1 MRC Centre for Developmental Neurobiology, Kings College London, Guys Campus, New Hunts House, London SE1 1UL, UK
2 Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology, 30 Medical Drive, Singapore 117609, Republic of Singapore
*Author for correspondence (e-mail: marita.buescher{at}kcl.ac.uk)
Accepted 11 June 2002
![]() |
SUMMARY |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Key words: SoxNeuro, Dichaete, vnd, ind, Neurogenesis, Drosophila
![]() |
INTRODUCTION |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
NB selection requires the interaction of two phenotypically opposite classes of genes: the proneural genes, which promote NB formation, and the neurogenic genes, which inhibit NB formation. Prior to NB formation, three proneural genes of the achaete/scute gene complex (AS-C), achaete (ac), scute (sc) and lethal of scute (lsc) are expressed in cell clusters at invariant positions within the NE (Campuzano et al., 1985; Martin-Bermudo et al., 1991
; Skeath et al., 1992
). Proneural gene expression confers neural potential to these cells and single NBs delaminate from within these clusters. Loss of the entire AS-C results in the loss of NBs (Jimenez and Campos-Ortega, 1990
). The singling out of NBs from within proneural clusters is accomplished through lateral inhibition and requires the function of the neurogenic genes. The interaction of the receptor Notch and its ligand Delta results in an accumulation of the gene products of the Enhancer of split gene complex E(spl)-C. The E(spl)-C antagonizes the maintenance and upregulation of proneural gene expression and promotes the adoption of the non-neural fate (Martin-Bermudo et al., 1995
). The cell that is singled out to adopt the neuronal pathway is thought to accumulate lower levels of E(spl)-C gene product and therefore is able to upregulate proneural gene expression in a positive auto-feedback loop. Loss of any one neurogenic gene leads to the production of excess NBs.
In total, 30 NBs per hemisegment delaminate from the NE in five successive waves (SI-SV) and form a stereotypical array of seven anteroposterior and three dorsoventral columns (for a review, see Goodman and Doe, 1993
). Each NB has a unique identity and generates an invariant cell lineage (Bossing et al., 1996
; Schmid et al., 1999
; Schmidt et al., 1997
). NB identity is specified by the activity of anteroposterior and dorsoventral patterning genes. Overlapping expression of these genes subdivides the NE into a grid of positional information which is established prior to the appearance of proneural clusters (for a review, see Skeath, 1999
). Anteroposterior patterning is mediated by the segment polarity genes which are expressed in transverse stripes within each segment (for a review, see Bhat, 1999
). Subdivision of the NE along the DV axis is accomplished through the activity of the homeobox genes ventral nervous system defective (vnd) (Jimenez et al., 1995
; McDonald et al., 1998
; Mellerick and Nirenberg, 1995
; Skeath et al., 1994
), intermediate neuroblasts defective (ind) (Weiss et al., 1998
) and muscle segment homeobox gene (msh) (Buescher and Chia, 1997
; DAlessio and Frasch, 1996
; Isshiki et al., 1997
). These genes are expressed in adjacent longitudinal columns and confer ventral, intermediate and lateral specificity respectively, to the NBs that arise from within these domains. Moreover, vnd and ind play a crucial role in the formation of NBs: loss of vnd or ind results in the loss of ventral or intermediate NBs, respectively.
Comparative analysis of neurogenesis in vertebrates and Drosophila has revealed a remarkable conservation of the mechanisms that underlie the determination of the presumptive NE, which mediate the selection of neural progenitors from within the NE and which govern certain aspects of DV patterning (for a review, see Chitnis, 1999). Many of the key molecular components originally identified in Drosophila were found to have orthologs in vertebrate species as diverse as Xenopus and zebrafish. Recent studies in Xenopus have been aimed at the identification of genes that link neural induction and primary neurogenesis (for a review, see Sasai, 1998
). Differential screens designed to uncover genes that are upregulated by the Sog ortholog Chordin have led to the identification of genes of the Sox family (Mizuseki et al., 1998
). Sox proteins are transcription factors that contain a high mobility group (HMG) domain and bind to DNA in a sequence-specific manner. Sox proteins have been shown to play a role in many developmental processes (for a review, see Pevny and Lovell-Badge, 1997
; Wegner, 1999
). However, the mechanisms by which vertebrate Sox proteins promote neurogenesis are as yet poorly understood. Two Drosophila Sox genes SoxN and Dichaete are expressed in the developing CNS and thus represent valuable models to study the function of Sox proteins in neurogenesis (Cremazy et al., 2000
; Nambu and Nambu, 1996
; Russell et al., 1996
). Dichaete is required for development of the ventral midline, segmentation of the abdomen and the formation of several NBs in the thorax (Ma et al., 1998
; Nambu and Nambu, 1996
; Russell et al., 1996
; Soriano and Russell, 1998
; Zhao and Skeath, 2002
). We present a study of the function of SoxN in the development of the embryonic CNS. SoxN is a member of the group B family of Sox proteins and is expressed in a pan-neuroectodermal manner throughout embryonic neurogenesis. We show that mutations of SoxN result in a severe hypoplasia in the intermediate and lateral regions of the CNS and demonstrate that SoxN and Dichaete function is partially redundant with respect to the formation of ventral and intermediate NBs. We show that SoxN genetically interacts with the DV patterning genes vnd and ind. Finally, we present evidence suggesting SoxN acts upstream and in parallel to the proneural genes of the AS-C.
