Role of Pax Genes in Eye Evolution

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

CREB Binding Protein Recruitment to the Transcription Complex Requires Growth Factor–Dependent Phosphorylation of Its GF Box Kerstin Zanger, Sally Radovick,

Advertisements

Identification of a Stat Gene That Functions in Drosophila Development

Bifocal Is a Downstream Target of the Ste20-like Serine/Threonine Kinase Misshapen in Regulating Photoreceptor Growth Cone Targeting in Drosophila Wenjing.

Implications of somatic mutations in the AML1 gene in radiation-associated and therapy-related myelodysplastic syndrome/acute myeloid leukemia by Hironori.

Cosuppression in Drosophila: Gene Silencing of Alcohol dehydrogenase by white-Adh Transgenes Is Polycomb Dependent Manika Pal-Bhadra, Utpal Bhadra, James.

Volume 138, Issue 1, Pages e3 (January 2010)

Volume 28, Issue 3, Pages (November 2007)

Volume 5, Issue 4, Pages (April 2004)

David X Liu, Lloyd A Greene Neuron

Christian Frei, Bruce A Edgar Developmental Cell

Volume 138, Issue 1, Pages e3 (January 2010)

Volume 3, Issue 3, Pages (March 1999)

Volume 16, Issue 6, Pages (December 2004)

M. Ushita, T. Saito, T. Ikeda, F. Yano, A. Higashikawa, N. Ogata, U

Sp1 Is Required for Glucose-Induced Transcriptional Regulation of Mouse Vesicular Glutamate Transporter 2 Gene Tao Li, Liqun Bai, Jing Li, Suzu Igarashi,

Rose-Anne Romano, Barbara Birkaya, Satrajit Sinha

Volume 11, Issue 4, Pages (April 2003)

Volume 2, Issue 3, Pages (September 1998)

Volume 16, Issue 12, Pages (June 2006)

Acquisition of Oncogenic Potential by RAR Chimeras in Acute Promyelocytic Leukemia through Formation of Homodimers Richard J Lin, Ronald M Evans Molecular.

Repulsive Axon Guidance

Act up Controls Actin Polymerization to Alter Cell Shape and Restrict Hedgehog Signaling in the Drosophila Eye Disc Aude Benlali, Irena Draskovic, Dennis.

Volume 23, Issue 3, Pages (February 2013)

Volume 75, Issue 12, Pages (June 2009)

Eyes Absent Mediates Cross-Talk between Retinal Determination Genes and the Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Signaling Pathway Francis C. Hsiao, Andrina Williams,

Volume 22, Issue 6, Pages (February 2018)

Ras Induces Mediator Complex Exchange on C/EBPβ

Helen Strutt, Mary Ann Price, David Strutt Current Biology

SUMO Promotes HDAC-Mediated Transcriptional Repression

Volume 105, Issue 2, Pages (April 2001)

Stephen A. Thacker, Peter C. Bonnette, Robert J. Duronio

EB3 Regulates Microtubule Dynamics at the Cell Cortex and Is Required for Myoblast Elongation and Fusion Anne Straube, Andreas Merdes Current Biology

Colin Kwok, Bernd B. Zeisig, Shuo Dong, Chi Wai Eric So Cancer Cell

Volume 57, Issue 5, Pages (May 2000)

Transcriptional Regulation of ATP2C1 Gene by Sp1 and YY1 and Reduced Function of its Promoter in Hailey–Hailey Disease Keratinocytes Hiroshi Kawada,

Volume 22, Issue 1, Pages (January 2018)

Volume 11, Issue 22, Pages (November 2001)

Keratinocyte growth factor promotes goblet cell differentiation through regulation of goblet cell silencer inhibitor Dai Iwakiri, Daniel K. Podolsky

Karmella A. Haynes, Amy A. Caudy, Lynne Collins, Sarah C.R. Elgin

Volume 22, Issue 2, Pages (February 2012)

Volume 1, Issue 3, Pages (September 2001)

Drosophila CRYPTOCHROME Is a Circadian Transcriptional Repressor

MyoD Targets TAF3/TRF3 to Activate Myogenin Transcription

Mark Van Doren, Anne L. Williamson, Ruth Lehmann Current Biology

Identification of a Stat Gene That Functions in Drosophila Development

The Regulation of the Drosophila msl-2 Gene Reveals a Function for Sex-lethal in Translational Control Greg J Bashaw, Bruce S Baker Cell Volume 89,

Codependent Activators Direct Myoblast-Specific MyoD Transcription

Let-7-Complex MicroRNAs Regulate the Temporal Identity of Drosophila Mushroom Body Neurons via chinmo Yen-Chi Wu, Ching-Huan Chen, Adam Mercer, Nicholas S.

