- THIS ARTICLE
-
Abstract
- Full Text (PDF)
- Alert me when this article is cited
- Alert me if a correction is posted
- SERVICES
- Email this article to a friend
- Similar articles in this journal
- Similar articles in PubMed
- Alert me to new issues of the journal
- Download to citation manager
- Reprints & Permissions
- CITING ARTICLES
- Citing Articles via HighWire
- Citing Articles via Google Scholar
- GOOGLE SCHOLAR
- Articles by Muller, M.
- Articles by Schedl, P.
- Search for Related Content
- PUBMED
- PubMed Citation
- Articles by Muller, M.
- Articles by Schedl, P.
The Mcp Element From the Drosophila melanogaster Bithorax Complex Mediates Long-Distance Regulatory Interactions
Martin Muller1,a, Kirsten Hagstroma, Henrik Gyurkovicsb, Vincenzo Pirrottac, and Paul Schedlaa Department of Molecular Biology, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey 08540,
b Institute of Genetics, Biological Research Center, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, 6701 Szeged, Hungary
c Department of Zoology, University of Geneva, CH1211 Geneva, Switzerland
Corresponding author: Paul Schedl, Department of Molecular Biology, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544., pschedl{at}molbio.princeton.edu (E-mail)
Communicating editor: S. HENIKOFF
 | ABSTRACT |
|---|
 TOP ABSTRACT MATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONLITERATURE CITED |
|---|
In the studies reported here, we have examined the properties of the Mcp element from the Drosophila melanogaster bithorax complex (BX-C). We have found that sequences from the Mcp region of BX-C have properties characteristic of Polycomb response elements (PREs), and that they silence adjacent reporters by a mechanism that requires trans-interactions between two copies of the transgene. However, Mcp trans-regulatory interactions have several novel features. In contrast to classical transvection, homolog pairing does not seem to be required. Thus, trans-regulatory interactions can be observed not only between Mcp transgenes inserted at the same site, but also between Mcp transgenes inserted at distant sites on the same chromosomal arm, or even on different arms. Trans-regulation can even be observed between transgenes inserted on different chromosomes. A small 800-bp Mcp sequence is sufficient to mediate these long-distance trans-regulatory interactions. This small fragment has little silencing activity on its own and must be combined with other Polycomb-Group-responsive elements to function as a "pairing-sensitive" silencer. Finally, this pairing element can also mediate long-distance interactions between enhancers and promoters, activating mini-white expression.
THE trans-regulatory interactions (often called transvection) that depend upon homolog pairing have been documented extensively in Drosophila. One of the first examples of transvection was described by 
An important criterion for establishing that transvection is responsible for a given intergenic interaction is the demonstration that this interaction is affected by chromosomal rearrangements that disrupt pairing between the two copies of the gene. In the case of Ubx, rearrangements with breakpoints anywhere centromere proximal to the BX-C locus at 89E on the right arm of the third chromosome interfere with pairing in BX-C and suppress transvection (
Trans-regulatory interactions do not always involve the activation of a promoter by an enhancer located on the other chromosome; they can also involve trans-interactions between negative elements or silencers. The classic example of a pairing-dependent negative regulatory interaction is that induced by the neomorphic zeste mutation z1 on the X-linked white (w) gene (
The Pc-G genes encode a heterogeneous group of proteins that play a key role in the regulation of the homeotic genes in the Antennapedia and Bithorax complexes, as well as other genes, like engrailed (en), that control cell fate decisions (
Experiments with homeotic reporter constructs have identified elements in several of the BX-C cis-regulatory domains that appear to be targets for Pc-G (and perhaps also trx-G) action. When these elements (called Polycomb response elements or PREs) are combined with parasegment-specific initiation elements, they are able to maintain segmentally restricted patterns of expression conferred on the reporter by the initiation elements (