![]() |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Immunohistochemistry
Embryos were collected, fixed and immunostained as previously described (Yang et al., 1997). Primary antibodies were anti-Eve (1:2000) (Patel et al., 1989
), anti-Ftz (1:500) (Doe et al., 1988
), anti-Eagle (1:500) (Higashijima et al., 1996
), anti-Wor (1:1000) (Yu et al., 2000
), anti-Vnd (1:1000) (Chu et al., 1998
), anti-Msh (1:500) (Isshiki et al., 1997
), anti-Lsc (1:500) (Martin-Bermudo et al., 1991
), anti-Ac (Skeath et al., 1992
) (Developmental Studies Hybridoma Bank, University of Iowa), anti-Repo (1:500) (Xiong et al., 1994
), anti-Ase (1:3000) (Jarman et al., 1993
) and anti-ß-gal (1:3000) (Promega). Histochemical detection was performed using Jackson Immunoresearch Inc HRP-conjugated secondary antibodies and visualized using the glucose-oxidase-DAB-nickel method as previously described (Yang et al., 1997
).
RNA in situ hybridization was carried out as described before (Tautz and Pfeifle, 1989). An plasmid for the generation of an ind-specific riboprobe was provided by T. von Ohlen; a plasmid for the generation of a SoxN-specific riboprobe was provided by F. Girard.
A GST fusion protein containing a region of the SoxN protein (amino acids 1-432) was produced in E. coli using the pGEX4T-1 vector (Pharmacia). The fusion protein was used to immunize mice. Homozygous embryos deficient for the SoxN gene (DfN-22) did not show anti-SoxN immunoreactivity demonstrating the specificity of the antibody.
![]() |
RESULTS |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
|
The failure to form specific GMCs/neurons could be explained by loss or mis-specification of the respective parental NBs. To assess NB formation in SoxN mutant embryos, we used an antibody against Worniu (Wor), a protein which is expressed in all NBs (Ashraf et al., 1999; Cai et al., 2001
; Yu et al., 2000
). In wild-type embryos,
30 NBs delaminate from the NE during embryonic stages 8-11 in five waves (SI-SV). SI NBs form three discrete columns: the ventral column which is made up of three NBs and the MP2 precursor; the intermediate column with two NBs; and the lateral column, which comprises four NBs. At later stages (SII-SV) additional NBs fill the space between these columns.
Anti-Wor staining of stage 9 SoxN mutant embryos indicated that SI NB formation in the lateral and intermediate columns is severely impaired (Fig. 2A-C). In the lateral column instead of the wild-type set of four NBs per hemisegment only one/two NBs are formed. Different lateral NBs are differentially affected. For example, NB3-5 fails to form in 82% of the hemisegments, whereas NB2-5 fails to form in only 22% of the hemisegments (for all NB between 50-100 hemisgements scored). We made similar observations with respect to NB formation in the intermediate column, which in wild type is composed of NB-5-3 and NB3-2. Both NBs frequently fail to form in SoxN mutant embryos (NB5-3, 14% loss; NB3-2, 67% loss). By contrast, the four NBs of the ventral column form almost normally. Analysis of older mutant embryos with anti-Wor revealed that SoxN is also required for the formation of late arising NBs. Stage 11 embryos exhibit drastically reduced numbers of NBs; NBs that do form, appear predominantly in the ventral region. (Fig. 2D,E). These results were confirmed using antibodies against three additional NB marker genes hunchback (Cabrera and Alonso, 1991), snail (Alberga et al., 1991
) and klumpfuss (Yang et al., 1997
) (data not shown). Staining of stage 11 SoxN mutant embryos with anti-Engrailed antibody revealed no difference to the wild-type Engrailed expression pattern, suggesting that the loss of NBs is not due to segmentation defects (Fig. 2I).
|
The results are shown in Table 1 and can be summarized as follows: the loss of SoxN causes a severe hypoplasia. However, specific spatial and temporal aspects are observed.
|
(2) Late arising NBs are more severely affected than early arising NBs. Compare the moderate frequencies of the loss of SI NBs with the near complete loss of SIV/SV NBs. Accordingly, the most extreme phenotype is observed for late arising, lateral NBs (note the complete loss of anti-Eagle expressing NBs, Fig. 2F,G).
(3) NBs that arise at the same time and in the same column are differentially affected by the loss of SoxN (compare the loss of intermediate SI NBs NB3-2(67%) and NB 5-3(14%).
In addition to the CNS, the NE gives rise to the ventral epidermis. To study possible defects of the ventral epidermis, we analyzed the cuticle of unhatched SoxN larvae. In wild-type first instar larvae, denticle belts are formed on the ventral side of the eight abdominal segments (Fig. 1G). Each denticle belt is made up of five rows of setae. In SoxN mutant larvae, we observed a severe loss of anterior setae, which results in a reduction of the AP expansion of the denticle belts (Fig. 1H). These results indicate that SoxN mutations lead to defects in both tissues that derive from the NE: the CNS and the ventral epidermis.