Volume 127, Issue 4, Pages (October 2004)

Drosophila ASPP Regulates C-Terminal Src Kinase Activity

Volume 14, Issue 3, Pages (March 2008)

PHYL Acts to Down-Regulate TTK88, a Transcriptional Repressor of Neuronal Cell Fates, by a SINA-Dependent Mechanism Amy H Tang, Thomas P Neufeld, Elaine.

Magalie Lecourtois, François Schweisguth Current Biology

Volume 131, Issue 1, Pages (October 2007)

Volume 35, Issue 3, Pages (November 2015)

Volume 39, Issue 5, Pages (November 2003)

Analyses of the Effects That Disease-Causing Missense Mutations Have on the Structure and Function of the Winged-Helix Protein FOXC1 Ramsey A. Saleem,

The Chick Transcriptional Repressor Nkx3

Volume 15, Issue 6, Pages (December 2008)

SUMO-1 Modification Represses Sp3 Transcriptional Activation and Modulates Its Subnuclear Localization Sarah Ross, Jennifer L Best, Leonard I Zon, Grace.

TBX22 Missense Mutations Found in Patients with X-Linked Cleft Palate Affect DNA Binding, Sumoylation, and Transcriptional Repression Artemisia M. Andreou,

Volume 2, Issue 4, Pages (April 2002)

Kaumudi Joshi, Seunghee Lee, Bora Lee, Jae W. Lee, Soo-Kyung Lee

Defining the Regulatory Elements in the Proximal Promoter of ΔNp63 in Keratinocytes: Potential Roles for Sp1/Sp3, NF-Y, and p63 Rose-Anne Romano, Barbara.

Volume 38, Issue 6, Pages (June 2010)

Volume 3, Issue 3, Pages (March 1999)

Transcriptional Regulation by p53 through Intrinsic DNA/Chromatin Binding and Site- Directed Cofactor Recruitment Joaquin M Espinosa, Beverly M Emerson

Volume 1, Issue 1, Pages (January 2008)

Volume 13, Issue 11, Pages (December 2015)

Volume 150, Issue 1, Pages (July 2012)

Presentation transcript:

Role of Pax Genes in Eye Evolution Zbynek Kozmik, Michael Daube, Erich Frei, Barbara Norman, Lidia Kos, Larry J. Dishaw, Markus Noll, Joram Piatigorsky Developmental Cell Volume 5, Issue 5, Pages 773-785 (November 2003) DOI: 10.1016/S1534-5807(03)00325-3

Figure 1 PaxB Gene Expression (A) RT-PCR of PaxB, J1A-, J1B-, J1C-, and J3-crystallins, RXR, and rRNA RNAs. (B) In situ hybridization of cryosections using PaxB antisense (AS; panels A, C, and E) and sense (S; panels B, D, and F) RNA probes. Arrows indicate staining in lumen of statocyst; arrowheads indicate pigmented layer. (C) Medusa with rhopalium (left inset). Schematic drawing (right inset) of rhopalium. Bottom panel: paired domain (brown/red), octapeptide (yellow), and homeodomain (blue). Developmental Cell 2003 5, 773-785DOI: (10.1016/S1534-5807(03)00325-3)

Figure 2 DNA Binding and Transactivation Properties of Wild-Type and Mutant PaxB Paired Domain (A) Top panel: EMSAs. Bottom panel: Western blot with anti-FLAG M2 antibody. (B) PaxB mutations. Spd, Splotch delayed (Pax3 mutation); AN, Aniridia (PAX6 mutation); WS, Waardenburg syndrome (PAX3 mutation); Peters' anomaly (PAX6 mutation). PaxB(IQN) mutation converts the paired domain binding specificity of Pax2/5/8 to that of Pax6 (see Supplemental Figure S1). (C) Transactivation of the TPO-luc reporter gene in cotransfected human epithelial kidney cell line 293. Developmental Cell 2003 5, 773-785DOI: (10.1016/S1534-5807(03)00325-3)

