brk knockdown led to round clones,
indicating that unlike Brk, dNAB has no apparent role in cell affinity. From
these results, we concluded that both dNAB and Brk play a crucial role in
mediating dMyc-induced apoptotic cell competition.
dNAB and Gro qualitatively differ in their ability to induce JNK-mediated cell killing
The results presented above raised the possibility that the previously
identified co-repressor of Brk, Gro
(Hasson et al., 2001;
Zhang et al., 2001), which has
been implicated in patterning, could play a role similar to that of dNAB in
promoting Brk-dependent cell elimination. However, several lines of evidence
appear to contradict this idea. First, in contrast to the situation in which
overexpression of dNAB leads to rapid cell loss
(Fig. 3A-D), clones of cells
overexpressing Gro appear large in size, do not show Caspase 3 activation and
are not readily eliminated, but rather are distributed randomly throughout the
wing disc, including the lateral regions where brk is highly
expressed (Fig. 7A-C). Notably,
these Gro clones readily repress the Brk target genes sal, omb and
vg (Hasson et al.,
2001; Zhang et al.,
2001). Second, whereas excess dNAB leads to induction of both JNK
signaling and Caspase 3 activation (Fig.
7D-F), overexpression of Gro throughout the entire posterior
compartment shows neither of these effects
(Fig. 7G-I). Thus, dNAB and Gro
qualitatively differ with respect to their ability to induce JNK-mediated cell
killing and Dpp-mediated patterning.
|
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
TOP
SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES |
|---|
NAB proteins comprise a family of transcriptional co-regulators implicated
in various developmental processes in different organisms. Drosophila
NAB was found to be required for determining specific neuronal fates in the
embryonic CNS and for wing hinge patterning
(Clements et al., 2003;
Tsuji et al., 2008). Our work
shows that dNAB induces cell elimination through induction of the JNK pathway,
which in turn triggers Caspase-3-mediated apoptosis. We show that dNAB acts as
a co-repressor that interacts with Brk to induce apoptotic cell elimination.
This conclusion is based on several lines of evidence. First, dNAB-induced
apoptosis is completely nullified by removal of Brk. Second, our epistatic
analysis placed dNAB in the Dpp signaling pathway downstream of the receptor
complex and of brk transcriptional repression and upstream of Brk.
Third, dNAB physically associates with Brk through its NCD2 domain in vitro.
Fourth, dNAB enhances the killing activity of Brk in the presumptive wing
blade region and is required for elimination of Dad-overexpressing cells, a
process that is completely dependent upon Brk function. Finally, ectopic
expression of dNAB represses the expression of Dpp/Brk target genes.
|
|
; Moreno and Basler,
2004). This competitive behavior correlates with, and can be
modulated by, the activation of the Dpp survival signaling pathway, showing
that dMyc-induced cell competition relies on Dpp signaling. The fact that
dNAB, similar to Brk, is crucial for dMyc-induced cell competition strongly
supports a role for dNAB as an effector of cell elimination of underperforming
cells with reduced Dpp signaling.
Elimination of underperforming cells takes place only during early larval
stages. Clones generated later, during the third instar larval stage, persist
to adulthood (e.g. Burke and Basler,
1996; Morata and Ripoll,
1975; Simpson,
1979). Consistently, using double staining of wing discs with
antibodies directed against Brk and dNAB, we have found that the two do not
overlap in the second instar larval stage [60 hours after egg laying (AEL)]
(Fig. 1C) and only slightly
overlap during the third instar (80 hours AEL)
(Fig. 1D). These findings
suggest that the Brk-dNAB complex is active in cell elimination only during
early development. This might indicate that either another factor required for
complex activity is present only during early development, or that a factor is
present during later stages that inhibits the complex. Alternatively,
intensive growth/proliferation might be required for the execution of the
killing activity of the complex.
The morphogen Dpp acts through a well-characterized transduction pathway to
simultaneously regulate growth, survival and patterning. To a large extent,
Dpp signaling acts through negative regulation of brk expression.
This implies that a complete answer to how the Dpp signal directs different
cellular and developmental processes requires an understanding of how Brk
executes its transcriptional repression functions. Our finding that dNAB is a
Brk co-repressor is in accordance with recent results showing that
overexpression of Brk forms that cannot bind either Gro or CtBP results in
repression of sal, omb and vg, and that Brk contains
additional co-repressor-binding domains
(Winter and Campbell, 2004).
We found that in contrast to Gro, a known co-repressor of Brk, the function of
dNAB is not required for Dpp-dependent patterning. However, Gro does not play
a similar role to that of dNAB in promoting JNK-mediated cell killing. These
findings imply that the choice of Brk co-repressor determines the specificity
of target gene repression, thereby modulating different Dpp outputs.