GA1192, C463 and C2139 are loss of function alleles of the SoxN gene
From the same EMS stock collection, we recovered three lines GA1192, C463 and C2139, which fail to complement each other and exhibit similar morphological defects. However, the morphological defects observed in C2139 mutant embryos are less severe than those of GA1192 and C463. All three alleles display similar CNS phenotypes either in homozygosity or in heterozygosity with each other. Using deficiencies, we mapped lethality and all phenotypic defects to the cytological position 29F. The phenotype of a homozygous deficiency that removes 29F (DfN-22, breakpoints: 29C;30C) is identical to that of GA1192 and C463, while the weaker CNS phenotype of C2139 is enhanced in heterozygosity with DfN-22. These data strongly suggest that GA1192 and C463 represent amorphic alleles, while C2139 appears to be a hypomorphic allele.
Analysis of the genomic sequence of the 29F region prompted us to choose the SoxN locus as a likely candidate gene (Cremazy et al., 2000). SoxN belongs to a family of sequence-specific DNA binding proteins whose common feature is the HMG box. The HMG box of SoxN shares more than 90% amino acid identity with the human group B Sox1, Sox2 and Sox3 proteins, and with Xenopus and chicken Sox2. Sox1, Sox2 and Sox3 have been implicated in vertebrate neural development (Collignon et al., 1996
; Nishiguchi et al., 1998
; Rex et al., 1994
; Streit et al., 1997
; Uwanogho et al., 1995
). Moreover, Drosophila SoxN-RNA expression can be detected early in the embryo (stage4), is later found in a pan-neuroectodermal pattern and expression persists until NB formation is completed (Cremazy et al., 2000
) (Fig. 4). Thus, the SoxN gene expression pattern coincides with the developmental defects that are observed in GA1192, C463 and C2139 mutant embryos. Immunostaining with a polyclonal anti-SoxN antibody (see below) revealed that homozygous GA1192 and C463 embryos are non-immunoreactive, consistent with them being phenotypic null alleles. By contrast, C2139 mutant embryos show a near wild-type expression pattern of SoxN, although the overall expression level is reduced, supporting the notion that C2139 represents a hypomorphic allele (data not shown).
|
|
SoxN and Dichaete both contribute to the formation of ventral and intermediate neuroblasts
In addition to SoxN a second HMG box protein, Dichaete is expressed prior to and during NB formation (Nambu and Nambu, 1996). Within the NE, Dichaete is expressed from stage 7 to stage 12 in two longitudinal stripes that encompass the ventral and intermediate but not the lateral region (Cremazy et al., 2000
). Dichaete mutant embryos display severe defects in CNS development (Nambu and Nambu, 1996
). Recently, it has been shown that Dichaete plays a role in the formation of several late arising ventral and intermediate NBs (Zhao and Skeath, 2002
). However, as observed in SoxN mutants, Dichaete mutant embryos do not show significant defects in ventral SI NB formation. This raises the question of whether Dichaete and SoxN function redundantly with respect to early ventral NB formation. We generated a double mutant stock Dichaete87;SoxNGA1192 and stained stage 9 embryos with anti-Wor (Fig. 5). As homozygous Dichaete mutants show severe segmentation defects in the abdomen, we restricted our analysis to the thoracic segments and found that in double mutant embryos, ventral SI NB formation is severely impaired: e.g. in SoxN and Dichaete single mutant embryos, the formation of NB1-1 is hardly affected (3% and 2% loss, respectively), while in double mutant embryos NB1-1 fails to form in 48% of the hemisegments. Thus, SoxN and Dichaete function is at least partially redundant with respect to early ventral NB formation.
|
SoxN genetically interacts with vnd and ind
Prior to and during NB formation, three homeobox genes, vnd, ind and msh, are expressed in adjacent longitudinal columns and subdivide the NE along the DV axis. vnd and ind play a crucial role in NB formation: loss of vnd or ind results in the loss of ventral or intermediate NBs, respectively. To determine if SoxN plays a role in the initiation or maintenance of Vnd, Ind or Msh expression, we stained stage 8 SoxN mutant embryos with anti-Vnd (Chu et al., 1998) and anti-Msh antibodies (Isshiki et al., 1997
), or an ind-specific RNA probe (Weiss et al., 1998
). The staining patterns of these genes were found to be identical to that of wild-type embryos, indicating that SoxN is dispensable for their expression (data not shown). Conversely, staining of vnd, ind or msh mutant embryos with an anti-SoxN antibody revealed no role for vnd, ind or msh in the maintenance of SoxN expression prior to and during NB formation (data not shown).
