• No results found

Ems and Nkx6 are central regulators in dorsoventral patterning of the Drosophila brain

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2020

Share "Ems and Nkx6 are central regulators in dorsoventral patterning of the Drosophila brain"

Copied!
11
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

INTRODUCTION

The development of the central nervous system in vertebrates and invertebrates involves the transformation of a two-dimensional sheet of neuroectodermal cells into a complex three-dimensional structure comprising a variety of different neural cell types. The specification of neural cell types is a multi-step process, which at early stages of embryogenesis critically depends on conveying positional information in the neuroectoderm (NE) to neural stem cells. The underlying molecular genetic mechanisms have been extensively studied in the embryonic ventral nerve cord (VNC) of the trunk (reviewed by Dessaud et al., 2008; Skeath and Thor, 2003).

In Drosophila, the VNC is generated by segmental arrays of neural stem cells, called neuroblasts (NBs), which delaminate from the truncal NE. Each NB acquires a unique identity that is finally reflected in the production of a specific cell lineage (Bossing et al., 1996; Schmidt et al., 1997). NB identity is specified by the combinatorial code of positional cues in the NE provided by the products of early patterning genes, which act in the anteroposterior (AP) and dorsoventral (DV) axes (reviewed by Skeath and Thor, 2003). The graded activities of the nuclear factor Dorsal, BMP and Epidermal growth factor receptor (Egfr) signaling pathways determine the DV boundaries of the NE, and further regulate the expression of a set of evolutionary conserved DV patterning genes (Hong et al., 2008; Mizutani et al., 2006; Skeath, 1998; von Ohlen and Doe, 2000). The expression of these ‘DV genes’ subdivides the trunk NE into three longitudinal columns along the DV axis: ventral nervous system defective(vnd/Nkx2) in the ventral, intermediate neuroblasts defective (ind/Gsx) in the intermediate, and muscle

segment homeobox(msh/Msx; Drop – FlyBase) in the dorsal NE column (Chu et al., 1998; Isshiki et al., 1997; McDonald et al., 1998; Weiss et al., 1998). In Drosophila, these homeobox genes interact in a hierarchical cascade of transcriptional repression, according to which vndrepresses ind(and msh) in the ventral column, and indrepresses mshin the intermediate column. The DV genes encode key regulators of NB identity and each NE column thereby gives rise to a population of distinctly specified NBs. However, whereas vnd, ind and Egfr have also been shown to be central for the formation of NBs in their respective NE column, this role appears dispensable for msh (reviewed by Cornell and von Ohlen, 2000; Skeath, 1999).

Much less is known about the genetic mechanisms of DV regionalization in the developing brain. The procephalic NE and the descending population of ~100 brain NBs in each hemisphere can be subdivided (from anterior to posterior) into the presumptive proto- (PC), deuto- (DC) and tritocerebrum (TC) (Urbach et al., 2003). We previously showed that DV genes are expressed in a segment-specific manner in the procephalic NE and brain NBs (Urbach and Technau, 2003a; Urbach and Technau, 2003b). It was further shown that the way in which vndcontrols expression of ind and mshdiffers between the brain and the VNC, and that vndis necessary for proper development of the ventral procephalic NE and of the brain NBs that descend from these NE domains. These experiments suggested that the role of vnd/Nkx2 in brain development exhibits striking parallels between vertebrates and Drosophila(Urbach et al., 2006).

In this work, we uncover a novel regulatory network of homeodomain transcription factors in Drosophilathat is specifically necessary to pattern the TC and DC in the DV axis, whereas the underlying genetic interactions in the PC diverge. We provide evidence that empty spiracles(ems) and Nk6 homeobox(Nkx6; HGTX– FlyBase) encode key regulators in the DV genetic network. Intriguingly, ems, a cephalic gap gene, is crucial for the

brain-Ems and Nkx6 are central regulators in dorsoventral

patterning of the

Drosophila

brain

Janina Seibert, Dagmar Volland and Rolf Urbach*

In central nervous system development, the identity of neural stem cells (neuroblasts) critically depends on the precise spatial patterning of the neuroectoderm in the dorsoventral (DV) axis. Here, we uncover a novel gene regulatory network underlying DV patterning in the Drosophilabrain, and show that the cephalic gap gene empty spiracles(ems) and the Nk6 homeobox gene (Nkx6) encode key regulators. The regulatory network implicates novel interactions between these and the evolutionarily conserved homeobox genes ventral nervous system defective(vnd), intermediate neuroblasts defective(ind) and muscle segment homeobox (msh). We show that Msh cross-repressively interacts with Nkx6 to sustain the boundary between dorsal and intermediate neuroectoderm in the tritocerebrum (TC) and deutocerebrum (DC), and that Vnd positively regulates Nkx6by suppressing Msh. Remarkably, Ems is required to activate Nkx6, indand mshin the TC and DC, whereas later Nkx6 and Ind act together to repress ems in the intermediate DC. Furthermore, the initially overlapping expression of Ems and Vnd in the ventral/intermediate TC and DC resolves into complementary expression patterns due to cross-repressive interaction. These results indicate that the anteroposterior patterning gene emscontrols the expression of DV genes, and vice versa. In addition, in contrast to regulation in the ventral nerve cord, cross-inhibition between homeodomain factors (between Ems and Vnd, and between Nkx6 and Msh) is essential for the establishment and maintenance of discrete DV gene expression domains in the Drosophilabrain. This resembles the mutually repressive relationship between pairs of homeodomain proteins that pattern the vertebrate neural tube in the DV axis.

KEY WORDS: Brain development, Neuroectodermal regionalization, Stem cell specification, Drosophila, ems/Emx, Nkx6(HGTX), vnd/Nkx2, msh(Drop)/Msx, ind/Gsx

Development 136, 3937-3947 (2009) doi:10.1242/dev.041921

Institute of Genetics, University of Mainz, D-55099 Mainz, Germany.

*Author for correspondence (urbach@uni-mainz.de)

Accepted 28 September 2009

D

E

V

E

LO

P

M

E

N

(2)

specific regulation of DV gene expression (Nkx6, vnd, ind, msh) and, conversely, DV genes control the expression of ems. Moreover, we demonstrate that cross-repressive interactions between pairs of homeodomain proteins establish DV gene expression domains in the fly brain, which bears similarity to DV patterning in the vertebrate neural tube.

MATERIALS AND METHODS Drosophilagenotypes and genetics

The following fly strains were used: Oregon R (wild type), Df(3L)XG3

(Bloomington Stock Center), ems9H83(Jürgens et al., 1984),ind16.2(Weiss et al., 1998), msh68(Isshiki et al., 1997), Nkx6D25(Broihier et al., 2004),

vnd6(Jiménez and Campos-Ortega, 1990), UAS-vnd(Chu et al., 1998), UAS-ind(von Ohlen et al., 2007), UAS-Nkx6 (Broihier et al., 2004), UAS-msh-m25-m6(Isshiki et al., 1997) and UAS-ems(Lovegrove et al., 2006). The vnd6; msh68double-mutant flies were created using standard genetic methods. The UAS-Gal4 system (Brand and Perrimon, 1993) was used to overexpress the UAS constructs in the neuroectoderm, crossing the UAS lines with the sca-Gal4 (Klaes et al., 1994) or Mat-Gal4-VP16 (Häcker and Perrimon, 1998) driver line. In the deficiency Df(3L)XG3, the chromosome region 70E3 to71D4 is deleted, including the closely adjacent loci of the indand Nkx6genes; the deletion, notably, does not include any other gene for which a role in DV patterning is known and that might otherwise confound our observed expression phenotype. To confirm whether the deficiency Df(3L)XG3 includes Nkx6 and ind, complementation tests were performed: the deficiency was crossed with either single mutant (ind16.2and Nkx6D25) and each was found to be non-complementary. All mutants have been blue balanced and distinguished from heterozygotes via antibody staining against -galactosidase. The deficiency Df(3L)XG3was additionally identified by lack of staining by in situ hybridization against Nkx6or indmRNA.