Figure 3 PaxB Has Adjacent Transactivation and Inhibitory Domains Typical of Pax2/5/8 Proteins, but Is Unable to Induce Grg Phosphorylation (A–C) Schematic diagrams of Gal4 DNA binding-PaxB fusion constructs (A) and luciferase reporter gene (C) cotransfected into human epithelial kidney cell line 293. The positions of breakpoints for PaxB-specific fusions G1–G6 are shown in (B). (D) PaxB contains two regions with intrinsic transactivation capacity TA, G3 and G6 (left histogram), separated by an inhibitory domain I (A). The inhibitory domain I adjacent to the transactivation domain TA is present in human Pax5; in contrast, Pax6 contains a strong activation domain TA (right histogram). (E) Western blot of transfected cell lysates with anti-HA antibody. (F) Western blot of whole cell extracts with anti-Grg (α-pan-TLE) and anti-paired domain (α-Pax) antibodies. The asterisk indicates Pax2-induced shift in Grg4 mobility. Developmental Cell 2003 5, 773-785DOI: (10.1016/S1534-5807(03)00325-3)

Figure 4 PaxB Transactivates Drosophila rh6 rhodopsin and Tripedalia J1- and J3-crystallin Promoters (A) Expression vectors (top) cotransfected into COS7 cells with the pRH6-lacZ reporter gene (bottom). (B) Expression vectors (top) cotransfected into 293 cells with the indicated jellyfish crystallin-luciferase reporter gene (bottom). Developmental Cell 2003 5, 773-785DOI: (10.1016/S1534-5807(03)00325-3)

Figure 5 Paired Domain Binding Sites in the J3-crystallin Promoter Mediate Activation by PaxB (A) Luciferase reporter genes with J3-crystallin promoter including two paired domain binding sites (X, mutated) and their activation by PaxB expression constructs cotransfected into 293 cells (D). (B) Putative PaxB binding sites in J3-crystallin promoter; match with the Pax2/5/8 consensus sequence in gray; mutations are set lower case. The asterisk marks the position within the Pax consensus sequence responsible for differential binding affinity of Pax6 and Pax2/5/8. (C) EMSA of different Pax proteins using J3 sites 1 and 2 as probes. (E) J3-crystallin promoter-luc (left panel) or 476Glu-luc (a Pax2/Pax6 promoter construct; right panel) reporter genes cotransfected with the indicated Pax expression vector into COS7 (left panel) and 293 (right panel) cells. Developmental Cell 2003 5, 773-785DOI: (10.1016/S1534-5807(03)00325-3)

Figure 6 Rescue of the spapol Eye Phenotype by Jellyfish PaxB Expression under Control of the spa Enhancer Left eyes of wild-type flies (A) and of offspring from crosses of w spa-Gal4; spapol virgins with males carrying homozygous UAS-D-Pax2-1 (B), UAS-PaxB (C), UAS-PaxB(AN) (D), UAS-PaxB(IQN) (E), UAS-PaxB(OCTAΔ) (F), UAS-Ey (G), or UAS-Toy (H) transgenes (all in a spapol and y w or w background) are compared by scanning electron microscopy. Developmental Cell 2003 5, 773-785DOI: (10.1016/S1534-5807(03)00325-3)

Figure 7 Induction of Eyes on Drosophila Legs by Ectopic Expression of PaxB or D-Pax2 Ventral views of heterozygous dpp-Gal4 flies with ectopic eyes induced by a UAS-Ey (A), UAS-PaxB (B), UAS-PaxB(IQN) (C), UAS-PaxB(OCTAΔ) (D), UAS-D-Pax2 (E), or UAS-Toy (F) transgene located on the other third chromosome are compared by light microscopy. Enlarged views of ectopic eyes from flies with the same genotype as shown in the panel above are compared by scanning electron microscopy (G–J). Relative magnifications: 130× (G and H), 1100× (I), and 400× (J). Developmental Cell 2003 5, 773-785DOI: (10.1016/S1534-5807(03)00325-3)