In the studies described here, we have investigated the trans-regulatory activities of the Mcp element from BX-C. Mcp was initially identified because deletions of the element cause a dominant gain-of-function transformation of PS9 into PS10 (
With the aim of distinguishing between these models, we tested fragments from the Mcp region of BX-C in a number of different transgene assays. While we have not resolved the question of whether Mcp corresponds to a silencer, a boundary, or both (as is the case for the element deleted by another BX-C gain-of-function mutation, Fab-71;
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
| TOPABSTRACTMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONLITERATURE CITED |
|---|
Plasmids and P-element constructs:
Mcp element:
A BX-C subclone, 
3908, spanning the Mcp region of BX-C was obtained from Dr. S. Sakonju (
|
The P-elements:
- w#1 and w#2 transgenes: These two mini-white reporter constructs are identical to the P elements used by
HAGSTROM et al. 1996 and were derived from a similar P element (pRW) described inVAZQUEZ and SCHEDL 1994 . - ftz:ftz promoter/LacZ transposon: ff#1 has been described previously by
HAGSTROM et al. 1996 . It contains unique XhoI and NotI sites between the Zebra and the Neurogenic enhancer elements originating from the fushi tarazu (ftz) cis-regulatory region (HIROMI et al. 1985 ). - wy#1 and wy#2 transposon: The yellow gene contained in these two P elements corresponds to the D-1868 BglII fragment in
GEYER and CORCES 1987 except that the yellow gene is the intronless yellow gene (MALLIN et al. 1998 ; DNA obtained from P. Geyer). It contains the body color enhancer element (bce) that directs yellow gene expression in the cuticle of the adult fly. - yw#1 transposon: This construct contains a fragment from the yellow gene including the whole yellow intron.
P-element transformation:
From each P-element construct, 0.5 mg/ml DNA was injected along with P-turbo helper plasmid (pUChspD2-3wc) into w1 or Df(1)w67c23,y-, respectively. Transformants were detected by rescue of the white- eye-color phenotype or the rescue of the yellow- body-color phenotype, respectively. Crosses to marked balancer chromosomes were performed to generate balanced stocks and to determine the chromosome of insertion for each line.
Isolation of transvection-suppressing rearrangements R(ff#10.5):
Transvection suppressing rearrangements on the ff#10.5 chromosome were isolated essentially as described by
Chromatin studies:
DNase I digests of embryonic nuclei isolated from wild-type and transgenic lines were preformed and analyzed as in
Scoring eye colors:
The pigmentation of the fly eye as a consequence of mini-white gene expression depends strongly on the age and the sex of the fly (
Testing for pairing sensitivity: A particular Mcp, mini-white insert was considered to be "pairing sensitive" if the eye color of the homozygous insert was either lighter or indistinguishable from the eye color of the heterozygous insert. The latter rule was not applied when flies with darkly pigmented eyes were compared. Such lines were considered as non-pairing-sensitive lines. A few of the transgenic lines obtained displayed nonuniform or mottled pigmentation patterns; however, the mini-white expression in these lines changed appropriately with dose. Such lines were not scored as pairing sensitive, though we observed that the pattern could be modified in certain Pc-G mutant backgrounds.
Testing for nonhomologous pairing-sensitive repression: Flies of the genotype P1+/+P2 were compared to P1/+ and P2/+ control flies. Two transgene inserts, P1 and P2, were considered to interact strongly if the eye color of P1+/+P2 flies was lighter than both heterozygous controls. An interaction was scored as moderate if the P1+/+P2 flies had lighter eye color than the darker of the two controls. All test crosses performed for the third chromosome were done reciprocally, and the same results were obtained.
