Division of Developmental Biology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, The University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH 45229, USA
(e-mail: linyby{at}chmcc.org)
SUMMARY
Heparan sulfate proteoglycans (HSPGs) are cell-surface and extracellular matrix macromolecules that are composed of a core protein decorated with covalently linked glycosaminoglycan (GAG) chains. In vitro studies have demonstrated the roles of these molecules in many cellular functions, and recent in vivo studies have begun to clarify their essential functions in development. In particular, HSPGs play crucial roles in regulating key developmental signaling pathways, such as the Wnt, Hedgehog, transforming growth factor-ß, and fibroblast growth factor pathways. This review highlights recent findings regarding the functions of HSPGs in these signaling pathways during development.
Introduction
During metazoan development, the formation of complex body structures and
patterns is governed by several secreted signaling molecules, including
members of the Wnt/Wingless (Wg), Hedgehog (Hh), transforming growth
factor-ß (TGFß) and fibroblast growth factor (FGF) families. Over
the past decades, intensive biochemical and genetic studies have elucidated
the central components of the signaling pathways that these molecules function
in. More recently, attention has shifted to understanding the mechanisms by
which the distributions of these signaling molecules are regulated in
morphogenetic fields. Studies in Drosophila and vertebrates have
demonstrated the crucial roles of heparan sulfate proteoglycans (HSPGs) in
these signaling pathways during development. This review focuses on recent
insights into the functions of HSPGs in regulating the activities and
distributions of these signaling molecules. For detailed reviews of previous
biochemical and genetic studies on the HSPGs, please see
(Belting, 2003;
Bernfield et al., 1999
;
Esko and Selleck, 2002
;
Lin and Perrimon, 2003
;
Nybakken and Perrimon, 2002
;
Princivalle and de Agostini,
2002
; Selleck,
2001
; Song and Filmus,
2002
).
HSPG biochemistry
HSPGs are cell-surface and extracellular matrix (ECM) macromolecules that
comprise a core protein to which heparan sulfate (HS) glycosaminoglycan (GAG)
chains are attached (Bernfield et al.,
1999; Esko and Selleck,
2002
). HSPGs are classified into several families based on their
core protein structure (Fig.
1). Glypicans and Syndecans are two major cell surface HSPGs, and
are linked to the plasma membrane by a glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI)
linkage or a transmembrane domain, respectively. Perlecans are secreted HSPGs
that are mainly distributed in the ECM. Although Glypicans and Perlecans
exclusively bear HS GAG chains, Syndecans are decorated with both HS and
chondroitin sulfate (CS). All three families of HSPGs are evolutionarily
conserved from vertebrates to Drosophila and C. elegans
(Esko and Selleck, 2002
;
Nybakken and Perrimon, 2002
).
The Drosophila genome encodes four HSPG homologs: a single Syndecan
(Sdc) (Johnson et al., 2004
;
Spring et al., 1994
;
Steigemann et al., 2004
), two
Glypicans [Division abnormally delayed (Dally) and Dally-like protein (Dlp)
(Baeg et al., 2001
;
Khare and Baumgartner, 2000
;
Nakato et al., 1995
)], and a
Perlecan [Terribly reduced optic lobes (Trol)
(Datta, 1995
;
Voigt et al., 2002
)].
|
|
|
Wnts are secreted signaling molecules that function in numerous
developmental processes in vertebrates and invertebrates
(Wodarz and Nusse, 1998).
Through the receptors of the Frizzled (Fz) family, Wnts can transduce their
signals by a ß-catenin/Armadillo-dependent pathway, called the
`canonical' Wnt pathway (Wodarz and Nusse,
1998
). Wnts can also relay their signals via the planar cell
polarity (PCP) pathway or Wnt/Ca2+ pathway, the so-called
`non-canonical' pathways (Veeman et al.,
2003
). Wnt proteins are lipid-modified, and are tightly associated
with the cell surface and the ECM (Nusse,
2003
). Therefore, how Wnt proteins move from cell to cell to
initiate intercellular signaling is of particular interest.
Drosophila wg encodes a homolog of vertebrate Wnt1, and its
function has been well explored in the patterning of the fly embryonic
epidermis (see Box 1) and of
the larval wing imaginal disc (see Box
2), where Wg acts as both a short-range inducer and a long-range
morphogen (Tabata and Takei,
2004; Teleman et al.,
2001
; Vincent and Dubois,
2002
).
Roles of HS chains in Wg signaling and distribution
The function of HSPGs in Wg signaling was first revealed by the
identification of sugarless (sgl)
(Binari et al., 1997;
Hacker et al., 1997
;
Haerry et al., 1997
) and
sulfateless (sfl) (Lin and
Perrimon, 1999
) as segment polarity genes in Drosophila.
sgl and sfl mutant embryos develop cuticle defects that are
similar to those in Wg or Hh signaling mutants
(Box 1), indicating that they
function in Wg and/or Hh signaling. Other evidence has also implicated the
involvement of HSPGs in Wg signaling. First, several Wg-dependent embryonic
developmental processes are abnormal in sgl or sfl mutant
embryos (Hacker et al., 1997
;
Lin and Perrimon, 1999
).
Second, Wg target-gene expression and extracellular Wg levels are reduced in
sfl mutant clones in the wing disc
(Baeg et al., 2001
;
Lin and Perrimon, 1999
).
Third, in vitro biochemical experiments have supported these findings
(Reichsman et al., 1996
).
Finally, other segment polarity genes, including fringe connection
(frc) and slalom, are also involved in HS biosynthesis, and
their studies have provided further evidence for the involvement of HS chains
in Wg signaling and distribution (Goto et
al., 2001
; Luders et al.,
2003
; Selva et al.,
2001
) (see Table 1
for more).
The Drosophila EXT proteins, Tout-velu (Ttv), Sister of ttv (Sotv)
and Brother of ttv (Botv), are also involved in Wg signaling and distribution
(Bornemann et al., 2004;
Han et al., 2004a
;
Perrimon et al., 2004
;
Takei et al., 2004
) (see
Box 3,
Fig. 2 and
Table 1). Although previous
studies had shown that Ttv is required specifically for Hh signaling
(The et al., 1999
) (as
discussed later), the more recent careful analyses of the phenotypes of
ttv, sotv and botv mutants have indicated that all three
proteins are required for normal Hh, Wg and Dpp functions during wing
development (Bornemann et al.,
2004
; Han et al.,
2004a
; Takei et al.,
2004
). Consistent with their expected roles in HS GAG
biosynthesis, mutations in any of these genes lead to striking reductions in
HS levels (Bornemann et al.,
2004
; Han et al.,
2004a
; Takei et al.,
2004
; Toyoda et al.,
2000a
; Toyoda et al.,
2000b
). These mutations also lead to reduced extracellular Wg
protein levels and to the reduced expression of Distal-less
(Dll), a Wg long-range target gene
(Wodarz and Nusse, 1998
).
However, these proteins do not function redundantly in HS GAG biosynthesis, as
ttv expression can only rescue the embryonic cuticle defect that is
associated with the ttv mutant, and not those of the sotv
and botv mutants (Han et al.,
2004a
). Together, these data suggest that all three EXT proteins
are required for Wg long-range signaling, possibly by modulating extracellular
Wg levels (Bornemann et al.,
2004
; Han et al.,
2004a
; Takei et al.,
2004
) (see Box
3).
Interestingly, Ttv, Sotv and Botv modulate Wg functions to varying degrees
in the wing disc (Han et al.,
2004a). Extracellular Wg levels are more greatly reduced in
botv mutant clones than in either ttv or sotv
clones. Moreover, the levels of senseless (sens), a Wg
short-range target gene, are strikingly reduced in botv mutant clones
and ttv-sotv double mutant clones, but not in ttv or
sotv mutant clones. These data suggest that Ttv and Sotv act
redundantly in Wg signaling, but that both are required for Wg distribution
(Han et al., 2004a
). Based on
their observations, Han et al. have proposed that HSPGs have distinct roles in
Wg distribution and signaling (Han et al.,
2004a
) (see Box 3
for more).
However, another study has shown that both Ttv and Sotv are required for Wg
short-range signaling (Bornemann et al.,
2004). This study showed that the expression of achaete
(ac), another Wg short-range target gene, is reduced in sotv
or ttv mutant cells in the wing disc
(Bornemann et al., 2004
). The
discrepancy between this and the findings of Han et al. could be due to the
different sensitivity of ac and sens to Wg signaling. For
example, higher levels of Wg signaling might be needed to activate ac
expression than to activate sens expression, causing ac
expression to be reduced in sotv or ttv mutant clones in the
wing disc. Nevertheless, the effects of sotv and ttv
mutations on Wg signaling and its distribution are relatively weak compared
with those in ttv-sotv double or botv single mutants
(Han et al., 2004a
),
indicating that some residual HS activity remains in the absence of
ttv or sotv (see Box
3). Analyses of ttv, sotv and botv mutants in
other developmental processes will further clarify this issue.