Staging, flat preparation and mounting of embryos

Staging of the embryos was carried out as previously described (Campos-Ortega and Hartenstein, 1997). Flat preparations of the head ectoderm of stained embryos and mounting were carried out as previously described (Urbach et al., 2003).

Documentation of phenotypes

Embryos were viewed under a Zeiss Axioplan microscope equipped with Nomarski optics using 40⫻, 63⫻and 100⫻oil-immersion objectives. Pictures were digitized with a CCD camera (Contron Progress 3012) and processed with Adobe Photoshop CS2.

Antibodies and immunohistochemistry

Embryos were dechorionated, fixed and immunostained according to previously published protocols (Urbach et al., 2003). For the anti-En and anti-Ems antibodies, biotinyl tyramide (TSA Biotin System, PerkinElmer) was used to amplify the signal following the manufacturer’s protocol. The following primary antibodies were used at the indicated dilutions: rabbit anti--gal (1:2000; Promega), mouse En (1:7; 4D9, DSHB), rat anti-Ems (1:1000) (Walldorf and Gehring, 1992), sheep anti-DIG alkaline phosphatase conjugated (1:1000; Roche Diagnostics), sheep anti-FITC alkaline phosphatase conjugated (1:1000; Roche Diagnostics) and rat Nkx6 (1:100) (Brohier et al., 2004). The secondary antibodies (donkey anti-mouse, donkey anti-rabbit, donkey anti-rat; Dianova) were either biotinylated or alkaline phosphatase conjugated and used at 1:500.

Whole-mount in situ hybridization

ind, vndand mshRNA probes were synthesized with T7 RNA polymerase using pBS SKII(+) linearized with XhoI (ind), SacI (vnd) or HindIII (msh) as a template. The Nkx6RNA probe was synthesized with T3 RNA polymerase, using the EST clone RE18506 [Berkeley Drosophila Genome Project (BDGP)] cloned into SphI-linearized pFLC1as a template, according to the manufacturer’s protocol (Roche). All riboprobes were DIG- as well as FITC-labeled. In situ hybridization was performed as described previously (Urbach et al., 2006) and the probes processed with NBT/BCIP solution (Roche Diagnostics), which, after a wash in methanol, results in blue staining. Then, the embryos were immunolabeled with a second primary antibody, followed

by incubation with a biotinylated secondary antibody and processing with DAB. For double in situ hybridizations, the FITC-labeled probe was processed with NBT/BCIP, followed by several washes with glycine buffer. Then, embryos were incubated with anti-DIG-AP antibody and the second probe processed with Vector Red (Vector Laboratories).

RESULTS

DV regionalization of the early brain primordium

by the expression of Nkx6 and the DV genes msh,

indand vnd

The Drosophilabrain, developing from the procephalic NE, can be divided into the TC, DC and PC. These AP subregions can be subdivided further into distinct DV domains based on the domain-specific expression of different DV genes (vnd, indand msh), which is most clearly displayed by stage 9 (Fig. 1M⬘,M⬙) (Urbach and Technau, 2003a). In relationship to these genes, we investigated the expression of Nkx6 (Fig. 1A-M⬘), another important DV gene (as we will show). Expression of Nkx6, which initiates in the blastodermal procephalic NE by stage 6 (Fig. 1C,D) (see Uhler et al., 2002), clearly exhibited segment-specific differences by stages 8/9: it was expressed in the ventral (which coexpresses vnd, Fig. 1K) and intermediate NE (which coexpresses ind, Fig. 1L) of the TC, as well as in the intermediate DC (which coexpresses ind). Thus, the expression of Nkx6is complementary to that of dorsal msh(Fig. 1C,M⬘). Nkx6was also detected in distinct subsets of early- and later-born trito- and deutocerebral NBs (Fig. 1M; data not shown), which develop from Nkx6-expressing NE (Fig. 1E,I,J,M⬘). Nkx6was not expressed in the NE of the PC, but by stage 11 was detected in a single protocerebral NB (Ppd5, Fig. 1J). Hence, expression of Nkx6at high levels and from early embryonic stages onwards is observed only in the NE and NBs of the TC and DC.

Cross-repressive interactions between Nkx6and

mshstabilize the border between intermediate

and dorsal NE in the TC and DC

We previously described that, in contrast to the trunk NE, the expression domains of mshand vndpartially share a common border in the TC and DC (Urbach and Technau, 2003a) (see Fig. 1B,D,M⬘), and that Vnd represses msh (Urbach et al., 2006). vnd is downregulated early in development in the intermediate NE and in large parts of the ventral NE of both neuromeres (Urbach et al., 2006), raising the question of how suppression of mshis sustained in this area after vndhas been lost. We found that Nkx6is expressed in the intermediate TC and DC just before the expression of vnd is downregulated and expression of indis activated (Fig. 1A,C,D; Fig. 2B,C). Since the expression of Nkx6is complementary to that of msh (Fig. 1C; Fig. 2A), we speculated that Nkx6 could act as a repressor of msh. In support of this, we observed ectopic msh in the intermediate TC (70%, n20 brain hemispheres) and in the intermediate/ventral DC (95%, n20) in Nkx6-null mutant embryos (Nkx6D25) by stages 10/11 (Fig. 2D,D,E,E). In a reciprocal experiment, we ectopically expressed Nkx6in the entire NE using sca-Gal4 (termed sca>Nkx6), which drives expression in the NE from stage 8 onwards, and found that ectopic Nkx6 represses mshin the dorsal NE of the TC and DC (10% complete loss, 90% strong reduction ofmsh, n35) (Fig. 2F,F⬘). Thus, Nkx6 acts as a repressor of msh and compensates for the early loss of vnd, keeping dorsalizing signals out of the ventral/intermediate TC and DC. To investigate whether Msh in turn represses Nkx6in the dorsal TC and DC, we explored Nkx6expression in msh-null mutants (msh68). In these embryos, the dorsal limit of the Nkx6expression domain was

D

E

V

E

LO

P

M

E

N

(3)

shifted into the entire dorsal NE of the TC and DC (100%, n28) (Fig. 3A,E,E⬘). Vice versa, after ectopic expression of mshusing the maternal Mat-Gal4-VP16 (termed Mat-Gal4), which drives expression ubiquitously (Bossing et al., 2002), we observed that Nkx6 expression is largely reduced (83%, n18) and sometimes absent (17%, n18) (Fig. 3F,F⬘). Hence, these data demonstrate that Nkx6 and Msh cross-repress each other to stabilize the boundary between intermediate and dorsal NE in the TC and DC.

vnd is required for activation of Nkx6expression in the TC and DC

Our observation that Nkx6 is expressed in specific DV neuroectodermal domains in the TC and DC prompted us to look in more detail into how Nkx6is regulated there. We detected Nkx6

[image:3.612.54.503.58.452.2]

coexpression with vndin the ventral TC, and with indand vnd (transiently) in the intermediate TC and DC (Fig. 1K,L). It has been reported previously that Vnd is a positive regulator of Nkx6in the head NE (Uhler et al., 2002). In agreement, we found a lack of Nkx6 expression in the TC and DC in vnd-null mutant embryos (vnd6; 100%, n20; Fig. 3A,C,C⬘). Since vndis necessary to activate ind (Urbach et al., 2006) in the intermediate DC, this raises the possibility that vndcould regulate Nkx6 expression indirectly via ind. However, expression of Nkx6was unaffected in the DC inind -null mutants (ind16.2), as was also the case in the TC (100%, n16; Fig. 3B), indicating that Nkx6depends on vndbut not on ind. Since indexpression is unaffected in Nkx6 mutant embryos (data not shown), this suggests that Nkx6and indare positively regulated in parallel in the DC by Vnd.