These results demonstrate that the expression of SoxN and the DV patterning genes is regulated independently. However, the vnd and ind mutant and the SoxN mutant phenotypes exhibit strikingly similar phenotypes with respect to ventral and intermediate NB formation. Moreover, SoxN and Vnd/Ind are co-expressed during NB formation. This prompted us to study whether SoxN genetically interacts with vnd and/or ind in the NE. We chose the SoxN allele C2139, which appears to be a hypomorph and tested whether removal of one copy of vnd or ind dominantly enhances the phenotype of SoxN. We generated the stocks vnd38/+;SoxNC2139/SoxNC2139 and ind16.2/+; SoxNC2139/SoxNC2139, and scored the formation of NBs using anti-Wor for the ventral SI NBs and the intermediate NB5-3 (Fig. 6). In addition, we used anti-Eve to score the RP2 neuron, the progeny of the intermediate SIII NB4-2 (data not shown). Anti-Wor staining of stage 9 vnd
38/+;SoxNC2139/SoxNC2139 embryos revealed an enhanced loss of ventral SI neuroblasts, ranging from 12% to 18% (Fig. 6C). In ind16.2/+; SoxNC2139/SoxNC2139 mutant embryos we observed an increased loss of NB5-3 (SoxNC2139 homozygous embryos: 12% loss, ind16.2/+; SoxNC2139/SoxNC2139 embryos: 46% loss; Fig. 6D) and an increased loss of the RP2 neuron (SoxNC2139/SoxNC2139 75% loss versus 99% loss for ind16.2/+; SoxNC2139/SoxNC2139; data not shown). Thus, SoxN interacts genetically with vnd in ventral and with ind in intermediate NB formation.
|
SoxN is required for the singling out of neuroblasts
We have shown that loss of SoxN results in a severe loss of NBs. Our expression studies show that SoxN protein is present in the NE before and during the entire process of neurogenesis. Hence, the expression pattern provides no clue as to which step(s) depend on SoxN function. To approach this question, we studied two key steps in neurogenesis: (1) the establishment cell clusters with neural potential and (2) the singling out of NBs.
The proneural genes of the AS-C have been shown to be essential for the promotion of NB formation and deletion of the entire gene complex results in the loss of 75% of all NBs (Campos-Ortega, 1993
). Many NBs that normally derive from clusters of neuroectodermal cells, which express either ac, sc, lsc or a combination of these genes, fail to form in SoxN mutant embryos. This raises the question of whether proneural genes are still expressed in a SoxN mutant background in clusters of ectodermal cells, and, if so, do they still confer neural potential to these cells? In wild-type embryos, prior to NB segregation (stage 8), Ac protein is found in cell clusters in rows 3 and 7 in the ventral and lateral column of the NE, while Lsc is found in stripes of two to three cell widths that transverse the entire NE (Martin-Bermudo et al., 1991
). Staining of stage 8 SoxN mutant embryos with anti-Lsc antibody revealed no appreciable difference from wild-type Lsc expression (Fig. 7A,B). Staining with anti-Ac antibody showed that Ac expression is initiated in both ventral and lateral clusters, but expression levels appear reduced and show significant variation in lateral cell clusters (Fig. 7C,D).
|
SoxN does not act to antagonize Notch signaling
The singling out of neuronal progenitor cells from cell clusters with neuronal potential requires the action of the neurogenic genes. Productive Notch signaling results in the accumulation of E(spl) gene products, which negatively regulate the expression of the proneural genes and initiates the non-neuronal differentiation pathway. Cells that enter the neuronal pathway are thought to accumulate only low levels of E(spl)gene products, a prerequisite for the upregulation of proneural gene expression (Martin-Bermudo et al., 1995). In SoxN mutant embryos, we observed a failure to upregulate proneural gene expression. Thus, it is conceivable that SoxN normally acts during lateral inhibition to antagonize the accumulation of E(spl) gene products.
To test this idea, we investigated whether SoxN function is still required in a genetic background where Notch signaling is non-productive: in a deletion mutant in which the entire E(spl) gene complex is removed. If SoxN indeed functions to antagonize Notch signaling, concomitant loss of E(spl) should restore NB formation in the lateral and intermediate regions. E(spl)R1 mutant embryos display a severe neurogenic phenotype (Mari-Beffa et al., 1991). Fig. 8B shows the SI NB pattern: the typical arrangement of S1 NBs in three columns is maintained; however, instead of the wild-type set of ten NBs, additional NBs are found in each position, indicating that more than one cell per proneural cluster has entered the neural pathway. E(spl)R1;SoxNGA1192 double mutant embryos display a combination of the neurogenic E(spl)R1 phenotype and the anti-neural SoxN phenotype (Fig. 8D): the neurogenic phenotype is apparent in the ventral column of SI NBs, which normally does not require SoxN function. In the lateral column, the anti-neural phenotype of SoxN remains unchanged: e.g. in SoxN single mutant embryos, NB3-5 fails to from in 82% of the hemisegments and in the double mutant NBs still fail to form with comparable frequency in the 3-5 position (Fig. 8C,D, arrows). Similar results were observed for other lateral and intermediate NBs. Therefore, in a SoxN mutant background the concomitant loss of E(spl) function does not restore NB formation in the lateral column. Based on these results, we conclude that SoxN does not function to antagonize Notch signaling during lateral inhibition. Rather, SoxN appears to act in a parallel pathway with the proneural and neurogenic genes and in the absence of SoxN, proneural gene expression is less efficient at conferring neural potential to ectodermal cells.
|
![]() |
DISCUSSION |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
It would be interesting to determine if neuroectodermal cells in SoxN mutants are still able to adopt the epidermal fate. However, owing to the lack of appropriate markers, which would indicate early epidermal differentiation, we examined the formation of the ventral denticle belts at the first instar larval stage. Denticle belt formation is severely impaired in SoxN mutant embryos indicating that epidermal development is disturbed. Hence, in the absence of SoxN, the ability of neuroectodermal cells to undergo neural or epidermal development may both be compromised.