P1P2/++ recombinants were established from interacting pairs for which the P1+/+P2 combination had a clearly distinct eye-color phenotype compared to P1/+ and P2/+ parental flies. P1+/+P2 virgins were crossed to w1 males, and the progeny was screened for males with the expected eye phenotype. Balanced stocks were established for at least two individual recombinant males recovered for a particular P1P2/++ combination, and the same results were obtained for them in the P1P2/++ vs. P1+/+P2 test. Some of the recombinants obtained were verified by crossing P1P2/++ virgins with w1 males. In all cases, P1/+ and P2/+ eye colors reappeared in the F1 generation. The w#14.17,w#11.102 recombinant was also verified by in situ hybridization to salivary gland chromosomes.
The eye color of P1P2/P1+ flies was compared to that of P2/+ flies for combinations where the homozygous P1 insert on its own had essentially white eyes due to pairing-sensitive inactivation of the mini-white gene. The P2 insert in the P1P2/P1+ combination was scored as interacting with P1/P1 if the eye color of P1P2/P1+ flies was lighter than that of P2/+ controls. The same rules apply for inserts located on different chromosomes.
Testing for trans-activation: All possible intrachromosomal crosses between {w#21 and wy#1} and {yw#1 and wy#2} lines were established, and the eye color of the resulting trans-heterozygous flies was compared to the eye color of the parental controls (w#21/+ and yw#1/+, respectively).
Mutant strains:
The following mutant chromosomes were used to study the effect of Pc-G alleles on Mcp-mediated repression and trans-activation: Pc106 has a point mutation in the chromodomain (
Immunohistochemical staining of embryos:
The method used was that described in
| RESULTS |
|---|
| TOPABSTRACTMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONLITERATURE CITED |
|---|
Mcp mediates the pairing-dependent inactivation of the mini white gene:
Three Mcp alleles, Mcp1, McpH27, and McpB116, have been characterized in detail (
To test the activity of Mcp isolated from its normal environment in BX-C, we introduced a 2.9-kb restriction fragment spanning the prominent hypersensitive site into the mini-white reporter construct w#2 (Figure 1B). w#2 has the white enhancer upstream of the mini-white gene, and, in the absence of negative chromosomal position effects, this construct is expected to give transgenic animals that have near wild-type eye color (
The eye-color phenotypes of the transgenic lines for the control constructs fell in the expected range and changed appropriately with transgene dose: the w#2 transgenic lines typically had dark-orange to red eye pigmentation, while flies homozygous for the transgene had noticeably darker eye colors than their heterozygous sibs. When the Mcp fragment is located in the blocking position, as in w#12 or w#13, the eye pigmentation of flies carrying a single copy of the construct was reduced compared to the w#2 control (data not shown). The effects of the Mcp fragment on mini-white expression were most clear cut for w#13, where >90% of the lines were less pigmented than the w#2 lines. Conversely, when the Mcp fragment was located in the upstream positions, as in w#14, the eye color of the transgenic lines was the same or darker than w#2. By way of comparison, when the Fab-7 boundary element was placed in the blocking position in the mini-white transgene, a reduction in eye color was observed in ~50% of the lines (
While these findings would seem to be consistent with an enhancer blocking activity, this interpretation is complicated by other observations. First, a significant fraction (from 5 to 25%, depending on the transgene) of the Mcp lines have variegating eye pigmentation as heterozygotes (see P/+ in Figure 2A and Figure B). Second, while mini-white expression for the control construct is typically proportional to the dose of the transgene, most of the w#12, w#13, and w#14 transgenic lines do not become darker when there are two copies of the transgene. Instead, the eye color of the homozygous flies is either the same (Figure 2C) or lighter (Figure 2A and Figure B) than their sibs that have only a single copy of the transgene. In some cases, mini-white expression in homozygous animals is virtually undetectable (Figure 2E), while in other cases, mini-white is expressed at high levels in only part of the eye (Figure 2D). This phenomenon is known as pairing-sensitive silencing (PS) and is a characteristic feature of DNA segments containing PREs.
|
As indicated in Figure 1A, there is little difference in the frequency of PS lines for constructs w#12 and w#13. Since PS activity does not seem to depend upon the orientation of the 2.9-kb Mcp fragment, this would argue against a directional silencing mechanism. Similarly, the position of the Mcp fragment relative to the enhancer and promoter does not seem to have a major effect on silencing activity. To determine whether the presence of the white enhancer might reduce the apparent silencing activity, we cloned the Mcp fragment into a mini-white construct, w#1, which lacks the enhancer, to give construct w#11. Pairing-sensitive w#11 lines were recovered at the same frequency as that observed for the transgenes carrying the white enhancer (see Figure 1A).