Roles of Dally and Dlp in Wg signaling and distribution
Which HSPG core proteins are involved in Wg signaling? Both Dally and Dlp,
two Drosophila Glypicans, function in Wg signaling
(Baeg et al., 2001;
Lin and Perrimon, 1999
;
Tsuda et al., 1999
).
Disruption of Dally function by mutations in the dally locus or by
its RNA interference (RNAi)-mediated knockdown results in weak segment
polarity defects, suggesting that Dally may be required for Wg signaling in
the embryonic epidermis (Lin and Perrimon,
1999
; Tsuda et al.,
1999
). However, embryonic cuticle defects associated with
dally mutant or dally RNAi embryos are relatively weak
compared with those of sgl or sfl mutants. Subsequent
studies have demonstrated that dlp RNAi embryonic segment polarity
defects are stronger than those of dally RNAi knockdown embryos.
dally-dlp RNAi embryos have more severe segment polarity defects than
dally RNAi or dlp RNAi embryos
(Baeg et al., 2001
). These data
suggest that both Dally and Dlp are required for Wg signaling in the embryonic
epidermis (Baeg et al.,
2001
).
However, a recent study by Desbordes and Sanson suggests that Dally and
Dlp, separately or together, are not necessary for Wg signaling in the
embryonic epidermis (Desbordes and Sanson,
2003; Perrimon et al.,
2004
). Using dally RNAi against relatively small regions
of dally, they showed that in dally knockdown embryos only
very weak denticle fusion is present, similar to that seen in control embryos
injected with buffer. Furthermore, the ectopic expression of wg in
dally-dlp RNAi embryos can rescue engrailed (en)
expression, a Wg target gene, and can generate naked cuticle, whereas ectopic
expression of hh in dlp RNAi embryos fails to rescue
wg expression, which is dependent on Hh signaling
(Desbordes and Sanson, 2003
).
On the basis of these data, the authors argue that both Dally and Dlp are not
required for Wg signalling, and that Dlp is strictly required for Hh signaling
(Desbordes and Sanson, 2003
;
Perrimon et al., 2004
).
Whether Dlp is involved solely in Hh, or in both Hh and Wg, signaling needs to
be resolved using dlp or dally-dlp null embryos. It is
possible that Dally and Dlp may only be involved in controlling Wg protein
retention or stability, but not in Wg signaling per se in the embryonic
epidermis, as suggested by Pfeiffer et al.
(Pfeiffer et al., 2002
).
Relatively compelling evidence for the functioning of Dally and Dlp in Wg
signaling has been demonstrated in the fly wing disc, where Hh and Wg
signaling function independently from each other. Dally mutants
exhibit wing margin defects and show genetic interactions with Wg signaling
components, suggesting that Dally is required for Wg signaling in the wing
disc (Lin and Perrimon, 1999).
Interestingly, overexpressing dlp, but not dally, can
strikingly increase extracellular Wg protein levels, suggesting that Dlp might
bind to Wg with a higher affinity than Dally does
(Baeg et al., 2001
;
Strigini and Cohen, 2000
).
However, overexpressing Dlp reduces, rather than enhances, Wg signaling. This
could be because an excess amount of Dlp may compete with a limiting amount of
Wg protein for its receptors Fz and Dfz2 (Fz2 FlyBase), thereby
inhibiting Wg signaling (Baeg et al.,
2001
). Whether Dlp plays a positive or a negative role in Wg
signaling remains to be determined by clonal analysis in available
dlp null mutants (Han et al.,
2004b
). Notum, which encodes a member of the alpha/beta-hydrolase
superfamily, can also repress Wg signaling, possibly by modifying Dlp and/or
Dally (Gerlitz and Basler,
2002
; Giraldez et al.,
2002
), thus providing further evidence for the involvement of
Dally and Dlp in Wg signaling.
HSPGs and Wnt signaling: lessons from vertebrate studies
Several recent studies have demonstrated the essential role of HSPGs in Wnt
signaling during vertebrate development
(De Cat et al., 2003;
Ohkawara et al., 2003
;
Topczewski et al., 2001
). In
Zebrafish, knypek encodes a glypican that is essential for convergent
extension movement during gastrulation
(Topczewski et al., 2001
).
Genetic analyses have demonstrated that Knypek is required for the signaling
activity of Wnt11, which acts via the non-canonical PCP pathway during
vertebrate gastrulation (Topczewski et
al., 2001
). Similarly, in Xenopus, reducing glypican 4
(Xgly4) disrupt cell movements during gastrulation
(Ohkawara et al., 2003
). Xgly4
physically interacts with Wnt11, and might function in the Wnt/PCP pathway
(Ohkawara et al., 2003
).
Interestingly, vertebrate glypican 3 can influence both canonical and
non-canonical Wnt signaling in in vitro cell culture assays
(De Cat et al., 2003
), and
blocking glypican 3 with antisense morpholino oligonucleotides disrupts
gastrulation movements in zebrafish (De
Cat et al., 2003
). Glypican 3 is processed by a furin-like
convertase (an enzyme involved in endoproteolytic processing), which is
required for glypican 3 modulation of Wnt signaling both in vitro and in vivo
(De Cat et al., 2003
).
Collectively, these data demonstrate that glypicans are required for Wnt
signaling during vertebrate development. Whether other glypicans also require
processing by a convertase(s), and whether a similar process exists in
Drosophila, remains to be resolved.
One important finding from HSPG studies in vertebrates has been the role of
sulfatases in Wnt signaling. Sulfatases modulate the sulfation states of HS
chains by removing sulfates from them. As previously discussed, the
sfl-encoded sulfotransferase in Drosophila is crucially
required for proper Wg signaling (Lin and
Perrimon, 1999). It is therefore surprising that QSulf1, the avian
homolog of the HS-specific, N-acetyl glucosamine sulfatases, can
promote Wnt signaling in myoblasts (Dhoot
et al., 2001
). In vertebrates, both Sulf1 and its highly related
protein Sulf2 are secreted, HS-specific, 6-O endosulfatases
(Ai et al., 2003
;
Morimoto-Tomita et al., 2002
;
Ohto et al., 2002
). A recent
study has shown that QSulf1 can function cell autonomously to remodel the
sulfation state of cell-surface HS chains and can promote Wnt signaling when
localized either at the cell surface or in the Golgi apparatus
(Ai et al., 2003
). Ai et al.
propose that the HS 6-O desulfation activity of QSulf1 might convert
cell-surface HSPGs to a low-affinity Wnt-binding state, thereby promoting the
formation of low-affinity HS-Wnt complexes that can functionally interact with
Frizzled receptors to initiate Wnt signal transduction
(Ai et al., 2003
;
Ohto et al., 2002
). As both
Sulf1 and Sulf2 are secreted enzymes and are expressed in a variety of
developmental contexts, they may participate in the signaling and distribution
of Wnts, as well as that of other signaling molecules, such as the FGFs (see
FGF signaling section). As Drosophila contains one QSulf1 homolog, it
will be interesting to determine whether this protein is also required for Wg
signaling.
Box 1. Wg and Hh roles in patterning the Drosophila embryonic
epidermis
During embryogenesis, Wg and Hh signaling have essential roles in patterning the embryonic epidermis. wg (shown in green) and hh (shown in red) are expressed in stripes within each segment of the epidermis. The position of the compartmental boundary that separates each segment, called the parasegmental (PS) boundary, is marked by the juxtaposition of Hh- and Wg-expressing cells, with the Wg stripe present at its anterior (A) and the Hh stripe at its posterior (P) edge. At stage 9 of embryonic development, Wg is distributed on both sides of the boundary (as shown by the green dots) and acts over a short-range posteriorly to maintain hh expression. Hh acts, in turn, anteriorly to maintain wg expression (as shown by the red arrows). At stage 12, Wg (shown by the green dots) is mainly distributed anteriorly, and forms a morphogen gradient that is required to produce the naked cuticle in larvae. In a wild-type embryo, as shown, the cuticle has an alternating pattern of naked cuticle and cuticle covered with small hairs called denticles. The wg mutant embryo is devoid of naked cuticle. Mutations in genes that affect either Wg and/or Hh signaling, such as in sfl, generate similar cuticle patterning defects, known as segment polarity defects.
|
Mechanisms by which HSPGs modulate Wnt/Wg signaling
Two models have been proposed to explain how HSPGs modulate Wg signaling.
In the first model, HSPGs can either stabilize the Wg protein from being
degraded or reduce the dimensionality of Wg ligand diffusion from three to two
dimensions, thereby maintaining the local concentration of Wg ligand that is
available for its receptor (Hacker et al.,
1997; Pfeiffer et al.,
2002
) (Fig. 3C).