Fig. 1. Expression of vnd, ind, msh andNkx6subdivides the Drosophilaearly embryonic brain into distinct DV domains.Flat

preparations displaying the head ectoderm of the left hemisphere; anterior is up. Black dashed lines indicate the ventral midline. (A)indexpression initiates in the neuroectoderm (NE) of the prospective intermediate deutocerebrum (iDC; arrow), which coexpresses vnd. (B-D)vnd/msh (B) and

Nkx6/msh(C) are expressed in complementary patterns, as summarized in D (for color code, see M⬘). (E-L)Nkx6, msh, vnd andindexpression combined with En [which indicates the posterior border of tritocerebrum (TC), DC and protocerebrum (PC)]. (E)By stage 9, Nkx6is expressed in the iDC, intermediate TC (iTC) and ventral TC (vTC), but not in the PC. mshis expressed in the dorsal (F), vndin the ventral (G), and indin the intermediate (H) TC/DC. (I)During stages 9/10, Nkx6 starts to fade from the iTC. (J)By stage 11, Nkx6 is additionally found in Ppd5 (arrowhead and inset). (K)Nkx6and vndare coexpressed in the vTC. (L)Nkx6and indare coexpressed in the intermediate TC/DC. (M-M⬙) Summary of DV gene expression in the brain NE (M⬘,M⬙) and in descending neuroblasts (M) at stage 9. (M⬙)DV gene expression subdivides the brain NE into distinct DV domains (indicated by the red dashed lines). Blue dashed lines mark neuromeric borders. Yellow hatched regions indicate low levels of Vnd protein. hs, enhead spot; as, enantennal stripe; is, enintercalary stripe. For nomenclature of neuroblasts, see Urbach et al. (Urbach et al., 2003).

D

E

V

E

LO

P

M

E

N

(4)

Vnd positively regulates Nkx6by repressing msh

Although we provide evidence that Vnd is a positive regulator of Nkx6 expression in the TC and DC, it is unclear whether Vnd regulates Nkx6directly or indirectly (see Uhler et al., 2002). In both brain neuromeres, Vnd is a repressor of msh(Urbach et al., 2006), and here we show that Msh acts as a repressor of Nkx6. This raises the possibility that Vnd regulates Nkx6indirectly by repressing msh. In accordance with this,Nkx6expression is abolished in vndmutant embryos in which mshis derepressed in the ventral TC and DC (Fig. 3C,C⬘) (Urbach et al., 2006), analogous to the situation after ectopic mshexpression (Fig. 3F,F⬘). Conversely, upon overexpressing vnd, which leads to repression of msh(Urbach et al., 2006), we observed a significant expansion of Nkx6expression into the dorsal NE of TC and DC (100%, n25; Fig. 3D,D⬘), similar to the results obtained in mshmutants (Fig. 3E,E⬘). Even though all of these observations suggest that Vnd regulates Nkx6indirectly by repressing the Nkx6 -repressor Msh, they do not exclude the possibility of a more direct interaction of vndwith Nkx6. We therefore tested Nkx6expression in vnd6; msh68double-mutant brains. We hypothesized that if Vnd does not directly activate Nkx6but is only needed to repress msh, thenNkx6should be detected in its endogenous expression domain (despite the absence of Vnd) and should additionally be expanded into the dorsal NE because Msh repressor function is absent in this genetic background. Exactly this pattern of Nkx6expression was observed in the double-mutant brain (100%, n10; Fig. 3G,G⬘), indicating that Vnd facilitates the expression of Nkx6by repressing the Nkx6-repressor msh.

The cephalic gap gene emsis required to activate

Nkx6,indand mshin the TC and DC

The sharp restriction of the domain of Nkx6 expression at the anterior DC and posterior TC suggests an interference with regulatory factors acting along the AP axis. Unexpectedly, we identified the cephalic gap gene emsto be involved. emsexpression initiates in a blastodermal circumferential stripe in the procephalon (Walldorf and Gehring, 1992) that subsequently resolves into three smaller domains that later encompass part of the TC, DC and PC

(e.g. Fig. 4C) (Hirth et al., 1995; Urbach and Technau, 2003a). In double labelings, we found that Nkx6expression initiates (by stage 6) within the Ems domain (in the prospective intermediate DC; Fig. 4A). Slightly later, the anterior borders of the Nkx6 and Ems expression domains coincided exactly. Nkx6 was subsequently expressed in NE cells of the TC, which retain high levels of Ems expression before Nkx6is activated (Fig. 4B). By stage 8, when the Nkx6 expression domain is entirely established, the posterior borders of the Nkx6 (at the posterior TC) and Ems expression domains corresponded precisely (Fig. 4B). Thus, ems appears to define the AP boundaries of Nkx6expression in the TC and DC. This was also observed upon vnd overexpression or in mshmutants, in which the Nkx6domain expands into the dorsal NE (Fig. 3D,E); in both cases, ectopic Nkx6is expressed within the AP borders of the early ems domain. Since these expression data imply that Ems plays a role in the activation of Nkx6, we tested the expression of Nkx6in ems-null mutant embryos (ems9H83). Remarkably, in these embryos Nkx6 expression was completely abolished in the TC and DC (100%, n25) (Fig. 4C,J), indicating that the AP patterning gene emsis required for the activation of Nkx6. The procephalic emsdomain in addition covered the areas of indand mshexpression in the TC and DC (Fig. 4D,E,G,H). Expression of ind(similar to Nkx6) initiated in the DC where the anterior borders of the ind and emsdomains corresponded precisely (Fig. 4D,E), suggesting that ems also regulates the anterior expansion of indexpression in the DC. In ems mutants, the expression of indand mshwas entirely absent in the NE of the TC and DC (Fig. 4F,K,I,L), indicating that emsis needed for the activation of indand mshas well.

[image:4.612.53.350.58.305.2]

These results led us to ask whether Ems alone is able to activate Nkx6,ind ormsh. Since endogenous emsis expressed throughout the entire NE of the early TC and DC (Fig. 4A,B), we investigated expression of Nkx6, indand mshin the PC and in the NE of the VNC upon mis-expression of Ems. In Mat>emsor sca>emsembryos, mshexpression was found in a nested ectopic domain in the central PC (Fig. 4M,N), whereas expression of Nkx6 and ind appeared unaltered (data not shown); also, in the trunk NE, ectopic expression of these DV genes could not be detected (data not shown). This

Fig. 2. Nkx6 and Msh cross-repress each other in the NE of TC and DC.(A)Nkx6(in the iTC/vTC/iDC) and

msh[in the dorsal (d) TC/dDC] are in complementary patterns. (B)Nkx6 and indare coexpressed in the iDC. (C)indexpression in the iTC initiates by early stage 9 (arrow). (D-F⬘) The ventral limit of mshexpression as judged from En domains as landmarks. D⬘,E⬘,F⬘are schematic representations of D,E,F. A filled area indicates the presence, whereas an empty area encircled with a dashed line indicates the absence, of gene expression; hatched areas mark ectopic gene expression. (D,D⬘) Wild type. The scheme considers Nkx6 protein expression present in the iTC at stages 10/11 (data not shown). (E,E⬘) In Nkx6mutants, mshis derepressed in the iDC/vDC and iTC; indexpression is not affected. (F,F⬘) sca-Gal4-driven Nkx6mis-expression suppresses

mshin the dTC/dDC. For orientation, abbreviations and symbols see Fig. 1.

