Ultrabithorax regulates genes at several levels of the wing-patterning hierarchy to shape the development of the<i>Drosophila</i> haltere

Weatherbee, Scott D.; Halder, Georg; Kim, Jaeseob; Hudson, Amy W.; Carroll, Sean B.

doi:10.1101/gad.12.10.1474

Cited by 308 publications

(311 citation statements)

References 53 publications

(38 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

285

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In order to address the mechanism by which ra1 may have been co-opted, further analysis of its upstream regulator(s) and regulatory sequences are required. In animals, co-option of multiple target genes and entire signaling pathways has been demonstrated (Weatherbee et al, 1998;Keys et al, 1999). Therefore, co-option sometimes requires changes to the cis-regulatory elements of multiple target genes, again emphasizing the importance of identifying the targets in the rest of the pathway.…”

Section: Co-optionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Branching Out: The ramosa Pathway and the Evolution of Grass Inflorescence Morphology

McSteen

2006

Plant Cell

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Co-optionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Branching Out: The ramosa Pathway and the Evolution of Grass Inflorescence Morphology

McSteen

2006

Plant Cell

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Ideas for how a transcription factor might control programs of cell differentiation have been developed, for example, in the analysis of Hox gene function (20)(21)(22)(23). It could directly activate many target genes required for the differentiation program, or it could function in a hierarchical system in which it directly regulates only a small number of genes, which then regulate the bulk of the required genes.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mef2 activity levels differentially affect gene expression during Drosophila muscle development

Elgar

Han

Taylor

2008

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cell differentiation is controlled by key transcription factors, and a major question is how they orchestrate cell-type-specific genetic programs. Muscle differentiation is a well studied paradigm in which the conserved Mef2 transcription factor plays a pivotal role. Recent genomic studies have identified a large number of mef2-regulated target genes with distinct temporal expression profiles during Drosophila myogenesis. However, the question remains as to how a single transcription factor can control such diverse patterns of gene expression. In this study we used a strategy combining genomics and developmental genetics to address this issue in vivo during Drosophila muscle development. We found that groups of mef2-regulated genes respond differently to changes in mef2 activity levels: some require higher levels for their expression than others. Furthermore, this differential requirement correlates with when the gene is first expressed during the muscle differentiation program. Genes that require higher levels are activated later. These results implicate mef2 in the temporal regulation of muscle gene expression, and, consistent with this, we show that changes in mef2 activity levels can alter the start of gene expression in a predictable manner. Together these results indicate that Mef2 is not an all-or-none regulator; rather, its action is more subtle, and levels of its activity are important in the differential expression of muscle genes. This suggests a route by which mef2 can orchestrate the muscle differentiation program and contribute to the stringent regulation of gene expression during myogenesis. muscle differentiation program ͉ transcription factor levels F or several decades it has been appreciated that the controlled regulation of gene expression, including the coordinated activation of batteries of genes, lies behind cell differentiation programs (1-3). It is now clear that a principle tier of control of cell differentiation is through key transcription factors, and an important general question is how these factors coordinate the genetic program of such complex processes. A classic paradigm is muscle, in which the conserved Mef2 transcription factor is a major regulator of gene expression and differentiation (4). Mef2 was first identified in mammalian cell culture (5-7), but because mammals possess four closely related mef2 genes functional analyses during development are complicated. In contrast, Drosophila has a single mef2 gene and was the first organism to be used to show that mef2 is required for muscle development in vivo (8)(9)(10). This highlighted that the analysis of how mef2 functions is central to understanding how muscle is made. Important characteristics of the underlying genetic program include the temporal coordination of muscle gene expression (11-13) and the regulation of levels and relative stoichiometries of gene expression during myogenesis (14-19). Although these basic features have been known for many years, much remains to be understood about them. However, the identificati...

show abstract

“…Position along the anterior-posterior axis in developing metazoans is specified by the Hox transcription factor family (1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7). Alterations in expression patterns of Hox transcription factors can rearrange appendages, a dramatic example of their capacity to instigate developmental programs (1).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Hox Transcription Factor Ultrabithorax Ib Physically and Genetically Interacts with Disconnected Interacting Protein 1, a Double-stranded RNA-binding Protein

Bondos

Catanese

Tan

et al. 2004

Journal of Biological Chemistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Hox protein family consists of homeodomain-containing transcription factors that are primary determinants of cell fate during animal development. Specific Hox function appears to rely on protein-protein interactions; however, the partners involved in these interactions and their function are largely unknown. Disconnected Interacting Protein 1 (DIP1) was isolated in a yeast two-hybrid screen of a 0 -12-h Drosophila embryo library designed to identify proteins that interact with Ultrabithorax (Ubx), a Drosophila Hox protein. The Ubx⅐DIP1 physical interaction was confirmed using phage display, immunoprecipitation, pull-down assays, and gel retardation analysis. Ectopic expression of DIP1 in wing and haltere imaginal discs malforms the adult structures and enhances a decreased Ubx expression phenotype, establishing a genetic interaction. Ubx can generate a ternary complex by simultaneously binding its target DNA and DIP1. A large region of Ubx, including the repression domain, is required for interaction with DIP1. These more variable sequences may be key to the differential Hox function observed in vivo. The Ubx⅐DIP1 interaction prevents transcriptional activation by Ubx in a modified yeast one-hybrid assay, suggesting that DIP1 may modulate transcriptional regulation by Ubx. The DIP1 sequence contains two dsRNAbinding domains, and DIP1 binds double-stranded RNA with a 1000-fold higher affinity than either singlestranded RNA or double-stranded DNA. The strong interaction of Ubx with an RNA-binding protein suggests a wider range of proteins may influence Ubx function than previously appreciated.

show abstract

Ultrabithorax regulates genes at several levels of the wing-patterning hierarchy to shape the development of theDrosophila haltere

Cited by 308 publications

References 53 publications

Branching Out: The ramosa Pathway and the Evolution of Grass Inflorescence Morphology

Branching Out: The ramosa Pathway and the Evolution of Grass Inflorescence Morphology

mef2 activity levels differentially affect gene expression during Drosophila muscle development

Hox Transcription Factor Ultrabithorax Ib Physically and Genetically Interacts with Disconnected Interacting Protein 1, a Double-stranded RNA-binding Protein

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About