SoxN and Dichaete both contribute to ventral SI neuroblast formation
The SoxN mutant phenotype shows a strong spatial aspect with respect to the DV axis: loss of SoxN severely affects the formation of NBs that derive from the lateral and intermediate regions of the NE but has little effect on ventral NB formation. This DV effect of SoxN mutations is not mirrored in a corresponding DV SoxN expression pattern. Thus, the mutant phenotype rather reflects a differential requirement for SoxN in different regions. Our analysis of ventral NB formation in SoxN;Dichaete double mutant embryos provides at least a partial explanation for these regional differences as the concomitant loss of SoxN and Dichaete results in a strong loss of ventral NBs. This suggests that SoxN and Dichaete may functionally substitute for each other. A functional redundancy of SoxN and Dichaete is not unexpected as the proteins have structural similarities and overlapping expression patterns. Like SoxN, Dichaete has been classified as a group B Sox protein and the HMG domains of both proteins show 87% amino acid identity. As the ability of sequence-specific DNA binding resides within the HMG domain, it is likely that SoxN and Dichaete bind to the same DNA motif present in an identical set of target genes. This is supported by studies that have shown that various vertebrate Sox proteins can bind to the same DNA sequence. Neuroectodermal Dichaete and SoxN expression overlaps in the ventral and intermediate region and therefore a functional redundancy would be expected to occur in ventral and intermediate NB formation. However, the severe phenotype of SoxN single mutants in intermediate NB formation suggests that Dichaete cannot always substitute for SoxN function. Additional evidence that SoxN and Dichaete function is not equivalent stems from the observation that loss of Dichaete or SoxN has different effects on Ac expression in the intermediate region of the NE: in Dichaete, but not in SoxN mutant embryos, Ac expression is partially derepressed in the intermediate column (Zhao and Skeath, 2002) (this paper).
SoxN genetically interacts with vnd and ind in ventral and intermediate neuroblast formation
The loss of one copy of vnd or ind in a SoxN homozygous mutant background dominantly enhances the SoxN phenotype, suggesting that SoxN genetically interacts with vnd and ind. As the expression of Vnd and Ind does not require SoxN function, we conclude that SoxN does not act upstream of vnd and ind, but rather in parallel. In ind mutant embryos, Ac expression in the NE is derepressed in the intermediate region. Nevertheless, NBs fail to form within this region (Weiss et al., 1998). vnd is required for Ac expression in the ventral NE. However, there seems to be no causal relationship between the loss of Ac expression and the subsequent loss of NBs as ectopic expression of Ac does not rescue NB formation (Chu et al., 1998
). Thus, it appears that expression of the genes of the AS-C can confer neural potential to the NE only when SoxN, vnd and ind expression is intact.
Molecular studies of vertebrate Sox proteins and, more recently, Drosophila Dichaete, have provided evidence that modulation of target gene expression requires heterodimerization of Sox with other transcription factors. For example, Dichaete interacts with the Single-minded and Drifter proteins both genetically and physically during midline development (Ma et al., 2000). This raises the question of whether SoxN forms functional heterodimers with Vnd and Ind. The co-expression of these factors in the NE and their parallel functions in NB formation do support a model in which SoxN physically associates with Vnd and Ind. Recently, Zhao and Skeath have shown that Dichaete genetically interacts with vnd and ind to promote NB formation and have postulated that a physical interaction of Dichaete/Vnd and Dichaete/Ind may occur (Zhao and Skeath, 2002
). Further experiments are required to delineate the molecular relationships between these proteins.
Sox gene function in the development of neural tissue may be conserved across species
Comparative studies of the key steps in neural development have revealed a remarkable conservation across a wide range of species. Common features include early neural determination, which depends on the antagonistic action of positive (Sog, Chordin) and negative (Dpp, BMP) acting factors; the singling out of neural progenitor cells and aspects of DV patterning. The results we present in this paper suggest that conservation extends to the function of Sox proteins in neural development. Based on sequence homology, the closest vertebrate relatives of SoxN and Dichaete are Sox1, Sox2 and Sox3. These proteins are closely related in structure throughout their entire length and are expressed in overlapping patterns in developing neural tissues (Collignon et al., 1996). These features, taken together with the observation that mice carrying a homozygous Sox1 mutation display rather mild defects in neural development, have led to the hypothesis that the functions of Sox1, Sox2 and Sox3 function is at least partially redundant (Nishiguchi et al., 1998
). Our analysis of SoxN;Dichaete double mutant embryos confirms this hypothesis in Drosophila, as SoxN and Dichaete function is indeed redundant with respect to the formation of a subset of NBs.