D

E

V

E

LO

P

M

E

N

(5)

suggests that in the PC, Ems is to a certain extent sufficient to activate mshbut not Nkx6or ind; however, we assume that this is due to interference with factors specific for the PC [e.g. the ems -repressor Tailless (Hartmann et al., 2001)] or for the trunk [where emsfunction is repressed by the activity of homeotic genes (Schöck et al., 2000)] NE. Moreover, high levels of Ems seem to be necessary early on in order to initiate expression of Nkx6, so that it is additionally possible that the onset and intensity of ectopic Ems expression are inadequate to induce activation of the DV genes. Nevertheless, an indication that Ems activates Nkx6was observed in msh mutant embryos. As mentioned above, in msh mutants, ectopic Nkx6expanded into the entire dorsal NE of TC and DC (Fig. 3E,E⬘). Since Ems is also expressed in this NE region (Fig. 4A,B), this suggests that Ems might be able to activate Nkx6in the absence of Msh.

A feedback loop between emsand Nkx6/ind

controls expression of emsin the intermediate DC

From stage 9 onwards, Ems and Nkx6 or ind are expressed in mutually exclusive NE domains (and in corresponding populations of brain NBs) in the TC and DC (Fig. 4C,F; see Fig. 6A; data not shown), raising the possibility that one or both of these genes might become a repressor of ems. Therefore, we examined Ems expression in Nkx6 or ind loss- and gain-of-function embryos. Since Ems expression appeared unaltered under all these conditions (data not shown), this indicates that neither Nkx6 nor Ind is alone sufficient to repress ems. However, in the absence of both indand Nkx6in the small deficiency Df(3L)XG3, Ems was specifically derepressed in the intermediate DC (where ind and Nkx6 are normally coexpressed). Derepression of emsin Df(3L)XG3embryos was not observed before stage 10 (Fig. 4O,P; complete derepression in 44%, strong derepression in 56%, n25), when Vnd can be detected in the respective NE (Urbach et al., 2006). Since Vnd is an early repressor of ems(see below), but later disappears from the intermediate DC, we suggest that repression of ems(as initially carried out by Vnd) is maintained by the combined activity of Nkx6 and Ind. This further argues for a regulation of emsexpression via a negative-feedback loop in which Ems is needed to activate its own late repressors Nkx6 and Ind.

Ems cross-repressively interacts with Vnd in the early NE of the TC and DC

[image:5.612.50.283.53.572.2]

vndis important for the formation and specification of brain NBs. In contrast to the trunk, in the early brainvndis dynamically expressed and becomes progressively confined to three ventral domains in the posterior TC, DC and PC (Sprecher et al., 2006; Urbach et al., 2003). We found that vndis transiently expressed also in the intermediate NE of the TC and DC (Fig. 1A,D; data not shown), which confirms our previous assumption that in vndmutant embryos the observed defects in the formation and specification of intermediate brain NBs are also cell-autonomously regulated (Urbach et al., 2006). However, it has remained unclear how vndexpression becomes depleted in the intermediate NE and in large parts of the ventral NE in the TC and DC. Interestingly, we again identified involvement of the cephalic gap gene ems. In double labelings for Ems protein and vndmRNA, we observed Ems coexpression with vndby stage 5 in the prospective NE of the intermediate/ventral TC and DC (Fig. 5A,A⬘). During stages 6/7, expression of vndbegan to disappear within the Ems domain in the intermediate and distinct parts of the ventral NE in the DC (Fig. 5B,C,C⬘). This early reduction of vnd expression suggests that Ems represses vnd. To test this, we examined vndexpression in emsmutant embryos. Indeed, we found Fig. 3. Nkx6expression in the procephalic NE in different DV

gene loss- or gain-of-function backgrounds.(A)Nkx6/En expression in wild type. (B)Nkx6 is activated normally in indmutants. (C,C⬘) In vnd

mutants, Nkx6expression is abolished in the TC/DC and msh expands into the intermediate/ventral TC/DC. (D,D⬘) Ectopic vnd(driven by

Mat-Gal4) represses msh, and Nkx6expands into the most dorsal non-neuronal ectoderm of the TC/DC. (E,E⬘) In mshmutants, Nkx6

expands into the dorsal NE. (F,F⬘) Mat-Gal4-driven expression of msh

represses Nkx6in the ventral/intermediate TC/DC from stage 9 onwards. (G,G⬘) In vnd;mshdouble mutants, Nkx6is detected in the iTC/vTC/iDC and ectopically in the dorsal TC/DC. C⬘-G⬘are schematic representations of C-G. Dashed lines encircle areas in which gene expression is absent; the hatched region in C⬘indicates msh

derepression in vndmutants, and that in D⬘,F⬘marks the gain-of-function situation. For orientation, abbreviations and symbols see

Fig. 1.

D

E

V

E

LO

P

M

E

N

(6)

that until stages 10/11, vndexpression in these embryos is kept at high levels in those NE domains in the TC and DC (100%, n26) (Fig. 5I,J), where it is normally repressed already during stages 6-9 (Fig. 5A-E⬘). Thus, Ems is necessary to repress vnd in the intermediate NE and in large parts of the ventral NE in the TC and DC.

However, Ems expression in the prospective NE of the TC and DC does not completely repress vndin the ventral NE. Surprisingly, during stages 7/8, cells began to lose Ems expression in domains where vndexpression remained high (Fig. 5C,C⬘). During stage 8, the residual Ems/vnd-coexpressing NE became partitioned into Ems- or vnd-expressing subdomains (Fig. 5D,D⬘), so that by stage 9, when neurogenesis initiates, the Ems and vndexpression domains were largely complementary (Fig. 5E,E⬘). This suggests that Vnd might also repress ems. In vnd mutant embryos, ectopic Ems expression was found in the intermediate/ventral DC and in the ventral TC (100%, n30; Fig. 5F,G). Conversely, mis-expression of vnd(Mat>vnd) abolished Ems expression almost completely in the TC/DC, except for a small domain in the ventral DC where expression levels of Ems were significantly reduced (100%, n18;

Fig. 5F,H) (see Urbach et al., 2006). These data suggest that Vnd is necessary and sufficient to repress ems. Taken together, we conclude that after the blastodermal phase of coexpression, Ems and Vnd act as mutual inhibitors.

Nkx6expression in the PC does not depend on

vndbut on ems

[image:6.612.53.502.60.393.2]

By stage 11, Nkx6 was additionally detected in one NB (Ppd5) in the PC, but not in the overlaying NE (Fig. 1J; Fig. 6A). Interestingly, Ems, but not vnd, was coexpressed with Nkx6in Ppd5, and Ems was also detected in its NE of origin (Fig. 6A,B). Accordingly, Nkx6expression was not affected in Ppd5 in vndmutants (Fig. 6C). That Nkx6is regulated independently of vnd in the PC was further corroborated by our observations made upon vnd overexpression (Mata>vnd or sca>vnd), showing that Nkx6cannot be ectopically induced in the PC (Fig. 3D; Fig. 6D) (see Uhler et al., 2002). By contrast, in emsmutants Nkx6expression was absent at the position of Ppd5 (100%, n22) (Fig. 6E), indicating the involvement of Ems in activating Nkx6. In emsmutants, the development of brain NBs has been reported to be affected (Younossi-Hartenstein et al., 1997), and even though we Fig. 4. Ems regulates expression of Nkx6, indand mshin the NE of TC and DC.(A-C)Nkx6expression initiates in the iDC (arrow), which coexpresses Ems (A), and is subsequently activated in the iTC/vTC (B). Ems and Nkx6are expressed in mutually exclusive domains in the TC/DC by late stage 9 (C). (D-F)Expression of indbegins in the iDC (arrow), and is coexpressed with Ems (D). (E)Ems is reduced in the iDC and indexpression initiates in the iTC (arrowhead). (F)Expression of indand Ems is found in mutually exclusive domains in the TC/DC. (G-I)Expression of mshinitiates in the dorsal NE, and is coexpressed with Ems (G). Later on, Ems expression is largely lost from the mshdomain (H,I; arrowhead points to the mandibular mshdomain). (J-L)Nkx6 (J), ind(K) or msh(L) combined with En. In emsmutants, neither Nkx6, indnor mshis activated in the NE of TC/DC (the missing expression domains are encircled by dashed lines). (M,N)msh/En expression (M) in wild-type (wt) and in emsgain-of-function (N; usingMat-Gal4) embryos at early stage 10. (N)Overexpression of Ems leads to ectopicmshexpression in the PC (arrow). (O,P)Ems/En expression in wild type (O) and Df(3L)XG3(P). Ems domains are encircled in gray. In the deficiency, ectopic Ems is found in the iDC (encircled in white). For orientation, abbreviations and symbols see Fig. 1.