This model is supported by data from several studies. For example, in the fly
embryonic epidermis, Wg protein is tightly associated with the surface of the
wg-expressing cells and is undetectable in sgl null embryos
(Hacker et al., 1997
;
Pfeiffer et al., 2002
).
Similarly, in the wing imaginal disc, extracellular Wg protein levels are
strikingly reduced in sfl mutants
(Baeg et al., 2001
), and in the
ttv, sotv and botv single mutants
(Bornemann et al., 2004
;
Han et al., 2004a
;
Takei et al., 2004
). Finally,
the overexpression of Wg protein can partially rescue the segmentation defects
associated with sfl and sgl, thereby compensating for the
loss of Wg signaling (Hacker et al.,
1997
). In the second model, HSPGs are proposed to act as
co-receptors that directly facilitate the formation of Wnt/Wg-Fz signaling
complexes (Lin and Perrimon,
1999
). Although most data support the first model, there is some
evidence that HSPGs may directly regulate Wg signaling, possibly by acting as
a co-receptor(s). The overexpression of Notum, for example, can
extinguish the signaling activity of membrane-tethered Wg that does not move
through tissue (Gerlitz and Basler,
2002
). And, as already discussed, analyses of EXT proteins in Wg
signaling suggest that HSPGs might have two distinct roles in Wg distribution
and signaling (Han et al.,
2004a
) (see also Box
3).
|
Box 2. Wg, Hh and Dpp morphogens are essential for patterning the
Drosophila wing
Drosophila wings arise from wing imaginal discs that are subdivided into anterior (A)/posterior (P) and dorsal (D)/ventral (V) compartments. The wing imaginal disc provides an excellent model system to study morphogen signaling and gradient formation during development. The three morphogens Wg, Hh and Dpp are essential for patterning the wing imaginal disc. In a third instar larvae wing imaginal disc, Wg (green) is expressed at the DV border and acts as a long-range morphogen to signal dorsally (arrows up) and ventrally (arrows down) to organize DV patterning. Hh (red) is expressed in the P compartment and moves into the A compartment of the disc to activate the expression of its target genes, including dpp (blue) in a stripe of cells adjacent to the AP compartment boundary. Dpp acts as a long-range morphogen that controls the growth and patterning of wing cells along the AP axis beyond the central domain.
|
HSPGs might also transport Wg protein through vesicles called argosomes,
which are generated from basolateral membranes and can travel from
Wg-producing cells to various regions of the wing disc
(Greco et al., 2001).
Wg-expressing cells produce argosomes that contain high levels of Wg.
Following the treatment of these cells with either heparinase I or III, Wg is
no longer detected on the plasma membrane of the Wg-expressing cells, nor in
the surrounding tissue. These and other data led Greco et al. to propose that
argosomes are involved in Wg morphogen transport, and that this process is
likely to be mediated by HSPGs (Greco et
al., 2001
).
HSPGs in Hh distribution and signaling
Like Wnts, Hh signaling molecules act as key mediators in many
developmental processes and essentially require HSPGs for their proper
distribution and signaling activity
(Ingham and McMahon, 2001;
Lin and Perrimon, 2003
).
Functions of HSPGs in Hh distribution
The first evidence that HSPGs function in Hh distribution came from the
genetic analysis of ttv (Bellaiche
et al., 1998) (see Box
3 and Table 1). In
the wing disc, Hh acts as a morphogen that forms a concentration gradient in
an anterior strip of cells near the anteroposterior (AP) border of the wing
disc (see Box 2). In wing discs
containing ttv mutant clones, Hh can only be detected in the
posterior-most ttv mutant cells that lie adjacent to wild-type cells.
Furthermore, Hh can diffuse through a ptc mutant clone in the wing
disc, but not through ptc-ttv double mutant cells
(Bellaiche et al., 1998
).
Mainly based on these data, Bellaiche et al. proposed that a Ttv-modified HSPG
is required for Hh to move from the cells where it is expressed to the
anterior Hh-receiving cells (Bellaiche et
al., 1998
). Several recent studies have also shown similar defects
in Hh distribution in wing clones mutant for sfl, sotv or
botv (Han et al.,
2004a
; Takei et al.,
2004
). Importantly, Hh protein accumulates abnormally in the
posterior compartment when the ttv-botv double mutant clones are made
in the anterior compartment along the AP boundary, further suggesting that Hh
fails to move into the HSPG mutant cells
(Takei et al., 2004
).
HSPGs are also required for Hh movement in the embryonic epidermis. The
mature form of Hh, HhNp (see Box
4) is distributed as large punctate particles between
Hh-expressing cells (Gallet et al.,
2003). Cholesterol modification is required for HhNp to form these
punctate particles (Gallet et al.,
2003
). In ttv mutant embryos, these punctate particles
are not distributed between Hh-expressing cells
(Gallet et al., 2003
;
The et al., 1999
). Although
Ttv is required for HhNp movement, it is not required for that of HhN (see
Box 4)
(Gallet et al., 2003
;
The et al., 1999
). Together,
these studies support the notion that HSPGs are required for the movement of
cholesterol-modified HhNp.
The HSPG core proteins Dally and Dlp are also involved in Hh movement in
the embryonic epidermis (Han et al.,
2004b). dlp mutant embryos exhibit virtually identical
defects to those of hh mutant embryos, and in their epidermis, Hh
punctate particles can only be detected in Hh-expressing cells, and not in
adjacent cells (Han et al.,
2004b
). However, in the wing disc, both Dally and Dlp act
partially redundantly in Hh movement (Han
et al., 2004b
).
HSPGs might also control the stability of Hh by protecting it from
degradation. Interestingly, Hh levels are reduced in Hh-producing cells mutant
for sotv or ttv
(Bornemann et al., 2004).
Bornemann et al. argue that, by extension, Hh ligand instability could also
contribute to reduced Hh levels and signaling in Hh-receiving cells lacking
HSPGs (Bornemann et al., 2004
).
Although the evidence of Hh accumulation in front of HSPG-defective cells
implicates HSPGs in Hh movement (Takei et
al., 2004
), current data suggest that HSPGs are likely to be
involved in both Hh movement and stability.
Mechanism(s) of HSPG-mediated Hh movement
Both vertebrate sonic hedgehog (Shh) and Drosophila Hh are
secreted from cells as multimeric and monomeric forms
(Chen et al., 2004;
Zeng et al., 2001
). The
soluble Shh multimeric form is freely diffusive
(Zeng et al., 2001
) and is
responsible for activating Shh-target genes
(Chen et al., 2004
). Do
secreted Hh proteins freely diffuse to receiving cells through extracellular
spaces, and what is the role of HSPGs in Hh movement? Han et al. have
demonstrated that a narrow strip of sfl or ttv mutant cells
in the fly wing disc is sufficient to completely block Hh signaling in the
anterior wild-type cells adjacent to mutant cells, suggesting that Hh fails to
move across these HSPG-deficient cells
(Han et al., 2004a
)
(Fig. 3). Similar results are
observed in clones mutant for both dally and dlp
(Han et al., 2004a
). Han et
al. further showed that HSPG-mediated Hh movement is independent of
dynamin-mediated endocytosis (Han et al.,
2004a
). On the basis of these and other data, Han et al. proposed
that Hh movement is mediated by restricted diffusion involving Dally and Dlp
(Han et al., 2004b
)
(Fig. 3A).
Roles of HSPGs in Hh signaling
HSPGs are also required for Hh signaling. In tissue culture experiments,
Dlp, but not Dally, Sdc or Trol, is required for Hh signaling
(Lum et al., 2003). As
mentioned earlier, Desbordes and Sanson have also argued that Dlp is
specifically required for Hh signaling in the embryonic epidermis
(Desbordes and Sanson, 2003
).
Although there are some arguments regarding whether Dlp is also involved in Wg
signaling (Perrimon et al.,
2004
), the reduced bagpipe expression, which is normally
activated by Hh signalling but is inhibited by Wg signalling in mesodermal
cells of dlp null embryos, resemble that of hh mutant
embryos, providing further evidence that Hh signaling requires Dlp during fly
embryogenesis (Han et al.,
2004a
). Importantly, although previous studies have shown that
ectopic expression of Hh can rescue the cuticle defects associated with HS GAG
mutants, such as those seen in sgl, sfl, frc and slalom
mutants (Luders et al., 2003
;
Perrimon et al., 2004
;
Selva et al., 2001
), ectopic
expression of Hh fails to restore Hh signaling activity, as assayed by
wg expression, in dly RNAi embryos
(Desbordes and Sanson, 2003
).