Interestingly, the regulation of SoxN and Sox2 expression appears to be conserved in Drosophila and Xenopus: both are negatively regulated by Dpp (BMP4) and positively regulated by the Dpp antagonist Sog (Chordin) (for a review, see Sasai, 2001). Experiments using dominant-negative forms of Sox2 in animal cap ectoderm have shown that Sox2 is required for the maintenance rather than the initial induction of neural tissue (Kishi et al., 2000
). This is in agreement with our observations that loss of SoxN does not alter the early expression of Brk, Sog and Dpp (M. B., unpublished) and thus does not seem to promote neurogenesis through the determination of the ventrolateral region in the blastoderm embryo. Despite indications for a role for vertebrate Sox genes in neural differentiation, its mode of action remains unclear as neither target genes nor CNS interaction partners have been identified. Our observations that SoxN genetically interacts with vnd and ind suggest the vertebrate homologs of Vnd [Nkx2.2 family (Pabst et al., 1998
)] and Ind [Gsh1/2 (Hsieh-Li et al., 1995
; Valerius et al., 1995
)] as potential CNS partners for Sox1, Sox2 and Sox3. Like Vnd and Ind, Nkx2.2 and Gsh1 are expressed in developing neural tissue and govern aspects of regional specification. Further studies will demonstrate whether Sox gene function represents a neuralizing pathway that is conserved across species.
![]() |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
---|
![]() |
REFERENCES |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Alberga, A., Boulay, J. L., Kempe, E., Dennefeld, C. and Haenlin, M. (1991). The snail gene required for mesoderm formation in Drosophila is expressed dynamically in derivatives of all three germ layers. Development 111, 983-992.[Abstract]
Ashraf, S. I., Hu, X., Roote, J. and Ip, Y. T. (1999). The mesoderm determinant snail collaborates with related zinc-finger proteins to control Drosophila neurogenesis. EMBO J. 18, 6426-6438.
Bhat, K. M. (1999). Segment polarity genes in neuroblast formation and identity specification during Drosophila neurogenesis. Bioessays 21, 472-485.[Medline]
Biehs, B., Francois, V. and Bier, E. (1996). The Drosophila short gastrulation gene prevents Dpp from autoactivating and suppressing neurogenesis in the neuroectoderm. Genes Dev. 10, 2922-2934.[Abstract]
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.[Medline]
Buescher, M. and Chia, W. (1997). Mutations in lottchen cause cell fate transformations in both neuroblast and glioblast lineages in the Drosophila embryonic central nervous system. Development 124, 673-681.
Cabrera, C. V. and Alonso, M. C. (1991). Transcriptional activation by heterodimers of the achaete-scute and daughterless gene products of Drosophila. EMBO J. 10, 2965-2973.[Abstract]
Cai, Y., Chia, W. and Yang, X. (2001). A family of snail-related zinc finger proteins regulates two distinct and parallel mechanisms that mediate Drosophila neuroblast asymmetric divisions. EMBO J. 20, 1704-1714.
Campos-Ortega, J. A. (1993). Early neurogenesis in Drosophila melanogaster. In The Development of Drosophila melanogaster. Vol. II (ed. B. A. Martinez-Arias), pp. 1131-1206. Cold Spring Harbor: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press.
Campos-Ortega, J. A. (1995). Genetic mechanisms of early neurogenesis in Drosophila melanogaster. Mol. Neurobiol. 10, 75-89.[Medline]
Campuzano, S., Carramolino, L., Cabrera, C. V., Ruiz-Gomez, M., Villares, R., Boronat, A. and Modolell, J. (1985). Molecular genetics of the achaete-scute gene complex of D. melanogaster. Cell 40, 327-338.[Medline]
Chitnis, A. B. (1999). Control of neurogenesislessons from frogs, fish and flies. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 9, 18-25.[Medline]
Chu, H., Parras, C., White, K. and Jimenez, F. (1998). Formation and specification of ventral neuroblasts is controlled by vnd in Drosophila neurogenesis. Genes Dev. 12, 3613-3624.
Collignon, J., Sockanathan, S., Hacker, A., Cohen-Tannoudji, M., Norris, D., Rastan, S., Stevanovic, M., Goodfellow, P. N. and Lovell-Badge, R. (1996). A comparison of the properties of Sox-3 with Sry and two related genes, Sox-1 and Sox-2. Development 122, 509-520.
Coulter, D. E., Swaykus, E. A., Beran-Koehn, M. A., Goldberg, D., Wieschaus, E. and Schedl, P. (1990). Molecular analysis of odd-skipped, a zinc finger encoding segmentation gene with a novel pair-rule expression pattern. EMBO J. 9, 3795-3804.[Abstract]
Cremazy, F., Berta, P. and Girard, F. (2000). Sox neuro, a new Drosophila Sox gene expressed in the developing central nervous system. Mech. Dev. 93, 215-219.[Medline]
DAlessio, M. and Frasch, M. (1996). msh may play a conserved role in dorsoventral patterning of the neuroectoderm and mesoderm. Mech. Dev. 58, 217-231.[Medline]
Doe, C. Q. (1992). Molecular markers for identified neuroblasts and ganglion mother cells in the Drosophila central nervous system. Development 116, 855-863.