Mcp silences yellow but not fushi tarazu:
We wondered whether Mcp would silence genes other than mini-white. To address this question, we introduced the 2.9-kb Mcp fragment into transgenes containing ftz and y. ftz is expressed in the early embryo (
ftz transgene: Even though the 2.9-kb Mcp fragment is located farther away from the mini-white gene in the ftz-LacZ construct, the frequency (~45%) of mini-white silencing in the ftz construct is close to that observed in mini-white vectors lacking ftz DNA. While Mcp silences mini-white in this transgene, we were unable to detect any silencing of the ftz gene, either in early embryos, when it is expressed in a stripe pattern, or in older embryos, when it is expressed in the central nervous system. Shown in Figure 2G and Figure H, is the expression pattern of the Ftz-ß-galactosidase fusion protein in embryos from two ff#10 lines: one that shows PS silencing of mini-white (Figure 2G) and one that does not (Figure 2H). The expression patterns are indistinguishable and similar to those seen in control ftz constructs.
y transgene: While Mcp is apparently unable to silence the ftz gene in embryos, it can silence y. Of the 10 wy#2 lines, 2 show evidence of silencing. As illustrated for one of the PS lines in Figure 2F, homozygous males display patchy pigmentation in abdominal segments A5 and A6 due to pairing-dependent variegation of the y gene. It is unclear why the frequency of pairing-sensitive lines for mini-white and y differ. It is possible that the y promoter is more resistant to Mcp-induced repression than the mini-white promoter. On the other hand, the difference may simply reflect the fact that it is easier to detect small changes in eye pigmentation than it is in body pigmentation.
A 0.81-kb Mcp fragment containing the major DNase I-hypersensitive site is necessary but not sufficient for silencing:
To more precisely define the sequences required for pairing-sensitive silencing, we subdivided the 2.9-kb Mcp fragment into three different regions: a proximal 1.2-kb EcoRI-SalI fragment, a central ~800-bp SalI-XbaI fragment that contains the prominent nuclease-hypersensitive site, and a distal ~900-bp XbaI-EcoRI fragment. Different combinations of these subfragments were then tested for PS activity in the w enhancer mini-white vector. As summarized in Figure 1D, nearly full silencing activity could be reconstituted by combining the central ~800-bp SalI-XbaI fragment with either the proximal (w#17) or the distal (w#16) subfragment. The central subfragment seems to be a critical component since strong silencing activity could not be regenerated by combining just the proximal and distal fragments (w#18). While the central fragment is required for silencing, it is not in itself sufficient to induce silencing of the mini-white reporter either with (w#19) or without (w#21) the w enhancer.
These findings are consistent with the idea that Mcp silencing requires two distinct activities: one provided by the central subfragment that contains the 0.4-kb Mcp nuclease-hypersensitive site, and a second by subsidiary elements contained either in the proximal or distal subfragment. This possibility is supported by experiments in which we introduced the central subfragment into different versions of the ftz-LacZ transgene. When the central ~800-bp fragment is incorporated into the starting ftz-LacZ transgene (ff#13), efficient silencing of mini-white is observed, and about three-quarters of the lines are PS (Figure 1F). A high frequency of PS is also observed when this subfragment is included in ftz-LacZ transgenes that lack either the UPS (ff#14) or the UPS and NE upstream (ff#15) enhancers. The high frequency of PS lines obtained with these three ftz-LacZ transgenes indicates that some sequence in the ftz fusion gene can effectively substitute for subsidiary element(s) in the proximal or distal Mcp subfragments. This subsidiary element presumably lies within either the ftz promoter or the Zebra element. Like ftz, sequences from the y gene can also restore the silencing activity of the central ~800-bp fragment (see Figure 1G).