These results suggest that the core protein of Dly is crucially required for
Hh signaling, whereas the attached HS chains are required for optimal Hh
signaling activity. Alternatively, the Dly core protein may be required for Hh
processing in the embryonic epidermis. It is also important to note that
although Dlp is required for Hh signaling during embryogenesis, Dlp is
functionally redundant with Dally in Hh signaling in the wing disc
(Han et al., 2004b
),
suggesting that the specificity of HSPG involvement in Hh signaling depends on
the developmental context.
Dlp might regulate Hh signaling in several ways. It might modulate Hh
levels at the cell surface and indirectly control the interaction of Hh with
its receptor Ptc. Alternatively, it might act as a co-receptor, perhaps by
transferring Hh to its receptor Ptc, or by forming a Hh-Dlp-Ptc ternary
complex in which Dlp may function to facilitate the Hh-Ptc interaction or to
stabilize a Hh-Ptc complex, as in the case of FGF signaling
(Ornitz, 2000;
Pellegrini, 2001
). On the one
hand, in tissue culture experiments, Lum et al. showed that Dlp acts cell
autonomously upstream or at the level of Ptc to activate the expression of an
Hh responsive-reporter, indicating that Dlp might deliver Hh to its receptor.
However, the knockdown of Dlp did not block Hh signaling when Hh was expressed
in responding cells (Lum et al.,
2003
). These results suggest that Dlp is not absolutely required
for Hh signaling in the presence of relatively large amounts of Hh. On the
other hand, ectopic expression of Hh or HhN fails to rescue Hh signaling
defects in dlp-RNAi embryos
(Desbordes and Sanson, 2003
),
and thus these data suggest that Dlp acts as a co-receptor for Hh signaling
(Desbordes and Sanson, 2003
).
Studies in the dlp null mutant should help to resolve this issue.
Hh signaling might also be regulated by other HSPG core proteins in
different tissues or developmental processes. For example, mutations in the
gene encoding Trol, the Drosophila Perlecan that forms a complex with
Hh, causes neuroblasts to undergo cell cycle arrest in the larval brain
(Datta, 1995;
Park et al., 2003
;
Voigt et al., 2002
). Genetic
interaction experiments also indicate that trol is required for Hh
signaling during neuroblast division (Park
et al., 2003
).
HSPGs in BMP signaling and morphogen gradient formation
The TGFß superfamily of secreted proteins, such as the bone
morphogenetic proteins (BMPs), act as morphogens in many developmental
contexts to pattern tissues. Drosophila Decapentaplegic (Dpp), the
functional ortholog of vertebrate BMP2 and BMP4, provides a paradigm for
studying the mechanisms of BMP signaling
(Raftery and Sutherland,
1999). Dpp acts as a long-range morphogen during wing development
(Box 2), and its activity and
ligand gradients can be assayed by monitoring the activated form of Mothers
against Dpp (pMAD), a cytoplasmic transducer of Dpp signaling
(Tanimoto et al., 2000
), and
by GFP-Dpp fusion proteins that retain signaling activity
(Entchev et al., 2000
;
Teleman and Cohen, 2000
).
Roles of HSPGs in Dpp signaling
dally mutants exhibit various dpp-like patterning defects
and these defects show genetic interactions with the dpp signaling
pathway (Jackson et al., 1997;
Nakato et al., 1995
). Ectopic
expression of Dally results in enhanced Dpp signaling in the fly wing disc
(Fujise et al., 2003
). These
data suggest a positive role of Dally in Dpp signaling. Recent data suggest
that Dally and Dlp are partially redundant in Dpp signaling, as the removal of
both Dally and Dlp causes stronger Dpp signaling defects than those seen in
either dally or dlp mutants
(Belenkaya et al., 2004
).
Consistent with the involvement of Dally and Dlp in Dpp signaling, Dpp
signaling is strikingly reduced in cells defective in HS biosynthesis such as
in EXT mutants (Bornemann et al.,
2004
; Han et al.,
2004a
; Takei et al.,
2004
) or in the sfl mutant
(Belenkaya et al., 2004
).
What is the role of HSPGs in Dpp signaling? Elevated levels of Dally
increase the sensitivity of cells to Dpp in a cell-autonomous fashion in the
wing disc, leading the authors to propose that Dally might serve as a
co-receptor for Dpp (Fujise et al.,
2003). However, Dally overexpression might lead to enhanced Dpp
signaling activity by increasing the levels of Dpp on Dally-expressing cells.
Moreover, Dpp signaling is not defective in the first row of sfl
single or dally-dlp double mutant cells if they are adjacent to
wild-type cells that face Dpp-producing cells
(Belenkaya et al., 2004
).
Finally, extracellular Dpp levels are strikingly reduced in sfl or
dally-dlp mutant cells (Belenkaya
et al., 2004
). These data suggest that the main function of HSPGs
in Dpp signaling in the wing disc is to modulate levels of Dpp
(Fig. 3C) (Han et al., 2004a
;
Takei et al., 2004
;
Belenkaya et al., 2004
).
Biochemical studies have demonstrated that both Dpp and BMP2 are
heparin-binding proteins (Groppe et al.,
1998; Ruppert et al.,
1996
), and that the binding of BMP2 to heparin requires its
N-terminal domain (Ruppert et al.,
1996
). Recently, the crystal structure of BMP2 alone and in
complex with its receptor has revealed that the N-terminal domains of both
BMP2 monomers are well placed for GAG binding
(Kirsch et al., 2000
;
Scheufler et al., 1999
).
Moreover, the GAG-binding domain of BMP2 is not located in regions required
for BMP2 dimerization and receptor interaction. These data suggest that HSPGs
are unlikely to be directly involved in Dpp/BMP signaling as a co-receptor, as
they are in FGF signaling (Ornitz,
2000
; Schlessinger et al.,
1995
), nor are they likely to be essential for Dpp signaling in
tissues where Dpp is abundant. Indeed, in striking contrast to the requirement
for HSPGs for proper Dpp signaling during wing development, in sgl, sfl,
ttv, sotv and botv mutant embryos, embryonic dorsoventral (DV)
patterning controlled by Dpp signaling is not defective
(Haerry et al., 1997
;
Han et al., 2004a
;
Lin and Perrimon, 1999
).
During early embryogenesis, Dpp is highly expressed in the dorsal half of the
embryo, and its activity gradient is regulated by an inverse gradient of its
antagonist Short gastrulation (Srinivasan
et al., 2002
).
HSPGs are required for Dpp morphogen gradient formation
Dpp acts as a morphogen during wing disc development
(Tabata and Takei, 2004;
Vincent and Dubois, 2002
). Do
HSPGs control the movement of the Dpp morphogen in the wing disc? Previous
findings have suggested that the Dpp morphogen moves across cells by a
transcytosis mechanism through Dynamin-mediated endocytosis
(Entchev et al., 2000
).
However, Lander et al. have proposed on theoretical grounds that diffusive
mechanisms of Dpp transport are much more plausible than non-diffusive
mechanisms (Lander et al.,
2002
). Several studies implicate the involvement of HSPGs in Dpp
distribution. Dpp distribution is defective in wing disc cells mutant for HS
biosyntheis, such as in the EXT or sfl mutants
(Belenkaya et al., 2004
;
Han et al., 2004a
;
Takei et al., 2004
). Both
Dally and Dlp are required for Dpp distribution
(Belenkaya et al., 2004
;
Fujise et al., 2003
).
Importantly, recent data also demonstrate that although Dynamin-mediated
endocytosis is required for Dpp signaling it is not essential for Dpp
morphogen movement (Belenkaya et al.,
2004
). Extracellular Dpp can move across endocytosis defective
cells, but not across sfl or dally-dly mutant cells
(Belenkaya et al., 2004
). These
data led Belenkaya et al. to propose that Dpp moves across cells through a
restricted diffusion mechanism that involves Dally and Dlp
(Belenkaya et al., 2004
). Dally
and Dlp have been proposed to have a similar role in Hh movement
(Han et al., 2004b
)
(Fig. 3A).
Functions of HSPGs in FGF signaling
FGFs are among the best-studied HSPG-binding proteins
(Ornitz, 2000), and play many
important roles in regulating cell proliferation, migration and
differentiation during development
(Coumoul and Deng, 2003
;
Ornitz and Itoh, 2001
). Recent
studies have provided new insights into the mechanisms by which HSPGs modulate
FGF signaling in development.
HSPGs in FGF signaling
As in the case of Wnt signaling, the first genetic evidence of a role for
HSPGs in FGF signaling came from sgl and sfl mutant embryos,
which show defective FGF signaling during Drosophila embryogenesis
(Lin et al., 1999). In
Drosophila, two FGF receptors, Heartlless (Htl) and Breathless (Btl),
are required for the migration of mesodermal and tracheal cells, respectively.
In sgl and sfl mutant embryos, both Htl and Btl signaling
are defective, demonstrating the essential role of HSPGs in FGF signaling in
development (Lin et al., 1999
;
Nybakken and Perrimon, 2002
).