Mechanistically, this could be achieved in a number of ways: for example, dNAB
or Gro association might alter the DNA-binding specificity of Brk, or the
promoters of Brk target genes might be differentially responsive to dNAB and
Gro. In addition, the fact that Gro is ubiquitously expressed throughout the
developing wing, and that Dpp induces dNAB expression in the center of the
wing disc while restricting Brk expression to lateral regions, provide another
means for differentially modulating Dpp outputs.
|
|
Supplementary material
Supplementary material for this article is available at
http://dev.biologists.org/cgi/content/full/136/7/1137/DC1
|
Footnotes |
|---|
* These authors contributed equally to this work 
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
TOP
SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES |
|---|
Adachi-Yamada, T. and O'Connor, M. B. (2002).
Morphogenetic apoptosis: a mechanism for correcting discontinuities in
morphogen gradients. Dev. Biol.
251, 74-90.[CrossRef][Medline]
Adachi-Yamada, T., Fujimura-Kamada, K., Nishida, Y. and
Matsumoto, K. (1999). Distortion of proximodistal information
causes JNK-dependent apoptosis in Drosophila wing.
Nature 400,166
-169.[CrossRef][Medline]
Burke, R. and Basler, K. (1996). Dpp receptors
are autonomously required for cell proliferation in the entire developing
Drosophila wing. Development
122,2261
-2269.[Abstract]
Campbell, G. and Tomlinson, A. (1999).
Transducing the Dpp morphogen gradient in the wing of Drosophila: regulation
of Dpp targets by brinker. Cell
96,553
-562.[CrossRef][Medline]
Clements, M., Duncan, D. and Milbrandt, J.
(2003). Drosophila NAB (dNAB) is an orphan transcriptional
co-repressor required for correct CNS and eye development. Dev.
Dyn. 226,67
-81.[CrossRef][Medline]
de la Cova, C., Abril, M., Bellosta, P., Gallant, P. and
Johnston, L. A. (2004). Drosophila myc regulates organ size
by inducing cell competition. Cell
117,107
-116.[CrossRef][Medline]
Dietzl, G., Chen, D., Schnorrer, F., Su, K. C., Barinova, Y.,
Fellner, M., Gasser, B., Kinsey, K., Oppel, S., Scheiblauer, S. et al.
(2007). A genome-wide transgenic RNAi library for conditional
gene inactivation in Drosophila. Nature
448,151
-156.[CrossRef][Medline]
Gerlitz, O. and Basler, K. (2002). Wingful, an
extracellular feedback inhibitor of Wingless. Genes
Dev. 16,1055
-1059.
Gerlitz, O., Nellen, D., Ottiger, M. and Basler, K.
(2002). A screen for genes expressed in Drosophila imaginal
discs. Int. J. Dev. Biol.
46,173
-176.[Medline]
Halachmi, N., Schulze, K. L., Inbal, A. and Salzberg, A.
(2007). Additional sex combs affects antennal development by
means of spatially restricted repression of Antp and wg. Dev.
Dyn. 236,2118
-2130.[CrossRef][Medline]
Halder, G., Polaczyk, P., Kraus, M. E., Hudson, A., Kim, J.,
Laughon, A. and Carroll, S. (1998). The Vestigial and
Scalloped proteins act together to directly regulate wing-specific gene
expression in Drosophila. Genes Dev.
12,3900
-3909.
Hasson, P., Muller, B., Basler, K. and Paroush, Z.
(2001). Brinker requires two corepressors for maximal and
versatile repression in Dpp signalling. EMBO J.
20,5725
-5736.[CrossRef][Medline]
Jazwinska, A., Kirov, N., Wieschaus, E., Roth, S. and Rushlow,
C. (1999). The Drosophila gene brinker reveals a novel
mechanism of Dpp target gene regulation. Cell
96,563
-573.[CrossRef][Medline]
Lecuit, T., Brook, W. J., Ng, M., Calleja, M., Sun, H. and
Cohen, S. M. (1996). Two distinct mechanisms for long-range
patterning by Decapentaplegic in the Drosophila wing.
Nature 381,387
-393.[CrossRef][Medline]
Lee, T. and Luo, L. (2001). Mosaic analysis
with a repressible cell marker (MARCM) for Drosophila neural development.
Trends Neurosci. 24,251
-254.[CrossRef][Medline]
Martin-Blanco, E., Gampel, A., Ring, J., Virdee, K., Kirov, N.,
Tolkovsky, A. M. and Martinez-Arias, A. (1998). puckered
encodes a phosphatase that mediates a feedback loop regulating JNK activity
during dorsal closure in Drosophila. Genes Dev.
12,557
-570.
Martin-Castellanos, C. and Edgar, B. A. (2002).
A characterization of the effects of Dpp signaling on cell growth and
proliferation in the Drosophila wing. Development
129,1003
-1013.[Medline]
Marty, T., Muller, B., Basler, K. and Affolter, M.
(2000). Schnurri mediates Dpp-dependent repression of brinker
transcription. Nat. Cell Biol.
2, 745-749.[CrossRef][Medline]
McEwen, D. G. and Peifer, M. (2005). Puckered,
a Drosophila MAPK phosphatase, ensures cell viability by antagonizing
JNK-induced apoptosis. Development
132,3935
-3946.