D

E

V

E

LO

P

M

E

N

(7)

observe NBs in the position of Ppd5, we cannot exclude the possibility that loss of Nkx6is a secondary effect of the non-formation of Ppd5. To see whether Msh (which is not normally expressed in the PC in the investigated time window) is able to interact with Nkx6 in the PC, we overexpressed msh(sca>msh) in this region. We found that Nkx6 expression is abolished in Ppd5 (100%, n24; Fig. 6F), indicating that Msh, similar to the situation in the TC and DC, is capable of repressing Nkx6also in the PC. Taken together, these results suggest that Ems is necessary to induce the expression of Nkx6in the protocerebral NB Ppd5. In contrast to in the TC and DC, Vnd does not play a role in the regulation of Nkx6expression in the PC, most likely because the Nkx6-repressor Msh is absent from the early PC.

DISCUSSION

The cephalic gap gene emscross-repressively

interacts with the DV gene vndto pre-pattern the

TC and DC

We show for the first time that the evolutionarily conserved homeodomain protein Ems is an integral component of the gene regulatory network that governs DV patterning in the posterior brain

[image:7.612.54.363.58.493.2]

neuromeres, the TC and DC (Fig. 7A,B). This novel function is surprising because emshas hitherto been exclusively connected with patterning functions along the AP axis. It has been proposed that the combined activities of the gap genes ems, buttonhead and orthodenticle(ocelliless– FlyBase) generate head segments (Cohen and Jürgens, 1990; Grossniklaus et al., 1994) and that emsmutants exhibit defects in the formation of the intercalary and antennal segment (Cohen and Jürgens, 1990; Schmidt-Ott et al., 1994) as well as in the corresponding TC and DC (Hirth et al., 1995; Younossi-Hartenstein et al., 1997) in accordance with the early pattern of ems expression (Dalton et al., 1989; Walldorf and Gehring, 1992; Urbach and Technau, 2003b). emsprobably also has a homeotic function in specifying aspects of intercalary segment identity (Schöck et al., 2000). We provide evidence that another crucial function of Ems is its cross-repressive interaction with Vnd (Fig. 7B). Previously, we showed that vnd expression is dynamic and exhibits specific differences in the TC and DC (Urbach et al., 2006). Here, we demonstrate that Ems is involved in the regulation of brain-specific differences in vndexpression, and that Vnd acts to repress emsin complementary parts of the TC and DC (Fig. 7B). These interactions Fig. 5. Cross-repressive regulation between ems and vndin the NE of TC and DC.(A,A⬘) Ems and

vndare coexpressed in the prospective NE of the ventral/intermediate TC/DC at stage 5. (B-C⬘) At stage 6, vndstarts to fade in the iDC (B) and at stage 7 in distinct parts of the vDC (C,C⬘), as indicated by blue bars. White asterisks indicate cells undergoing mitosis that transiently lose Ems or vndexpression.

Expression of Ems is encircled in brown, vndin blue. Light and dark colored areas indicate domains of weak and strong expression, respectively. Yellow dashed line indicates the cephalic furrow, and the black dashed line the border between mesectoderm [adjacent to the foregut (Fg)] and NE. (D,D⬘) Ems begins fading at stage 8 (as indicated by brown bars). (E,E⬘) By stage 9, Ems and vndare expressed in mutually exclusive NE domains. C⬘,D⬘,E⬘are schematic representations of C,D,E. (F-H)Ems/En expression in the wild type (F), in vndmutants (G), or upon Mat-Gal4-driven overexpression of vnd(H). Endogenous Ems domains are encircled in gray, and ectopic Ems in white. (G)Ectopic Ems is found in iDC/vTC. (H)Ems is abolished in TC/DC, except for a small domain in the vDC. (I,J)vnd/En expression in wild type (I) and emsmutants (J). (J)Areas of ectopic

vndinclude v/iDC and iTC. mds, mandibular en stripe. For orientation, abbreviations and symbols see Fig. 1.

D

E

V

E

LO

P

M

E

N

(8)

help to refine the pattern into mutually exclusive domains at the onset of neurogenesis, which is important as both genes provide positional information that subsequently specifies the identity of individual brain NBs (Urbach and Technau, 2003b). Depending on the context, Vnd/Nkx2 can act as a transcriptional activator or repressor, as determined by physical interaction with the co-repressor Groucho, which enhances repression (Chu et al., 1998; Cowden and Levine, 2003; Muhr et al., 2001; McDonald et al., 1998; Stepchenko and Nierenberg. 2004; Uhler et al., 2007; Yu et al., 2005). Interestingly, we observe that Ems also regulates the expression of two Nkxgenes in an opposing manner: it represses vnd/Nkx2but is necessary to activate Nkx6. The repressor function of Ems most likely also depends on Groucho, as Ems has been reported to bind Groucho in vitro (Goldstein et al., 2005).

In emsmutants, defects in proneural gene expression (lethal of scute and achaete) are restricted to NE regions where ems is normally expressed during early neurogenesis, leading to the loss of a subset of NBs in the TC and DC (Younossi-Hartenstein et al., 1997; Hartmann et al., 2000). This contrasts with the phenotype of the late embryonic emsmutant brain, which exhibits a severe reduction, or entire elimination, of the TC and DC (Hirth et al., 1995), suggesting that the proper development of a larger NE domain and/or fraction of NBs in the TC and DC must be affected. However, in emsmutants the organization of the early procephalic NE appears normal until stages 9/10 and apoptosis is not detected (Hartmann et al., 2000). A possible explanation for the subsequent complete loss of TC and DC is that in emsmutants, vndbecomes derepressed in the ventral/intermediate NE of both neuromeres,

[image:8.612.53.278.60.322.2]

and expression of msh, indand Nkx6is not activated. As we have shown previously, ectopic vndprevents the expression of many NB identity genes (Urbach et al., 2006). Indeed, the expression of a number of molecular markers has been reported to be absent in the ems mutant brain (Hartmann et al., 2000). It is therefore conceivable that in the TC and DC of ems mutants, as a consequence of lacking emsand ectopic vnd (and the absence of proneural gene activation), some NBs do not form. Additionally, Fig. 6. Nkx6expression is regulated differently in the PC.(A,B)In

the PC, Ems is coexpressed with Nkx6in the neuroblast Ppd5 (A) but not with vnd(B). (C,D)In vnd mutants, Nkx6is unaffected in Ppd5 (C). Upon sca-Gal4-driven mis-expression of vnd, Nkx6expression is unaltered in the PC in contrast to in the TC/DC, where the Nkx6

[image:8.612.308.559.63.393.2]

domain expands dorsally (D). (E,F)Nkx6expression is also abolished at the position of Ppd5 in emsmutants (E, arrow) and in Ppd5 upon sca -Gal4-driven mis-expression of msh (F, arrowhead; see inset).