It is currently unknown which HSPG core proteins are involved in Htl- and
Btl-mediated FGF signaling during embryogenesis. However, Trol is not only
required for Hh signaling, but is also involved in Btl-mediated FGF signaling
during neuroblast division in the larval brain
(Park et al., 2003
). Study of
available null mutants in sdc, dally and dly should reveal
which core proteins are involved in FGF signaling in Drosophila.
Recent studies have provided in vivo evidence for the requirement of HSPGs
in FGF signaling in vertebrates. First, lazy mesoderm
(lzme), a mouse homolog of Drosophila sgl, arrests during
gastrulation with defects in mesoderm and endoderm migration, which require
FGF signaling (Garcia-Garcia and Anderson,
2003). In lzme embryos, although Fgf8 expression
is not affected, the expression of several Fgf8 downstream-target genes is
defective, resembling the altered expression patterns seen in
Fgf8/ embryos. These data strongly suggest
that lzme is required for FGF8 signaling in mice
(Garcia-Garcia and Anderson,
2003
). Second, in Xenopus embryos, depleting Glypican 4
transcripts with antisense morpholino oligonucleotides causes FGF signaling
defects during neural tube closure (Galli
et al., 2003
).
HS chain structure and FGF signaling
Biochemical studies have demonstrated the importance of 6-O
sulfation of HS for FGF signaling (Nakato
and Kimata, 2002). Crystallographic studies have further suggested
that the 6-O sulfation of HS is required for FGF1-FGFR2 and
FGF2-FGFR1 interactions (Pellegrini et
al., 2000
; Schlessinger et
al., 2000
). The 6-O sulfation of HS is indeed essential
for FGF signaling in development. In Drosophila, this 6-O
sulfation is catalyzed by a single Heparan sulfate
6-O-sulfotransferase (Hs6st) gene
(Kamimura et al., 2001
).
Interestingly, Hs6st is specifically expressed in mesodermal and tracheal
cells. Knocking down this transcript by RNAi severely perturbs tracheal
development and diminishes Btl-dependent MAPK activity
(Kamimura et al., 2001
),
suggesting that 6-O sulfations in HS chains are essential for FGF
signaling.
As mentioned earlier, QSulf1, a HS-specific 6-O endosulfatase, and
its mammalian orthologs can promote Wnt signaling
(Ai et al., 2003;
Dhoot et al., 2001
). By
contrast, two recent studies have shown that Sulf1 inhibits FGF signaling.
First, the expression of human SULF1 resulted in a striking reduction
in FGF2 signaling activity in ovarian cancer cell lines
(Lai et al., 2003
). Second,
QSulf1 was shown to block FGF signaling activity in both Xenopus and
chicken embryos (Wang et al.,
2004
). These studies provide further evidence of the involvement
of 6-O sulfation of HS in FGF signalling, and also indicate that
Sulf1, and possibly Sulf2, has a dual regulatory function as a positive
regulator of Wnt signaling and as a negative regulator of FGF signaling.
How HSPGs modulate FGF signaling
Biochemical studies have provided evidence that HSPGs participate in FGF
signaling by directly interacting with FGFs and their receptors in a ternary
complex on the cell surface (Ornitz,
2000; Pellegrini,
2001
). The crystal structures of FGF-FGFR-heparin complexes have
shown that one FGF, one heparin molecule and one FGFR chain constitute the
1:1:1 FGF-FGFR-heparin complex
(Pellegrini, 2001
;
Pellegrini et al., 2000
;
Schlessinger et al., 2000
).
One possible role of heparin/HSPGs within the FGF signaling complex is to
facilitate the FGF and FGFR interaction
(Fig. 3B). Alternatively,
heparin/HSPGs may enhance the stability of a binary FGF-FGFR complex. In
support of this view, various biochemical studies have demonstrated that
heparin can increase the affinity of FGF for its receptor
(Ornitz, 2000
).
Specificity of HSPGs in developmental signaling pathways
The studies described above have illustrated that HSPGs have essential roles in the Wnt, Hh, TGFß and FGF developmental signaling pathways. Do HSPGs have any specificity in regulating these pathways? How do HSPGs control these pathways in various tissues? Now studies in Drosophila and vertebrates are providing evidence that the specificity of HSPG function in these pathways is controlled by both the HSPG core proteins and their attached HS GAG chains. Furthermore, these HSPG functions are being discovered to be context dependent.
The nature of HSPG core proteins is likely to contribute to the specificity
of HSPGs in cell signaling. The distribution of HS GAG chains solely depends
on the expression of HSPG core proteins. The expression of HSPG core proteins
is, in turn, regulated by Wg, Hh and Dpp signaling, as has been shown for
Dally in the wing disc (Fujise et al.,
2001; Fujise et al.,
2003
). HSPG core proteins can also contribute to the modification
of HS GAG chains (Chen and Lander,
2001
; Esko and Zhang,
1996
). The GAG attachment sites and their surrounding amino acid
sequence can determine the number of HS chains that attach to a specific HSPG
core protein (Esko and Selleck,
2002
). Moreover, all of the Glypican core proteins share a unique,
highly conserved N-terminal globular domain that contains 14 cysteine
residues, which is a potent enhancer of preferential HS glycosylation
(Chen and Lander, 2001
).
Finally, The HSPG core proteins may be directly involved in cell signaling.
For example, Glypican proteins contain a GPI anchor. This anchor is enriched
in the lipid raft domain, which has been implicated in protein sorting and in
signaling complex assembly (Simons and
Toomre, 2000
). Other parts of the Glypican protein core could be
directly involved in cell signaling. Indeed, while overexpression of Hh can
rescue Hh signaling defects in sgl null embryos
(Hacker et al., 1997
), it
fails to restore Hh signaling activity in dlp RNAi embryos
(Desbordes and Sanson, 2003
).
Similarly, in Xenopus, the overexpression of full-length Xgly4 can inhibit
Activin-induced elongation (Ohkawara et
al., 2003
). These data suggest direct roles for Glypican core
proteins in cell signaling.
The specificity of HSPGs is also controlled by the biosynthesis of HS GAG
chains. As shown in Fig. 2,
several glycosyltransferases and modification enzymes are involved in this
process. Genetic studies of the Drosophila EXT proteins Ttv, Botv and
Sotv, have illustrated the involvement of HS biosynthesis in specific
functions of HSPGs. For example, these proteins are required for Hh and Dpp
signaling, but neither Wg nor FGF signaling is defective in ttv
mutant embryos during embryogenesis (The
et al., 1999). By contrast, Wg short-range signaling is defective
in both botv single and ttv-sotv double mutant clones in the
wing disc (Han et al., 2004a
).
Specific defects associated with distinct modifications of HS GAG chains have
also been reported. Drosophila Hs6st is specifically expressed in
mesodermal and tracheal cells during fly embryogenesis, and is required for
FGF signaling (Kamimura et al.,
2001
). In the mouse, mutations in HS 2-O-sulfotransferase
(Hs2st) (Bullock et al., 1998
;
Merry et al., 2001
) and
D-glucuronyl C5-epimerase (Li et al.,
2003
) are associated with renal agenesis and skeletal
malformations, but major organ systems, including the brain, liver and
gastrointestinal tract appear to be normal. Although specific signaling
defects have not yet been identified in these two mouse mutants, the unique
patterning defects observed indicate that Hs2st and the C5 epimerase have
specific functions in development. Perhaps the disruption of the
Drosophila homologs of these genes will shed light on the signaling
pathways they act in.
The requirement for HSPGs for the activity of certain signaling pathways
also depends on the developmental context. For example, Dpp signaling in DV
patterning during embryogenesis is not defective in fly embryos mutant for HS
biosynthesis enzymes (sgl, sfl or Exts) or HSPG core proteins (Dally
and Dlp) (Haerry et al., 1997;
Han et al., 2004a
;
Lin and Perrimon, 1999
;
The et al., 1999
). By
contrast, clones mutant for these genes show striking defects in Dpp
distribution and signaling in the wing disc
(Belenkaya et al., 2004
;
Bornemann et al., 2004
;
Fujise et al., 2003
;
Han et al., 2004a
;
Takei et al., 2004
). One
explanation for this is that dpp is highly expressed in the dorsal
half of embryos, where the Dpp activity gradient is regulated by an inverse
gradient of its antagonist Short gastrulation
(Srinivasan et al., 2002
),
whereas in the wing disc, Dpp forms concentration gradients to transduce its
signaling. As such, the main function of HSPGs in Dpp signaling in the wing
disc is likely to be the modulation of extracellular Dpp levels by preventing
it from being degraded. A recent study has also suggested that the role of
proteoglycans in Drosophila Wg and Dpp signaling has not been
conserved in vertebrates (Garcia-Garcia
and Anderson, 2003
), owing to the fact that mouse embryos with
mutations in lzme are defective in FGF signaling, but not in Wnt3 or
Nodal (a TGFß member) signaling during gastrulation. These authors
propose that many of the phenotypes of proteoglycan-related human disorders
could be due to disrupted FGF signaling. However, in other developmental
contexts, such as in developing limbs, HSPGs may play essential roles in Wnt
and BMP signaling. For example, loss of mouse glpyican 3 in association with
heterozygous Bmp4 deficiencies results in polydactyly and skeletal
abnormalities that are not seen in either Gpc3 null or Bmp4
heterozygous mice, suggesting a role for glypican 3 in BMP4 signaling
(Paine-Saunders et al.,
2000
).