Minami, M., Kinoshita, N., Kamoshida, Y., Tanimoto, H. and
Tabata, T. (1999). brinker is a target of Dpp in Drosophila
that negatively regulates Dpp-dependent genes. Nature
398,242
-246.[CrossRef][Medline]
Morata, G. and Ripoll, P. (1975). Minutes:
mutants of drosophila autonomously affecting cell division rate.
Dev. Biol. 42,211
-221.[CrossRef][Medline]
Moreno, E. and Basler, K. (2004). dMyc
transforms cells into super-competitors. Cell
117,117
-129.[CrossRef][Medline]
Moreno, E., Basler, K. and Morata, G. (2002).
Cells compete for decapentaplegic survival factor to prevent apoptosis in
Drosophila wing development. Nature
416,755
-759.[CrossRef][Medline]
Muller, B., Hartmann, B., Pyrowolakis, G., Affolter, M. and
Basler, K. (2003). Conversion of an extracellular Dpp/BMP
morphogen gradient into an inverse transcriptional gradient.
Cell 113,221
-233.[CrossRef][Medline]
Nairz, K., Zipperlen, P., Dearolf, C., Basler, K. and Hafen,
E. (2004). A reverse genetic screen in Drosophila using a
deletion-inducing mutagen. Genome Biol.
5, R83.[CrossRef][Medline]
Nellen, D., Burke, R., Struhl, G. and Basler, K.
(1996). Direct and long-range action of a DPP morphogen gradient.
Cell 85,357
-368.[CrossRef][Medline]
Oh, S. W., Kingsley, T., Shin, H. H., Zheng, Z., Chen, H. W.,
Chen, X., Wang, H., Ruan, P., Moody, M. and Hou, S. X.
(2003). A P-element insertion screen identified mutations in 455
novel essential genes in Drosophila. Genetics
163,195
-201.[Medline]
Russo, M. W., Sevetson, B. R. and Milbrandt, J.
(1995). Identification of NAB1, a repressor of NGFI-A- and
Krox20-mediated transcription. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
USA 92,6873
-6877.
Schwank, G., Restrepo, S. and Basler, K.
(2008). Growth regulation by Dpp: an essential role for Brinker
and a non-essential role for graded signaling levels.
Development 135,4003
-4013.
Sepp, K. J. and Auld, V. J. (1999). Conversion
of lacZ enhancer trap lines to GAL4 lines using targeted transposition in
Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics
151,1093
-1101.
Serrano, N. and O'Farrell, P. H. (1997). Limb
morphogenesis: connections between patterning and growth. Curr.
Biol. 7,R186
-R195.[CrossRef][Medline]
Simpson, P. (1979). Parameters of cell
competition in the compartments of the wing disc of Drosophila.
Dev. Biol. 69,182
-193.[CrossRef][Medline]
Simpson, P. and Morata, G. (1981). Differential
mitotic rates and patterns of growth in compartments in the Drosophila wing.
Dev. Biol. 85,299
-308.[CrossRef][Medline]
Svaren, J., Sevetson, B. R., Apel, E. D., Zimonjic, D. B.,
Popescu, N. C. and Milbrandt, J. (1996). NAB2, a corepressor
of NGFI-A (Egr-1) and Krox20, is induced by proliferative and differentiative
stimuli. Mol. Cell. Biol.
16,3545
-3553.[Abstract]
Swirnoff, A. H., Apel, E. D., Svaren, J., Sevetson, B. R.,
Zimonjic, D. B., Popescu, N. C. and Milbrandt, J. (1998).
Nab1, a corepressor of NGFI-A (Egr-1), contains an active transcriptional
repression domain. Mol. Cell. Biol.
18,512
-524.
Terriente Felix, J., Magarinos, M. and Diaz-Benjumea, F. J.
(2007). Nab controls the activity of the zinc-finger
transcription factors Squeeze and Rotund in Drosophila development.
Development 134,1845
-1852.
Tsuji, T., Hasegawa, E. and Isshiki, T. (2008).
Neuroblast entry into quiescence is regulated intrinsically by the combined
action of spatial Hox proteins and temporal identity factors.
Development 135,3859
-3869.
Tsuneizumi, K., Nakayama, T., Kamoshida, Y., Kornberg, T. B.,
Christian, J. L. and Tabata, T. (1997). Daughters against dpp
modulates dpp organizing activity in Drosophila wing development.
Nature 389,627
-631.[CrossRef][Medline]
Tyler, D. M., Li, W., Zhuo, N., Pellock, B. and Baker, N. E.
(2007). Genes affecting cell competition in Drosophila.
Genetics 175,643
-657.
Winter, S. E. and Campbell, G. (2004).
Repression of Dpp targets in the Drosophila wing by Brinker.
Development 131,6071
-6081.
Zhang, H., Levine, M. and Ashe, H. L. (2001).
Brinker is a sequence-specific transcriptional repressor in the Drosophila
embryo. Genes Dev. 15,261
-266.
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati 
Twitter What's this?
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