Fig. 7. Dynamics of the spatiotemporal expression pattern of DV genes and emsin Drosophila, a model of their genetic

interactions and a comparison with the expression patterns of gene orthologs in the mouse brain.(A)Summary of the

spatiotemporal expression pattern of DV genes and emsin TC/DC. (B)Model of the development of genetic interactions between DV genes and emsin TC/DC, as compared with the VNC. Genetic factors and interactions specific for TC/DC are indicated in blue. Dashed arrows indicate a requirement for Ems to activate msh, Nkx6and ind, and of Vnd to activate ind. Green and red indicate negative feedback loops in the iDC. (C)Comparison of the expression of ems/Emx2(Rubenstein et al., 1998; Shimamura et al., 1995; Urbach and Technau, 2003b) and DV genes [msh/Msx(Ramos and Roberts, 2005; Urbach and Technau, 2003a), Nkx6and vnd/Nkx2(Prakash et al., 2009; Rubenstein et al., 1998; Shimamura et al., 1995; Urbach and Technau, 2003a) and this study] between mouse [at embryonic day 8 (E8) and E10 (the neural tube has been unfolded into the neural plate)] and Drosophila(stage 9). Note that we detected faint Nkx6expression also in ventral NE of the

Drosophila trunk (Fig. 1E and data not shown). Msx1is expressed mainly in dorsal NE of the mouse brain (Ramos and Roberts, 2005), but additionally in the ventral midbrain (Andersson et al., 1996). FB, forebrain; MB, midbrain; HB, hindbrain. For details see Discussion.

D

E

V

E

LO

P

M

E

N

(9)

owing to mis-specification of the NE (where neural identity gene expression is absent or altered), the other NBs and their progeny might still form but degenerate at later stages.

Integration of DV and AP patterning signals establishes the NE domains of Nkx6, indand msh

expression

It has been largely unclear how expression of Nkx6 is regulated in the brain NE, although Vnd has been suggested to act as a positive regulator (Uhler et al., 2002). At the blastodermal stage, coexpression of emsand vndis only observed in the intermediate and ventral NE of the TC and DC, which might account for early Nkx6expression being limited to the respective NE in the brain and absent from the trunk. Our data indicate that Ems and Vnd together facilitate the activation of Nkx6. Ems expression closely prefigures the domain of Nkx6expression in the TC and DC (Fig. 7A), and together with the fact that Nkx6 is completely abolished in ems mutants, this suggests that Ems might act as a direct activator to regulate the extension of the Nkx6domain along the AP axis. Vnd indirectly regulates the enlargement of the Nkx6domain along the DV axis by repressing the Nkx6-repressor Msh. That DV patterning in the brain NE integrates AP signals is additionally supported by the fact that Ems is also necessary for activation of indand msh, indicating that emsis a key regulator in DV patterning of the TC and DC. We also provide evidence for a negative-feedback control in the DV regulatory network, in which Ems is needed to activate its own later-stage repressors, Nkx6 and Ind (Fig. 7B). Together, our data suggest not only that Ems regulates the expression of all DV genes (activating Nkx6, ind, mshand repressing vnd), but also that DV factors (Nkx6, Ind and Vnd) control expression of ems, indicating that integration of DV and AP patterning signals takes place at different levels in the DV genetic network.

Nkx6functions as a DV patterning gene in early

brain development and interacts

cross-repressively with msh

We identified Nkx6as specifically involved in DV patterning of the TC and DC (Fig. 7B). In addition to later suppression of ems(in concert with Ind), a further pivotal function of Nkx6 is to maintain the suppression of mshin the intermediate/ventral TC and DC that was initiated by Vnd. Since in both neuromeres the expression of Nkx6starts before and persists longer than that of ind(Fig. 7A), and because mshis ventrally derepressed in Nkx6but not in indmutants (J.S. and R.U., unpublished observations), this implies that Nkx6 (but not Ind) is the major msh suppressor necessary to prevent intermediate/ventral NE and the descending NBs from adopting dorsal fates (Urbach et al., 2006). Consequently, Nkx6 indirectly regulates the proper specification of brain NB identity by suppressing msh (andems). Further experiments are required to show whether Nkx6 is also more directly involved in the fate specification of NBs and progeny cells in the brain, as has been shown in the VNC, where Nkx6 promotes the fate of ventrally projecting, and represses the fate of dorsally projecting, motoneurons (Broihier et al., 2004).

Additionally, we observed cross-inhibitory interactions between Nkx6 and Msh (Fig. 7A,B). We assume that this mutually repressive regulation in the TC and DC is necessary to stabilize the boundary between dorsal and intermediate NE, and to ensure the regionalized expression of mshand Nkx6over time. It is likely that Nkx6 and Msh/Msx interact with the co-repressor Groucho (Andersson et al., 2006; Broihier and Skeath, 2002; Muhr et al., 2001; Uhler et al., 2002; Syu et al., 2009) to repress each other at the transcriptional

level. Interestingly, aspects of the genetic interactions between Nkx6 and Msh/Msx seem to be evolutionarily conserved, as Msx1, which is expressed in the vertebrate midbrain and functions as a crucial determinant in the specification of dopamine neurons, represses Nkx6.1 in ventral midbrain dopaminergic progenitors of mice (Andersson et al., 2006).

It had not been shown until now that domains of DV gene expression in the Drosophilabrain become established through cross-repressive regulation, and it is possible that such genetic interactions are more common than previously thought (e.g. we have further evidence that Ind and Msh act as mutual inhibitors; J.S. and R.U., unpublished). This suggests that in the fly brain, cross-inhibition between pairs of homeodomain transcription factors is fundamental for establishing and maintaining DV neuroectodermal and corresponding stem cell domains. By contrast, in the NE of the VNC, where DV patterning is much better understood (reviewed by Cornell and Von Ohlen, 2000; Hong et al., 2008; Skeath, 1999), cross-repressive interactions of homeobox genes are largely omitted. There, DV patterning is proposed to be conducted by a strict ventral-dominant hierarchy according to which ventral genes repress more-dorsal genes (Cowden and Levine, 2003). However, one exception to the rule seems to be the cross-inhibitory interaction between Vnd and Ind (Zhao et al., 2007). Interestingly, in the developing vertebrate neural tube, cross-repressive interactions of homeodomain proteins are common and indeed crucial for the establishment of discrete DV progenitor domains (reviewed by Dessaud et al., 2008). This bears a marked resemblance to the mutually antagonistic relationship between pairs of homeodomain proteins that dorsoventrally pattern the fly brain.

A genetic regulatory network for DV patterning of the TC and DC

A predominant feature of the brain-specific DV genetic network we describe here, and a general design feature of gene regulatory networks (Levine and Davidson, 2005), is the extensive use of transcriptional repression to regulate target gene expression in spatial and temporal dimensions. All factors involved in the network operate as repressors (except Ems, which may also serve as an activator), via mutual repression (between Ems and Vmd, and between Nkx6 and Msh), a double-negative mechanism (Vnd represses Msh, which represses Nkx6), and a negative-feedback loop (Ems is needed to activate Nkx6 and Ind, which in turn repress Ems) (Fig. 7B). The spatial and temporal complexity of the regulatory interactions we have deciphered implies similar complexity in the underlying cis-regulatory control of these factors. For example, the domain of mshexpression is regulated by the input of at least two transcriptional repressors acting in subsequent time windows (Vnd early and Nkx6 late), and the input of at least three repressors regulates the dynamics of emsexpression (Vnd early, Ind and Nkx6 late). The brain-specific DV patterning network probably comprises further genes in addition to those that we have identified, and it is likely that interactions with other putative regulators (e.g. Dorsal, Egfr, Dpp) will complement our present model. Altogether, our data provide the basis for a systematic comparison of the genetic processes underlying DV patterning of the brain between different animal taxa at the level of gene regulatory networks.