Conclusion
Developmental and biochemical studies in Drosophila and vertebrate model systems have revealed essential roles for HSPGs in regulating a number of developmental signaling pathways in a variety of developmental contexts. HSPGs appear to control these signaling pathways in various ways, such as by retaining and stablizing ligands, by transporting ligands and by facilitating ligand-receptor interactions. These roles are likely to be mediated by both the HSPG protein cores and the specific HS GAG modifications that are carried out by a combination of enzymes. Further detailed analyses of animals mutant for individual core proteins and HS GAG chain-modifying enzymes are needed to define the molecular mechanisms by which HSPGs regulate cell signaling in various developmental processes. Cell biology studies of live tissues are also needed to further define the cellular basis of the HSPG-mediated regulation of morphogen gradient formation during development. Finally, we also need to determine the HS structures of specific HSPGs by HS GAG sequencing and advanced mass spectroscopy to elucidate the molecular nature of HSPG-ligand interactions. Given their molecular complexity, a complete understanding of HSPG functions in development requires that we investigate them using combined genetic, cell biological and biochemical approaches.
Note added in proof
Two recent papers have demonstrated that Dlp promotes low-level Wg activity
far from the site of Wg production, but reduces high-level Wg signaling near
the Wg source (Kreuger et al.,
2004; Kirkpatrick et al.,
2004
). Kreuger et al. further show that Notum, a previously
identified secreted enzyme, can cleave the GPI anchor of Dlp, releasing Dlp
from the cell surface. Kirkpatrick et al. show through genetic interaction
studies that Dlp and Notum cooperate to restrict high-level Wg signaling. As
Notum is transcribed in response to high-level Wg signaling, these findings
suggest that feedback confers spatial specificity on proteoglycan function by
switching Dlp from a membrane-tethered cofactor to a secreted antagonist.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I thank Chun Han and Tatyana Belenkaya for suggestions and figures. Work in the author's laboratory is supported by grants from the NIH.
REFERENCES
Ai, X., Do, A. T., Lozynska, O., Kusche-Gullberg, M., Lindahl,
U. and Emerson, C. P., Jr (2003). QSulf1 remodels the 6-O
sulfation states of cell surface heparan sulfate proteoglycans to promote Wnt
signaling. J. Cell Biol.
162,341
-351.
Baeg, G. H., Lin, X., Khare, N., Baumgartner, S. and Perrimon,
N. (2001). Heparan sulfate proteoglycans are critical for the
organization of the extracellular distribution of Wingless.
Development 128,87
-94.
Belenkaya, T. Y., Han, C., Yan, D., Opoka, R., Khodoun, M., Liu, H. and Lin, X. (2004). Drosophila Dpp morphogen movement is independent of Dynamin-mediated endocytosis, but regulated by the glypican members of heparan sulfate proteoglycans. Cell 119,231 -244.[CrossRef][Medline]
Bellaiche, Y., The, I. and Perrimon, N. (1998). Tout-velu is a Drosophila homologue of the putative tumour suppressor EXT-1 and is needed for Hh diffusion. Nature 394, 85-88.[CrossRef][Medline]
Belting, M. (2003). Heparan sulfate proteoglycan as a plasma membrane carrier. Trends Biochem. Sci. 28,145 -151.[CrossRef][Medline]
Bernfield, M., Gotte, M., Park, P. W., Reizes, O., Fitzgerald, M. L., Lincecum, J. and Zako, M. (1999). Functions of cell surface heparan sulfate proteoglycans. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 68,729 -777.[CrossRef][Medline]
Binari, R. C., Staveley, B. E., Johnson, W. A., Godavarti, R.,
Sasisekharan, R. and Manoukian, A. S. (1997). Genetic
evidence that heparin-like glycosaminoglycans are involved in wingless
signaling. Development
124,2623
-2632.
Bornemann, D. J., Duncan, J. E., Staatz, W., Selleck, S. and
Warrior, R. (2004). Abrogation of heparan sulfate synthesis
in Drosophila disrupts the Wingless, Hedgehog and Decapentaplegic signaling
pathways. Development
131,1927
-1938.
Bullock, S. L., Fletcher, J. M., Beddington, R. S. and Wilson,
V. A. (1998). Renal agenesis in mice homozygous for a gene
trap mutation in the gene encoding heparan sulfate 2-sulfotransferase.
Genes Dev. 12,1894
-1906.
Chen, M. H., Li, Y. J., Kawakami, T., Xu, S. M. and Chuang, P.
T. (2004). Palmitoylation is required for the production of a
soluble multimeric Hedgehog protein complex and long-range signaling in
vertebrates. Genes Dev.
18,641
-659.
Chen, R. L. and Lander, A. D. (2001).
Mechanisms underlying preferential assembly of heparan sulfate on glypican-1.
J. Biol. Chem. 276,7507
-7517.
Coumoul, X. and Deng, C. X. (2003). Roles of FGF receptors in mammalian development and congenital diseases. Birth Defects Res. Part C Embryo Today 69,286 -304.[CrossRef][Medline]
Datta, S. (1995). Control of proliferation
activation in quiescent neuroblasts of the Drosophila central nervous system.
Development 121,1173
-1182.
De Cat, B., Muyldermans, S. Y., Coomans, C., Degeest, G.,
Vanderschueren, B., Creemers, J., Biemar, F., Peers, B. and David, G.
(2003). Processing by proprotein convertases is required for
glypican-3 modulation of cell survival, Wnt signaling, and gastrulation
movements. J. Cell Biol.
163,625
-635.
Desbordes, S. C. and Sanson, B. (2003). The
glypican Dally-like is required for Hedgehog signalling in the embryonic
epidermis of Drosophila. Development
130,6245
-6255.
Dhoot, G. K., Gustafsson, M. K., Ai, X., Sun, W., Standiford, D.
M. and Emerson, C. P., Jr (2001). Regulation of Wnt signaling
and embryo patterning by an extracellular sulfatase.
Science 293,1663
-1666.
Entchev, E. V., Schwabedissen, A. and Gonzalez-Gaitan, M. (2000). Gradient formation of the TGF-beta homolog Dpp. Cell 103,981 -991.[Medline]
Esko, J. D. and Selleck, S. B. (2002). Order out of chaos: assembly of ligand binding sites in heparan sulfate. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 71,435 -471.[CrossRef][Medline]
Esko, J. D. and Zhang, L. (1996). Influence of core protein sequence on glycosaminoglycan assembly. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 6,663 -670.[CrossRef][Medline]
Fujise, M., Izumi, S., Selleck, S. B. and Nakato, H. (2001). Regulation of dally, an integral membrane proteoglycan, and its function during adult sensory organ formation of Drosophila. Dev. Biol. 235,433 -448.[CrossRef][Medline]
Fujise, M., Takeo, S., Kamimura, K., Matsuo, T., Aigaki, T.,
Izumi, S. and Nakato, H. (2003). Dally regulates Dpp
morphogen gradient formation in the Drosophila wing.
Development 130,1515
-1522.
Gallet, A., Rodriguez, R., Ruel, L. and Therond, P. P. (2003). Cholesterol modification of hedgehog is required for trafficking and movement, revealing an asymmetric cellular response to hedgehog. Dev. Cell 4,191 -204.[Medline]
Galli, A., Roure, A., Zeller, R. and Dono, R.
(2003). Glypican 4 modulates FGF signalling and regulates
dorsoventral forebrain patterning in Xenopus embryos.
Development 130,4919
-4929.
Garcia-Garcia, M. J. and Anderson, K. V. (2003). Essential role of glycosaminoglycans in Fgf signaling during mouse gastrulation. Cell 114,727 -737.[CrossRef][Medline]
Gerlitz, O. and Basler, K. (2002). Wingful, an
extracellular feedback inhibitor of Wingless. Genes
Dev. 16,1055
-1059.