Doe, C. Q., Hiromi, Y., Gehring, W. J. and Goodman, C. S. (1988). Expression and function of the segmentation gene fushi tarazu during Drosophila neurogenesis. Science 239, 170-175.[Medline]
Goodman, C. S. and Doe, C. Q. (1993). Early neurogenesis in Drosophila melanogaster. In The Development of Drosophila melanogaster, Vol. II (ed. B. A. Martinez-Arias), pp. 1131-1206. Cold Spring Harbour: Cold Spring Harbour Laboratory Press.
Higashijima, S., Shishido, E., Matsuzaki, M. and Saigo, K. (1996). eagle, a member of the steroid receptor gene superfamily, is expressed in a subset of neuroblasts and regulates the fate of their putative progeny in the Drosophila CNS. Development 122, 527-536.
Hsieh-Li, H. M., Witte, D. P., Szucsik, J. C., Weinstein, M., Li, H. and Potter, S. S. (1995). Gsh-2, a murine homeobox gene expressed in the developing brain. Mech. Dev. 50, 177-186.[Medline]
Isshiki, T., Takeichi, M. and Nose, A. (1997). The role of the msh homeobox gene during Drosophila neurogenesis: implication for the dorsoventral specification of the neuroectoderm. Development 124, 3099-3109.
Jarman, A. P., Brand, M., Jan, L. Y. and Jan, Y. N. (1993). The regulation and function of the helix-loop-helix gene, asense, in Drosophila neural precursors. Development 119, 19-29.
Jazwinska, A., Rushlow, C. and Roth, S. (1999). The role of brinker in mediating the graded response to Dpp in early Drosophila embryos. Development 126, 3323-3334.
Jimenez, F. and Campos-Ortega, J. A. (1990). Defective neuroblast commitment in mutants of the achaete-scute complex and adjacent genes of D. melanogaster. Neuron 5, 81-89.[Medline]
Jimenez, 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.[Abstract]
Kishi, M., Mizuseki, K., Sasai, N., Yamazaki, H., Shiota, K., Nakanishi, S. and Sasai, Y. (2000). Requirement of Sox2-mediated signaling for differentiation of early Xenopus neuroectoderm. Development 127, 791-800.
Ma, Y., Niemitz, E. L., Nambu, P. A., Shan, X., Sackerson, C., Fujioka, M., Goto, T. and Nambu, J. R. (1998). Gene regulatory functions of Drosophila fish-hook, a high mobility group domain Sox protein. Mech. Dev. 73, 169-182.[Medline]
Ma, Y., Certel, K., Gao, Y., Niemitz, E., Mosher, J., Mukherjee, A., Mutsuddi, M., Huseinovic, N., Crews, S. T., Johnson, W. A. et al. (2000). Functional interactions between Drosophila bHLH/PAS, Sox, and POU transcription factors regulate CNS midline expression of the slit gene. J. Neurosci. 20, 4596-4605.
Mari-Beffa, M., de Celis, J. F. and Garcia-Bellido, A. (1991). Genetic and developmental analyses of chaetae pattern formation in Drosophila tergites. Roux Arch. dev. Biol. 200(3), 132-142.
Martin-Bermudo, M. D., Martinez, C., Rodriguez, A. and Jimenez, F. (1991). Distribution and function of the lethal of scute gene product during early neurogenesis in Drosophila. Development 113, 445-454.[Abstract]
Martin-Bermudo, M. D., Carmena, A. and Jimenez, F. (1995). Neurogenic genes control gene expression at the transcriptional level in early neurogenesis and in mesectoderm specification. Development 121, 219-224.
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.
Mellerick, D. M. and Nirenberg, M. (1995). Dorsal-ventral patterning genes restrict NK-2 homeobox gene expression to the ventral half of the central nervous system of Drosophila embryos. Dev. Biol. 171, 306-316.[Medline]
Mizuseki, K., Kishi, M., Matsui, M., Nakanishi, S. and Sasai, Y. (1998). Xenopus Zic-related-1 and Sox-2, two factors induced by chordin, have distinct activities in the initiation of neural induction. Development 125, 579-587.
Mukherjee, A., Shan, X., Mutsuddi, M., Ma, Y. and Nambu, J. R. (2000). The Drosophila sox gene, fish-hook, is required for postembryonic development. Dev. Biol. 217, 91-106.[Medline]
Nambu, P. A. and Nambu, J. R. (1996). The Drosophila fish-hook gene encodes a HMG domain protein essential for segmentation and CNS development. Development 122, 3467-3475.
Nishiguchi, S., Wood, H., Kondoh, H., Lovell-Badge, R. and Episkopou, V. (1998). Sox1 directly regulates the gamma-crystallin genes and is essential for lens development in mice. Genes Dev. 12, 776-781.