Mcp repression of mini-white depends upon Pc-G group genes:
PREs located elsewhere in BX-C require proteins in the Polycomb group for their silencing activity (
|
Of the Pc-G proteins characterized to date, only one, the product of the pleiohomeotic (pho) gene, is known to bind directly to DNA. The pho gene encodes a zinc-finger protein and appears to be the fly homolog of the mammalian YY1 transcription factor (
|
Chromatin structure of PS and non-PS transgenes:
The experiments described in the previous section indicate that sequences in the central Mcp subfragment are critical for silencing activity. When located in the context of BX-C, this particular DNA segment contains a prominent nuclease-hypersensitive region. We wondered whether this nuclease-hypersensitive region is reformed when the Mcp fragment is included in transgenes, and whether there are any differences in the chromatin structure of PS and non-PS lines. To address these questions, we DNase I digested 12- to 24-hr embryonic nuclei prepared from two different ff#10 transgenic lines, one of which was pairing sensitive (ff#10.5) and the other not (ff#10.19.1). Indirect end labeling was then used to examine the DNase I cleavage pattern in the Mcp element of each transgene and as a control in the endogenous BX-C element (not shown).
The DNase I cleavage pattern in the ff#10 transgene chromatin was examined by probing Asp718 restriction digests with a 32P-labeled fragment derived from the ftz UPS element. Asp718 generates a restriction fragment of ~10 kb from the endogenous ftz gene and a much larger (>20 kb) fragment from each of the ff#10 transgene inserts. Both of these full-length restriction fragments are observed in naked ff#10 genomic DNA (not shown) and in DNA prepared from transgenic nuclei that have been lightly digested with DNase I (see Figure 4, left, top two bands). In addition to the two restriction fragments, we observe a less strongly labeled band of ~6 kb (see arrow in Figure 4) in the DNase I chromatin digests of both the pairing-sensitive and the non-pairing-sensitive lines. The yield of this ~6-kb fragment appears to be slightly greater from the pairing-sensitive line.
|
Significantly, a ~6-kb DNase I cleavage product is not observed when DNase I digests of 12- to 24-hr wild-type nuclei (that lack the ff#10 transgene) are hybridized with the ftz UPS probe (Figure 4). Thus, it would appear that this subfragment is derived from DNase I cleavage in the chromatin of the ff#10 transgene and not in the chromatin of the endogenous ftz gene. To confirm this suggestion, we restricted DNA isolated from the ff#10.5 and ff#10.19.1 DNase I digests with Asp718 and BalI. In the endogenous ftz gene, BalI cleaves ~5 kb from the Asp718 site. In the ff#10 transgene, BalI cleaves ~7.5 kb from the Asp718 restriction site. If the ~6-kb DNase I cleavage product is derived from the endogenous gene, it should disappear after BalI restriction, while it should remain if it is derived from the ff#10 transgene. As can be seen in Figure 4, the 6.0-kb DNase I cleavage product is still observed after BalI digestion, indicating that it must be derived from cleavage in ff#10 transgene chromatin. On the basis of the size of the 6-kb fragment, the DNase I cleavage site in the transgene chromatin would map to the center of the Mcp fragment (see Figure 1) at approximately the same position as the DNase I cleavage site in the Mcp element of BX-C.
