Gene expression during Drosophila embryogenesis

Embryonic expression patterns for 6,003 (44%) of the 13,659 protein-coding genes identified in the Drosophila melanogaster genome were documented, of which 40% show tissue-restricted expression.

Identifying the genomic regions bound by sequence-specific regulatory factors is central both to deciphering the complex DNA cis-regulatory code that controls transcription in metazoans and to determining the range of genes that shape animal morphogenesis. We used whole-genome tiling arrays to map sequences bound in Drosophila melanogaster embryos by the six maternal and gap transcription factors that initiate anterior–posterior patterning. We find that these sequence-specific DNA binding proteins bind with quantitatively different specificities to highly overlapping sets of several thousand genomic regions in blastoderm embryos. Specific high- and moderate-affinity in vitro recognition sequences for each factor are enriched in bound regions. This enrichment, however, is not sufficient to explain the pattern of binding in vivo and varies in a context-dependent manner, demonstrating that higher-order rules must govern targeting of transcription factors. The more highly bound regions include all of the over 40 well-characterized enhancers known to respond to these factors as well as several hundred putative new cis-regulatory modules clustered near developmental regulators and other genes with patterned expression at this stage of embryogenesis. The new targets include most of the microRNAs (miRNAs) transcribed in the blastoderm, as well as all major zygotically transcribed dorsal–ventral patterning genes, whose expression we show to be quantitatively modulated by anterior–posterior factors. In addition to these highly bound regions, there are several thousand regions that are reproducibly bound at lower levels. However, these poorly bound regions are, collectively, far more distant from genes transcribed in the blastoderm than highly bound regions; are preferentially found in protein-coding sequences; and are less conserved than highly bound regions. Together these observations suggest that many of these poorly bound regions are not involved in early-embryonic transcriptional regulation, and a significant proportion may be nonfunctional. Surprisingly, for five of the six factors, their recognition sites are not unambiguously more constrained evolutionarily than the immediate flanking DNA, even in more highly bound and presumably functional regions, indicating that comparative DNA sequence analysis is limited in its ability to identify functional transcription factor targets.

To fully understand animal transcription networks, it is essential to accurately measure the spatial and temporal expression patterns of transcription factors and their targets. We describe a registration technique that takes image-based data from hundreds of Drosophila blastoderm embryos, each costained for a reference gene and one of a set of genes of interest, and builds a model VirtualEmbryo. This model captures in a common framework the average expression patterns for many genes in spite of significant variation in morphology and expression between individual embryos. We establish the method's accuracy by showing that relationships between a pair of genes' expression inferred from the model are nearly identical to those measured in embryos costained for the pair. We present a VirtualEmbryo containing data for 95 genes at six time cohorts. We show that known gene-regulatory interactions can be automatically recovered from this data set and predict hundreds of new interactions.

No abstract

A fundamental goal of genetics and functional genomics is to identify and mutate every gene in model organisms such as Drosophila melanogaster. The Berkeley Drosophila Genome Project (BDGP) gene disruption project generates single P-element insertion strains that each mutate unique genomic open reading frames. Such strains strongly facilitate further genetic and molecular studies of the disrupted loci, but it has remained unclear if P elements can be used to mutate all Drosophila genes. We now report that the primary collection has grown to contain 1045 strains that disrupt more than 25% of the estimated 3600 Drosophila genes that are essential for adult viability. Of these P insertions, 67% have been verified by genetic tests to cause the associated recessive mutant phenotypes, and the validity of most of the remaining lines is predicted on statistical grounds. Sequences flanking >920 insertions have been determined to exactly position them in the genome and to identify 376 potentially affected transcripts from collections of EST sequences. Strains in the BDGP collection are available from the Bloomington Stock Center and have already assisted the research community in characterizing >250 Drosophila genes. The likely identity of 131 additional genes in the collection is reported here. Our results show that Drosophila genes have a wide range of sensitivity to inactivation by P elements, and provide a rationale for greatly expanding the BDGP primary collection based entirely on insertion site sequencing. We predict that this approach can bring >85% of all Drosophila open reading frames under experimental control.

The 2B5 region on the X chromosome of Drosophila melanogaster forms an early ecdysone puff at the end of the third larval instar. The region contains a complex genetic locus, the Broad-Complex (BR-C) composed of four groups of fully complementing (br, rbp, l(1)2Bc, and l(1)2Bd) alleles, and classes of noncomplementing (npr 1) and partially noncomplementing l(1)2Bab alleles. BR-C mutants prevent metamorphosis, including the morphogenesis of imaginal discs. Results are presented that indicate that the BR-C contains two major functional domains. One, the br domain is primarily, if not exclusively, involved in the elongation and eversion of appendages by imaginal discs. The second, the l(1)2Bc domain, is primarily involved in the fusion of discs to form a continuous adult epidermis. Nonetheless, the two domains may encode products with related functions because in some situations mutants in both domains appear to affect similar developmental processes.

The information in Table 1 for RNA polymerase II was incorrectly given for the form of the enzyme unphosphorylated at the C-terminal tail, which is recognized by the 8WG16 monoclonal antibody. The corrected version of the Table below gives the intended information for the enzyme phosphorylated at the C terminus, which is recognized by the H14 monoclonal antibody.

No abstract