Pabst, O., Herbrand, H. and Arnold, H. H. (1998). Nkx2-9 is a novel homeobox transcription factor which demarcates ventral domains in the developing mouse CNS. Mech. Dev. 73, 85-93.[Medline]
Patel, N. H., Schafer, B., Goodman, C. S. and Holmgren, R. (1989). The role of segment polarity genes during Drosophila neurogenesis. Genes Dev. 3, 890-904.[Abstract]
Pevny, L. H. and Lovell-Badge, R. (1997). Sox genes find their feet. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 7, 338-344.[Medline]
Rex, M., Uwanogho, D., Cartwright, E., Pearl, G., Sharpe, P. T. and Scotting, P. J. (1994). Sox gene expression during neuronal development. Biochem. Soc. Trans. 22, 252S.[Medline]
Russell, S. R., Sanchez-Soriano, N., Wright, C. R. and Ashburner, M. (1996). The Dichaete gene of Drosophila melanogaster encodes a SOX-domain protein required for embryonic segmentation. Development 122, 3669-3676.
Sasai, Y. (1998). Identifying the missing links: genes that connect neural induction and primary neurogenesis in vertebrate embryos. Neuron 21, 455-458.[Medline]
Sasai, Y. (2001). Roles of Sox factors in neural determination: conserved signaling in evolution? Int. J. Dev. Biol. 45, 321-326.[Medline]
Schmid, A., Chiba, A. and Doe, C. Q. (1999). Clonal analysis of Drosophila embryonic neuroblasts: neural cell types, axon projections and muscle targets. Development 126, 4653-4689.
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.[Medline]
Seeger, M., Tear, G., Ferres-Marco, D. and Goodman, C. S. (1993). Mutations affecting growth cone guidance in Drosophila: genes necessary for guidance toward or away from the midline. Neuron 10, 409-426.[Medline]
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.[Medline]
Skeath, J. B., Panganiban, G., Selegue, J. and Carroll, S. B. (1992). Gene regulation in two dimensions: the proneural achaete and scute genes are controlled by combinations of axis-patterning genes through a common intergenic control region. Genes Dev. 6, 2606-2619.[Abstract]
Skeath, J. B., Panganiban, G. F. and Carroll, S. B. (1994). The ventral nervous system defective gene controls proneural gene expression at two distinct steps during neuroblast formation in Drosophila. Development 120, 1517-1524.
Soriano, N. S. and Russell, S. (1998). The Drosophila SOX-domain protein Dichaete is required for the development of the central nervous system midline. Development 125, 3989-3996.
Streit, A., Sockanathan, S., Perez, L., Rex, M., Scotting, P. J., Sharpe, P. T., Lovell-Badge, R. and Stern, C. D. (1997). Preventing the loss of competence for neural induction: HGF/SF, L5 and Sox-2. Development 124, 1191-1202.
Tautz, D. and Pfeifle, C. (1989). A non-radioactive in situ hybridization method for the localization of specific RNAs in Drosophila embryos reveals translational control of the segmentation gene hunchback. Chromosoma 98, 81-85.[Medline]
Uwanogho, D., Rex, M., Cartwright, E. J., Pearl, G., Healy, C., Scotting, P. J. and Sharpe, P. T. (1995). Embryonic expression of the chicken Sox2, Sox3 and Sox11 genes suggests an interactive role in neuronal development. Mech. Dev. 49, 23-36.[Medline]
Valerius, M. T., Li, H., Stock, J. L., Weinstein, M., Kaur, S., Singh, G. and Potter, S. S. (1995). Gsh-1: a novel murine homeobox gene expressed in the central nervous system. Dev. Dyn. 203, 337-351.[Medline]
Wegner, M. (1999). From head to toes: the multiple facets of Sox proteins. Nucleic Acids Res. 27, 1409-1420.
Weiss, J. B., von Ohlen, T., Mellerick, D. M., Dressler, G., Doe, C. Q. and Scott, M. P. (1998). Dorsoventral patterning in the Drosophila central nervous system: the intermediate neuroblasts defective homeobox gene specifies intermediate column identity. Genes Dev. 12, 3591-3602.
Xiong, W. C., Okano, H., Patel, N. H., Blendy, J. A. and Montell, C. (1994). repo encodes a glial-specific homeo domain protein required in the Drosophila nervous system. Genes Dev. 8, 981-994.[Abstract]
Yang, X., Bahri, S., Klein, T. and Chia, W. (1997). Klumpfuss, a putative Drosophila zinc finger transcription factor, acts to differentiate between the identities of two secondary precursor cells within one neuroblast lineage. Genes Dev. 11, 1396-1408.[Abstract]
Yu, F., Morin, X., Cai, Y., Yang, X. and Chia, W. (2000). Analysis of partner of inscuteable, a novel player of Drosophila asymmetric divisions, reveals two distinct steps in inscuteable apical localization. Cell 100, 399-409.[Medline]
Zhao, G. and Skeath, J. B. (2002). The Sox-domain containing gene Dichaete/fish-hook acts in concert with vnd and ind to regulate cell fate in the Drosophila neuroectoderm. Development 129, 1165-1174.