Giraldez, A. J., Copley, R. R. and Cohen, S. M. (2002). HSPG modification by the secreted enzyme Notum shapes the Wingless morphogen gradient. Dev. Cell 2, 667-676.[Medline]
Goto, S., Taniguchi, M., Muraoka, M., Toyoda, H., Sado, Y., Kawakita, M. and Hayashi, S. (2001). UDP-sugar transporter implicated in glycosylation and processing of Notch. Nat. Cell Biol. 3,816 -822.[CrossRef][Medline]
Greco, V., Hannus, M. and Eaton, S. (2001). Argosomes: a potential vehicle for the spread of morphogens through epithelia. Cell 106,633 -645.[Medline]
Groppe, J., Rumpel, K., Economides, A. N., Stahl, N., Sebald, W.
and Affolter, M. (1998). Biochemical and biophysical
characterization of refolded Drosophila DPP, a homolog of bone morphogenetic
proteins 2 and 4. J. Biol. Chem.
273,29052
-29065.
Hacker, U., Lin, X. and Perrimon, N. (1997).
The Drosophila sugarless gene modulates Wingless signaling and encodes an
enzyme involved in polysaccharide biosynthesis.
Development 124,3565
-3573.
Haerry, T. E., Heslip, T. R., Marsh, J. L. and O'Connor, M.
B. (1997). Defects in glucuronate biosynthesis disrupt
Wingless signaling in Drosophila. Development
124,3055
-3064.
Han, C., Belenkaya, T. Y., Khodoun, M., Tauchi, M. and Lin,
X. (2004a). Distinct and collaborative roles of Drosophila
EXT family proteins in morphogen signalling and gradient formation.
Development 131,1563
-1575.
Han, C., Belenkaya, T. Y., Wang, B. and Lin, X.
(2004b). Drosophila glypicans control the cell-to-cell movement
of Hedgehog by a dynamin-independent process.
Development 131,601
-611.
Ingham, P. W. and McMahon, A. P. (2001).
Hedgehog signaling in animal development: paradigms and principles.
Genes Dev. 15,3059
-3087.
Jackson, S. M., Nakato, H., Sugiura, M., Jannuzi, A., Oakes, R.,
Kaluza, V., Golden, C. and Selleck, S. B. (1997).
dally, a Drosophila glypican, controls cellular responses to the
TGF-beta-related morphogen, Dpp. Development
124,4113
-4120.
Jeong, J. and McMahon, A. P. (2002).
Cholesterol modification of Hedgehog family proteins. J. Clin.
Invest. 110,591
-596.
Johnson, K. G., Ghose, A., Epstein, E., Lincecum, J., O'Connor, M. B. and van Vactor, D. (2004). Axonal heparan sulfate proteoglycans regulate the distribution and efficiency of the repellent slit during midline axon guidance. Curr. Biol. 14,499 -504.[CrossRef][Medline]
Kamimura, K., Fujise, M., Villa, F., Izumi, S., Habuchi, H.,
Kimata, K. and Nakato, H. (2001). Drosophila heparan sulfate
6-O-sulfotransferase (dHS6ST) gene. Structure, expression, and function in the
formation of the tracheal system. J. Biol. Chem.
276,17014
-17021.
Kamiyama, S., Suda, T., Ueda, R., Suzuki, M., Okubo, R.,
Kikuchi, N., Chiba, Y., Goto, S., Toyoda, H., Saigo, K. et al.
(2003). Molecular cloning and identification of
3'-phosphoadenosine 5'-phosphosulfate transporter. J.
Biol. Chem. 278,25958
-25963.
Khare, N. and Baumgartner, S. (2000). Dally-like protein, a new Drosophila glypican with expression overlapping with wingless. Mech. Dev. 99,199 -202.[CrossRef][Medline]
Kim, B. T., Kitagawa, H., Tamura Ji, J., Kusche-Gullberg, M.,
Lindahl, U. and Sugahara, K. (2002). Demonstration of a novel
gene DEXT3 of Drosophila melanogaster as the essential N-acetylglucosamine
transferase in the heparan sulfate biosynthesis: chain initiation and
elongation. J. Biol. Chem.
277,13659
-13665.
Kirkpatrick, C. A., Dimitroff, B. D., Rawson, J. M. and Selleck, S. B. (2004). Opposing activities of Dally-like Glypican at high and low levels of wingless morphogen activity spatial regulation of wingless morphogen distribution and signaling by Dally-like Protein. Dev. Cell 7,513 -523.[CrossRef][Medline]
Kirsch, T., Sebald, W. and Dreyer, M. K. (2000). Crystal structure of the BMP-2-BRIA ectodomain complex. Nat. Struct. Biol. 7,492 -496.[CrossRef][Medline]
Kreuger, J., Perez, L., Giraldez, A. J. and Cohen, S. M. (2004). Opposing activities of Dally-like Glypican at high and low levels of wingless morphogen activity. Dev. Cell 7, 503-512.[CrossRef][Medline]
Lai, J., Chien, J., Staub, J., Avula, R., Greene, E. L.,
Matthews, T. A., Smith, D. I., Kaufmann, S. H., Roberts, L. R. and Shridhar,
V. (2003). Loss of HSulf-1 up-regulates heparin-binding
growth factor signaling in cancer. J. Biol. Chem.
278,23107
-23117.
Lander, A. D., Nie, Q. and Wan, F. Y. (2002). Do morphogen gradients arise by diffusion? Dev. Cell 2, 785-796.[Medline]
Li, J. P., Gong, F., Hagner-McWhirter, A., Forsberg, E., Abrink,
M., Kisilevsky, R., Zhang, X. and Lindahl, U. (2003).
Targeted disruption of a murine glucuronyl C5-epimerase gene results in
heparan sulfate lacking L-iduronic acid and in neonatal lethality.
J. Biol. Chem. 278,28363
-28366.
Lin, X. and Perrimon, N. (1999). Dally cooperates with Drosophila Frizzled 2 to transduce Wingless signalling. Nature 400,281 -284.[CrossRef][Medline]
Lin, X. and Perrimon, N. (2003). Developmental roles of heparan sulfate proteoglycans in Drosophila. Glycoconj. J. 19,363 -368.[CrossRef]
Lin, X., Buff, E. M., Perrimon, N. and Michelson, A. M.
(1999). Heparan sulfate proteoglycans are essential for FGF
receptor signaling during Drosophila embryonic development.
Development 126,3715
-3723.
Luders, F., Segawa, H., Stein, D., Selva, E. M., Perrimon, N.,
Turco, S. J. and Hacker, U. (2003). Slalom encodes an
adenosine 3'-phosphate 5'-phosphosulfate transporter essential for
development in Drosophila. EMBO J.
22,3635
-3644.
Lum, L., Yao, S., Mozer, B., Rovescalli, A., von Kessler, D.,
Nirenberg, M. and Beachy, P. A. (2003). Identification of
Hedgehog pathway components by RNAi in Drosophila cultured cells.
Science 299,2039
-2045.
Merry, C. L., Bullock, S. L., Swan, D. C., Backen, A. C., Lyon,
M., Beddington, R. S., Wilson, V. A. and Gallagher, J. T.
(2001). The molecular phenotype of heparan sulfate in the
Hs2st/ mutant mouse. J. Biol. Chem.
276,35429
-35434.
Morimoto-Tomita, M., Uchimura, K., Werb, Z., Hemmerich, S. and
Rosen, S. D. (2002). Cloning and characterization of two
extracellular heparin-degrading endosulfatases in mice and humans.
J. Biol. Chem. 277,49175
-49185.
Nakato, H. and Kimata, K. (2002). Heparan sulfate fine structure and specificity of proteoglycan functions. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1573,312 -318.[Medline]
Nakato, H., Futch, T. A. and Selleck, S. B.
(1995). The division abnormally delayed (dally) gene: a putative
integral membrane proteoglycan required for cell division patterning during
postembryonic development of the nervous system in Drosophila.
Development 121,3687
-3702.
Nusse, R. (2003). Wnts and Hedgehogs:
lipid-modified proteins and similarities in signaling mechanisms at the cell
surface. Development
130,5297
-5305.
Nybakken, K. and Perrimon, N. (2002). Heparan sulfate proteoglycan modulation of developmental signaling in Drosophila. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1573,280 -291.[Medline]
Ohkawara, B., Yamamoto, T. S., Tada, M. and Ueno, N.
(2003). Role of glypican 4 in the regulation of convergent
extension movements during gastrulation in Xenopus laevis.
Development 130,2129
-2138.
Ohto, T., Uchida, H., Yamazaki, H., Keino-Masu, K., Matsui, A.
and Masu, M. (2002). Identification of a novel nonlysosomal
sulphatase expressed in the floor plate, choroid plexus and cartilage.
Genes Cells 7,173
-185.
Ornitz, D. M. (2000). FGFs, heparan sulfate and FGFRs: complex interactions essential for development. Bioessays 22,108 -112.[CrossRef][Medline]
Ornitz, D. M. and Itoh, N. (2001). Fibroblast growth factors. Genome Biol. 2, R3005.