Evolutionary considerations of DV patterning in the brain

The genetic factors considered in this study in the developing fly brain are expressed in similar NE domains from early embryonic stages onwards in the anterior neural plate in vertebrates. Emx2, for

D

E

V

E

LO

P

M

E

N

(10)

example, is expressed in the laterodorsal region, andNkx2genes in the ventral region, of the early vertebrate forebrain (Fig. 7C). At the four-somite stage (~E8), these two domains exhibit a common border (reviewed by Rubenstein et al., 1998; Shimamura et al., 1995), similar to that observed in Drosophilaafter Ems and Vnd have, through cross-repression, regulated their mutually exclusive expression domains. Moreover, whereas Msx genes are mainly expressed in dorsal regions of the posterior forebrain, midbrain and hindbrain (reviewed by Ramos and Robert, 2005), expression of Nkx6 genes is reported in more lateroventral regions, overlapping ventrally with the expression of Nkx2genes (Prakash et al., 2009; Rubenstein et al., 1998) (Fig. 7C). However, even though these patterns of gene expression exhibit certain similarities between insects and vertebrates, it remains to be shown whether their genetic interactions are also conserved.

Acknowledgements

We thank Ethan Bier, James Castelli-Gair Hombría, Takako Isshiki, Akinao Nose, Tonja von Ohlen, Jim Skeath, Olaf Vef, Uwe Walldorf, BDGP and the

Bloomington Stock Center for providing antibodies, cDNA and fly stocks. We are grateful to Gerd Technau for general support, and to Gert Pflugfelder, Ana Rogulja-Ortmann, Gerd Technau and Joachim Urban for critically reading the manuscript. This work was supported by a grant from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft to R.U. and G.M.T. (UR163/1-2, 1-4).

References

Andersson, E., Tryggvason, U., Deng, Q., Friling, S., Alekseenko, Z., Robert, B., Perlmann, T. and Ericson, J.(2006). Identification of intrinsic determinants of midbrain dopamine neurons. Cell 124, 393-405.

Bossing, T., Udolph, G., Doe, C. Q. and Technau, G. M.(1996). The embryonic central nervous system lineages of Drosophila melanogaster. I. Neuroblast lineages derived from the ventral half of the neuroectoderm. Dev. Biol. 179, 41-64.

Bossing, T., Barros, C. S. and Brand, A. H.(2002). Rapid tissue-specific expression assay in living embryos. Genesis34, 123-126.

Brand, A. H. and Perrimon, N.(1993). Targeted gene expression as a means of altering cell fates and generating dominant phenotypes. Development118, 401-415.

Broihier, H. T. and Skeath, J. B.(2002).Drosophila homeodomain protein dHb9 directs neuronal fate via crossrepressive and cell-nonautonomous mechanisms.

Neuron35, 39-50.

Broihier, H. T., Kuzin, A., Zhu, Y., Odenwald, W. and Skeath, J. B.(2004).

Drosophila homeodomain protein Nkx6 coordinates motoneuron subtype identity and axonogenesis. Development131, 5233-5242.

Campos-Ortega, J. A. and Hartenstein, V.(1997).The Embryonic Development of Drosophila melanogaster. Berlin: Springer.

Chu, H., Parras, C., White, K. and Jimenez, F.(1998). Formation and specification of ventral neuroblasts is controlled by vndin Drosophila

neurogenesis. Genes Dev. 12, 3613-3624.

Cohen, S. M. and Jürgens, G.(1990). Mediation of Drosophilahead development by gap-like segmentation genes. Nature346, 482-485.

Cornell, R. A. and von Ohlen, T.(2000).Vnd/nkx, ind/gsh, and msh/msx: conserved regulators of dorsoventral neural patterning? Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 10, 63-71.

Cowden, J. and Levine, M.(2003). Ventral dominance governs sequential patterns of gene expression across the dorsal-ventral axis of the neuroectoderm in the Drosophilaembryo. Dev. Biol. 262, 335-349.

Dalton, D., Chadwick, R. and McGinnis, W. (1989). Expression and embryonic function of empty spiracles: a Drosophilahomeobox gene with two patterning functions on the anterior-posterior axis of the embryo. Genes Dev. 3, 1940-1956.

Dessaud, E., McMahon, A. P. and Briscoe, J.(2008). Pattern formation in the vertebrate neural tube: a sonic hedgehogmorphogen-regulated transcriptional network. Development135, 2489-2503.

Goldstein, R. E., Cook, O., Dinur, T., Pisanté, A., Karandikar, U. C., Bidwai, A. and Paroush, Z.(2005). An eh1-like motif in Odd-skipped mediates recruitment of Groucho and repression in vivo. Mol. Cell. Biol. 25, 10711-10720.

Grossniklaus, U., Cadigan, K. M. and Gehring, W. J.(1994). Three maternal coordinate systems cooperate in the patterning of the Drosophilahead.

Development120, 3155-3171.

Häcker, U. and Perrimon, N.(1998). DRhoGEF2 encodes a member of the Dbl family of oncogenes and controls cell shape changes during gastrulation in

Drosophila. Genes Dev. 12, 274-284.

Hartmann, B., Hirth, F., Walldorf, U. and Reichert, H.(2000). Expression, regulation and function of the homeobox gene empty spiraclesin brain and ventral nerve cord development of Drosophila. Mech. Dev. 90, 143-153.

Hartmann, B., Reichert, H. and Walldorf, U.(2001). Interaction of gap genes in the Drosophilahead: taillessregulates expression of empty spiraclesin early embryonic patterning and brain development. Mech. Dev. 109, 161-172.

Hirth, F., Therianos, S., Loop, T., Gehring, W. J., Reichert, H. and Furukubo-Tokunaga, K.(1995). Developmental defects in brain segmentation caused by mutations of the homeobox genes orthodenticleand empty spiraclesin

Drosophila. Neuron 15, 769-778.

Hong, J. W., Hendrix, D. A., Papatsenko, D. and Levine, M. S.(2008). How the Dorsal gradient works: insights from postgenome technologies.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA105, 20072-20076.

Isshiki, T., Takeichi, M. and Nose, A.(1997). The role of the mshhomeobox gene during Drosophilaneurogenesis: implication for the dorsoventral specification of the neuroectoderm. Development124, 3099-3109.

Jiménez, F., Martin-Morris, L. E., Velasco, L., Chu, H., Sierra, J., Rosen, D. R. and White, K.(1995).vnd, a gene required for early neurogenesis of

Drosophila, encodes a homeodomain protein. EMBO J. 14, 3487-3495.

Jürgens, G., Wieschaus, E., Nüsslein-Volhard, C. and Kluding, H.(1984). Mutations affecting the pattern of the larval cuticle in Drosophila melanogaster. II. Zygotic loci on the third chromosome. Rouxs Arch. Dev. Biol. 193, 283-295.

Klaes, A., Menne, T., Stollewerk, A., Scholz, H. and Klämbt, C.(1994). The Ets transcription factors encoded by the Drosophilagene pointeddirect glial cell differentiation in the embryonic CNS. Cell 78, 149-160.

Levine, M. and Davidson, E. H.(2005). Gene regulatory networks for development. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 102, 4936-4942.

Lovegrove, B., Simões, S., Rivas, M. L., Sotillos, S., Johnson, K., Knust, E., Jacinto, A. and Castelli-Gair Hombría, J.(2006). Coordinated control of cell adhesion, polarity, and cytoskeleton underlies Hox-induced organogenesis in

Drosophila. Curr. Biol. 16, 2206-2216.

McDonald, J. A., Holbrook, S., Isshiki, T., Weiss, J., Doe, C. Q. and Mellerick, D. M.(1998). Dorsoventral patterning in the Drosophila central nervous system: the vnd homeobox gene specifies ventral column identity. Genes Dev. 12, 3603-3612.

Mizutani, C. M., Meyer, N., Roelink, H. and Bier, E.(2006). Threshold-dependent BMP-mediated repression: a model for a conserved mechanism that patterns the neuroectoderm. PLoS Biol. 4, e313.

Muhr, J., Andersson, E., Persson, M., Jessell, T. M. and Ericson, J.(2001). Groucho-mediated transcriptional repression establishes progenitor cell pattern and neuronal fate in the ventral neural tube. Cell104, 861-873.