Paine-Saunders, S., Viviano, B. L., Zupicich, J., Skarnes, W. C. and Saunders, S. (2000). glypican-3 controls cellular responses to Bmp4 in limb patterning and skeletal development. Dev. Biol. 225,179 -187.[CrossRef][Medline]
Park, Y., Rangel, C., Reynolds, M. M., Caldwell, M. C., Johns, M., Nayak, M., Welsh, C. J., McDermott, S. and Datt, S. (2003). Drosophila perlecan modulates FGF and hedgehog signals to activate neural stem cell division. Dev. Biol. 253,247 -257.[CrossRef][Medline]
Pellegrini, L. (2001). Role of heparan sulfate in fibroblast growth factor signalling: a structural view. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 11,629 -634.[CrossRef][Medline]
Pellegrini, L., Burke, D. F., von Delft, F., Mulloy, B. and Blundell, T. L. (2000). Crystal structure of fibroblast growth factor receptor ectodomain bound to ligand and heparin. Nature 407,1029 -1034.[CrossRef][Medline]
Perrimon, N., Hacker, U., Sanson, B. and Tabata, T.
(2004). Wingless, hedgehog and heparan sulfate proteoglycans.
Development 131,2509
-2513.
Pfeiffer, S., Ricardo, S., Manneville, J. B., Alexandre, C. and Vincent, J. P. (2002). Producing cells retain and recycle Wingless in Drosophila embryos. Curr. Biol. 12,957 -962.[CrossRef][Medline]
Princivalle, M. and de Agostini, A. (2002). Developmental roles of heparan sulfate proteoglycans: a comparative review in Drosophila, mouse and human. Int. J. Dev. Biol. 46,267 -278.[Medline]
Raftery, L. A. and Sutherland, D. J. (1999). TGF-beta family signal transduction in Drosophila development: from Mad to Smads. Dev. Biol. 210,251 -268.[CrossRef][Medline]
Reichsman, F., Smith, L. and Cumberledge, S. (1996). Glycosaminoglycans can modulate extracellular localization of the wingless protein and promote signal transduction. J. Cell Biol. 135,819 -827.[Abstract]
Ruppert, R., Hoffmann, E. and Sebald, W. (1996). Human bone morphogenetic protein 2 contains a heparin-binding site which modifies its biological activity. Eur. J. Biochem. 237,295 -302.[Abstract]
Scheufler, C., Sebald, W. and Hulsmeyer, M. (1999). Crystal structure of human bone morphogenetic protein-2 at 2.7 A resolution. J. Mol. Biol. 287,103 -115.[CrossRef][Medline]
Schlessinger, J., Lax, I. and Lemmon, M. (1995). Regulation of growth factor activation by proteoglycans: what is the role of the low affinity receptors? Cell 83,357 -360.[Medline]
Schlessinger, J., Plotnikov, A. N., Ibrahimi, O. A., Eliseenkova, A. V., Yeh, B. K., Yayon, A., Linhardt, R. J. and Mohammadi, M. (2000). Crystal structure of a ternary FGF-FGFR-heparin complex reveals a dual role for heparin in FGFR binding and dimerization. Mol. Cell 6,743 -750.[Medline]
Selleck, S. B. (2001). Genetic dissection of proteoglycan function in Drosophila and C. elegans. Semin. Cell Dev. Biol. 12,127 -134.[CrossRef][Medline]
Selva, E. M., Hong, K., Baeg, G. H., Beverley, S. M., Turco, S. J., Perrimon, N. and Hacker, U. (2001). Dual role of the fringe connection gene in both heparan sulphate and fringe-dependent signalling events. Nat. Cell Biol. 3, 809-815.[CrossRef][Medline]
Simons, K. and Toomre, D. (2000). Lipid rafts and signal transduction. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 1, 31-39.[CrossRef][Medline]
Song, H. H. and Filmus, J. (2002). The role of glypicans in mammalian development. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1573,241 -246.[Medline]
Spring, J., Paine-Saunders, S. E., Hynes, R. O. and Bernfield, M. (1994). Drosophila syndecan: conservation of a cell-surface heparan sulfate proteoglycan. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 91,3334 -3338.[Abstract]
Srinivasan, S., Rashka, K. E. and Bier, E. (2002). Creation of a Sog morphogen gradient in the Drosophila embryo. Dev. Cell 2,91 -101.[Medline]
Steigemann, P., Molitor, A., Fellert, S., Jackle, H. and Vorbruggen, G. (2004). Heparan sulfate proteoglycan syndecan promotes axonal and myotube guidance by slit/robo signaling. Curr. Biol. 14,225 -230.[CrossRef][Medline]
Strigini, M. and Cohen, S. M. (2000). Wingless gradient formation in the Drosophila wing. Curr. Biol. 10,293 -300.[CrossRef][Medline]
Tabata, T. and Takei, Y. (2004). Morphogens,
their identification and regulation. Development
131,703
-712.
Takei, Y., Ozawa, Y., Sato, M., Watanabe, A. and Tabata, T.
(2004). Three Drosophila EXT genes shape morphogen gradients
through synthesis of heparan sulfate proteoglycans.
Development 131,73
-82.
Tanimoto, H., Itoh, S., ten Dijke, P. and Tabata, T. (2000). Hedgehog creates a gradient of DPP activity in Drosophila wing imaginal discs. Mol. Cell 5, 59-71.[Medline]
Teleman, A. A. and Cohen, S. M. (2000). Dpp gradient formation in the Drosophila wing imaginal disc. Cell 103,971 -980.[Medline]
Teleman, A. A., Strigini, M. and Cohen, S. M. (2001). Shaping morphogen gradients. Cell 105,559 -562.[CrossRef][Medline]
The, I., Bellaiche, Y. and Perrimon, N. (1999). Hedgehog movement is regulated through tout velu-dependent synthesis of a heparan sulfate proteoglycan. Mol. Cell 4, 633-639.[Medline]
Topczewski, J., Sepich, D. S., Myers, D. C., Walker, C., Amores, A., Lele, Z., Hammerschmidt, M., Postlethwait, J. and Solnica-Krezel, L. (2001). The zebrafish glypican knypek controls cell polarity during gastrulation movements of convergent extension. Dev. Cell 1,251 -264.[Medline]
Toyoda, H., Kinoshita-Toyoda, A., Fox, B. and Selleck, S. B.
(2000a). Structural analysis of glycosaminoglycans in animals
bearing mutations in sugarless, sulfateless, and tout-velu. Drosophila
homologues of vertebrate genes encoding glycosaminoglycan biosynthetic
enzymes. J. Biol. Chem.
275,21856
-21861.
Toyoda, H., Kinoshita-Toyoda, A. and Selleck, S. B.
(2000b). Structural analysis of glycosaminoglycans in Drosophila
and Caenorhabditis elegans and demonstration that tout-velu, a Drosophila gene
related to EXT tumor suppressors, affects heparan sulfate in vivo.
J. Biol. Chem. 275,2269
-2275.
Tsuda, M., Kamimura, K., Nakato, H., Archer, M., Staatz, W., Fox, B., Humphrey, M., Olson, S., Futch, T., Kaluza, V. et al. (1999). The cell-surface proteoglycan Dally regulates Wingless signalling in Drosophila. Nature 400,276 -280.[CrossRef][Medline]
Veeman, M. T., Axelrod, J. D. and Moon, R. T. (2003). A second canon. Functions and mechanisms of beta-catenin-independent Wnt signaling. Dev. Cell 5, 367-377.[Medline]
Vincent, J. P. and Dubois, L. (2002). Morphogen transport along epithelia, an integrated trafficking problem. Dev. Cell 3,615 -623.[Medline]
Voigt, A., Pflanz, R., Schafer, U. and Jackle, H. (2002). Perlecan participates in proliferation activation of quiescent Drosophila neuroblasts. Dev. Dyn. 224,403 -412.[CrossRef][Medline]
Wang, S., Ai, X., Freeman, S. D., Pownall, M. E., Lu, Q.,
Kessler, D. S. and Emerson, C. P., Jr (2004). QSulf1, a
heparan sulfate 6-O-endosulfatase, inhibits fibroblast growth factor signaling
in mesoderm induction and angiogenesis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
USA 101,4833
-4838.
Wodarz, A. and Nusse, R. (1998). Mechanisms of Wnt signaling in development. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 14,59 -88.[CrossRef][Medline]
Zak, B. M., Crawford, B. E. and Esko, J. D. (2002). Hereditary multiple exostoses and heparan sulfate polymerization. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1573,346 -355.[Medline]
Zeng, X., Goetz, J. A., Suber, L. M., Scott, W. J., Jr, Schreiner, C. M. and Robbins, D. J. (2001). A freely diffusible form of Sonic hedgehog mediates long-range signalling. Nature 411,716 -720.[CrossRef][Medline]