Prakash, N., Puelles, E., Freude, K., Trümbach, D., Omodei, D., Di Salvio, M., Sussel, L., Ericson, J., Sander, M., Simeone, A. et al.(2009). Nkx6-1 controls the identity and fate of red nucleus and oculomotor neurons in the mouse midbrain. Development136, 2545-2555.

Ramos, C. and Robert, B.(2005). msh/Msxgene family in neural development.

Trends Genet. 21, 624-632.

Rubenstein, J. L., Shimamura, K., Martinez, S. and Puelles, L.(1998). Regionalization of the prosencephalic neural plate. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 21, 445-477.

Schmidt, H., Rickert, C., Bossing, T., Vef, O., Urban, J. and Technau, G. M.

(1997). The embryonic central nervous system lineages of Drosophila

melanogaster. II. Neuroblast lineages derived from the dorsal part of the neuroectoderm. Dev. Biol. 189, 186-204.

Schmidt-Ott, U., Gonzalez-Gaitan, M., Jäckle, H. and Technau, G. M.(1994). Number, identity, and sequence of the Drosophilahead segments as revealed by neural elements and their deletion patterns in mutants. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA91, 8363-8367.

Schöck, F., Reischl, J., Wimmer, E., Taubert, H., Purnell, B. A. and Jäckle, H.

(2000). Phenotypic suppression of empty spiraclesis prevented by buttonhead.

Nature 405, 351-354.

Shimamura, K., Hartigan, D. J., Martinez, S., Puelles, L. and Rubenstein, J. L.

(1995). Longitudinal organization of the anterior neural plate and neural tube.

Development121, 3923-3933.

Skeath, J. B.(1998). The DrosophilaEGF receptor controls the formation and specification of neuroblasts along the dorsal-ventral axis of the Drosophila

embryo. Development125, 3301-3312.

Skeath, J. B.(1999). At the nexus between pattern formation and cell-type specification: the generation of individual neuroblast fates in the Drosophila

embryonic central nervous system. BioEssays 21, 922-931.

Skeath, J. B. and Thor, S.(2003). Genetic control of Drosophilanerve cord development. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 13, 8-15.

Sprecher, S. G., Urbach, R., Technau, G. M., Rijli, F. M., Reichert, H. and Hirth, F.(2006). The columnar genevndis required for tritocerebral neuromere formation during embryonic brain development of Drosophila.Development 133, 4331-4339.

Stepchenko, A. and Nierenberg, M.(2004). Mapping activation and repression domains of the vnd/NK-2 homeodomain protein.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA

101, 13180-13185.

D

E

(11)

Syu, L. J., Uhler, J., Zhang, H. and Mellerick, D., M.(2009). The Drosophila

Nkx6 homeodomain protein has both activation and repression domains and can activate target gene expression. Brain Res.1266, 8-17.

Uhler, J., Garbern, J., Yang, L., Kamholz, J. and Mellerick, D. M.(2002). Nk6, a novel Drosophilahomeobox gene regulated by vnd.Mech. Dev. 116, 105-116.

Uhler, J., Zhang, H., Syu, L. J. and Mellerick, D. M.(2007). The Nk-2 box of the

Drosophila homeodomain protein, Vnd, contributes to its repression activity in a Groucho-dependent manner. Mech. Dev. 124, 1-10.

Urbach, R. and Technau, G. M.(2003a). Segment polarity and D/V patterning gene expression reveals segmental organization of the Drosophilabrain.

Development 130, 3607-3620.

Urbach, R. and Technau, G. M.(2003b). Molecular markers for identified neuroblasts in the developing brain of Drosophila. Development130, 3621-3637.

Urbach, R., Schnabel, R. and Technau, G. M.(2003). The pattern of neuroblast formation, mitotic domains, and proneural gene expression during early brain development in Drosophila. Development130, 3589-3606.

Urbach, R., Volland, D., Seibert, J. and Technau, G. M.(2006). Segment-specific requirements for dorsoventral patterning genes during early brain development in Drosophila. Development133, 4315-4330.

von Ohlen, T. and Doe, C. Q.(2000). Convergence of Dorsal, Dpp, and Egfr signaling pathways subdivides the Drosophilaneuroectoderm into three dorsal-ventral columns. Dev. Biol.224, 362-372.

von Ohlen, T., Syu, L. J. and Mellerick, D. M.(2007). Conserved properties of the Drosophila homeodomain protein, Ind. Mech. Dev. 124, 925-934.

Walldorf, U. and Gehring, W. J.(1992). Empty spiracles, a gap gene containing a homeobox involved in Drosophilahead development. EMBO J.11, 2247-2259.

Weiss, J. B., von Ohlen, T., Mellerick, D. M., Dressler, G., Doe, C. Q. and Scott, M. P.(1998). Dorsoventral patterning in the Drosophilacentral nervous system: the intermediate neuroblasts defectivehomeobox gene specifies intermediate column identity. Genes Dev. 12, 3591-3602.

Younossi-Hartenstein, A., Green, P., Liaw, G. J., Rudolph, K., Lengyel, J. and Hartenstein, V.(1997). Control of early neurogenesis of the Drosophilabrain by the head gap genes tll, otd, ems, and btd. Dev. Biol. 182, 270-283.

Yu, Z., Syu, L. J. and Mellerick, D. M.(2005). Contextual interactions determine whether the Drosophila homeodomain protein, Vnd, acts as a repressor or activator. Nucleic Acids Res. 33, 1-12.

Zhao, G., Wheeler, S. R. and Skeath, J. B.(2007).Genetic control, of, dorsoventral patterning. and neuroblast specification, in, the Drosophilacentral nervous system. Int. J. Dev. Biol.51,107-115.

D

E

V

E

LO

P

M

E

N

Figure

Fig. 1. Expression of vndcombined with En [which indicates the posterior border of tritocerebrum (TC), DC and protocerebrum (PC)]
Fig. 2. Nkx6 and Msh cross-repress each other inthe NE of TC and DC.type. The scheme considers Nkx6 protein expressionpresent in the iTC at stages 10/11 (data not shown).(E,EiDC/vDC and iTC; (F,Fmshschematic representations of D,E,F
Fig. 3. Nkx6representations of C-G. Dashed lines encircle areas in which geneexpression is absent; the hatched region in CiTC/vTC/iDC and ectopically in the dorsal TC/DC
Fig. 4. Ems regulates expression of Nkx6TC/DC (the missing expression domains are encircled by dashed lines)
+3

References

Related documents

Therefore, the current practice in the management of an acute anterior shoulder dislocation appears to be to perform a single view (AP) pre-reduction radiograph to confirm

The cotton swab soaked with the secretion was immediately broken off into the Mycofast All-in Transport Medium and subsequently transported to the laboratory within 12

In contrast, the laser light-scattering sensor designated BARDOT (bacterial rapid detection using opti- cal scatter technology), developed at Purdue University (28, 29), could be

Our in vitro and cellular assays indicate that tri- phenylethylenes (i) directly bind CnCam1 by thermal shift assay, (ii) prevent CnCam1 from binding and activating calcineurin

In the second part of the study, women in high priority pregnancies (the criteria of the Ministry of Health, Malaysia: Table I) were surveyed at antenatal clinics in all the

Data from this study would indicate the ethnic proportions of potential patients of Chinese medical practitioners in 1980 to be 73% Chinese, 17% Malay and 10% Indian, that is, 27%

However, of the clinical parameters reviewed (including age, sex, race, diagnosis of pan- creatic insufficiency, cystic fibrosis-related diabetes, gastroesoph- ageal diseases, CF

(A) Type I IFN production by SV40T MEFs from matched wild-type and Sting -deficient mice stimulated with 0.1 ␮ M CPT for 48 h, measured by bioassay on LL171 cells (data shown as