Chromosomal rearrangements that suppress transvection in BX-C do not disrupt Mcp-mediated silencing of mini-white:
We chose a pairing-sensitive Mcp transposon ff#10.5, which is inserted close to BX-C at 91A. As in wild type, the Ubx gene on the ff#10.5 homolog is activated by Cbx when trans to a Cbx Ubx chromosome, giving a wing with an abnormal shape and an alula that is greatly reduced in size. We selected for X-ray-induced rearrangements in the ff#10.5 chromosome that suppress these Cbx gain-of-function phenotypes when trans to the Cbx Ubx chromosome. The four strongest transvection-suppressing rearrangements [R(ff#10.5)] were analyzed cytologically. As indicated in Figure 5A, they have at least one breakpoint in the critical region, which Lewis showed disrupts pairing in BX-C.
|
We then combined each of the four rearranged chromosomes [R(ff#10.5)] with the original ff#10.5 chromosome and examined the eye-color phenotype. Since these four rearrangements suppress transvection at BX-C, we anticipated that they would also suppress the pairing-sensitive silencing of mini-white in the nearby Mcp ff#10.5 transgene. In all four cases, however, the eye color of the R(ff#10.5)/ff#10.5 animals was indistinguishable from that of the control ff#10.5 homozygotes. This can be seen for one of the R(ff#10.5)ff#10.5 combinations in Figure 5A. Moreover, precisely the same result was obtained when we combined the R(ff#10.5) chromosomes in all possible pairwise combinations; in every case, the pairing-sensitive silencing of mini-white was equivalent to that observed in animals homozygous for the starting ff#10.5 transgene (not shown). These findings indicate that rearrangements that suppress transvection in the Ubx locus are incapable of interfering with the pairing-sensitive silencing of mini-white by the Mcp element in the ff#10.5 transgene.
Silencing interactions between transgenes inserted at different chromosomal sites:
The enhancer-promoter interactions involved in CbxUbx/++ transvection are quite sensitive to perturbations in homolog pairing and can be disrupted by DNA rearrangements located at a considerable distance from BX-C. Hence, it is conceivable that the breakpoints we recovered in our screen are too far from 91A to effectively perturb homolog pairing in the vicinity of the ff#10.5 transgene insertion. Since the closest proximal breakpoint in the four rearrangements is at 88C, this would argue that the critical region for silencing by the Mcp element in the ff#10.5 transgene insert might be considerably smaller than the critical region for breakpoints that can disrupt the CbxUbx/++ transvection. To test the most extreme version of this hypothesis, we asked whether the ff#10.5 transgene can participate in silencing interactions with Mcp transgenes inserted at other sites on the third chromosome. For this purpose, we crossed the ff#10.5 line to nine pairing-sensitive Mcp transgene lines located at sites on both arms of the third chromosome and scored the eye-color phenotype of the trans-heterozygotes for mini-white silencing.
Remarkably, we observed long-distance trans-silencing interactions with five of the nine heteropartners (see Table 2A and Figure 5B). Although the ff#10.5 transgene only interacts with partners inserted on the right arm of 3R (see Figure 6 and Table 2A), the five interacting transgenes are located at a considerable distance from ff#10.5. The two closest are more than two numbered divisions away (at 87D and 93D), while the other three are between five and eight numbered divisions away. These findings indicate that unlike CbxUbx/++ transvection, uninterrupted homolog pairing in the vicinity of the transgene is not required for the silencing activity of the Mcp element in the ff#10.5 transgene. Moreover, the critical region would appear to be no larger than the transgene itself. Another curious feature of this long-distance interaction is that the eye color of the trans-combination is usually rather homogenous (see Figure 5). Moreover, similar levels of pigmentation are seen in different individuals. Thus, this trans-interaction appears to occur with a rather high fidelity.
|
|
We wondered whether the long-distance trans-silencing activity of the ff#10.5 transgene was unique to this particular insert or a general property of transgenes containing the Mcp element. To answer this question, we crossed the nine third chromosome pairing-sensitive Mcp transgene lines in all possible pairwise combinations and examined the eye-color phenotype. Transsilencing interactions were scored as "moderate" when the eye color of the trans-heterozygous combination (P1 +/+ P2) was lighter than one of the heterozygous parents P1/+ or P2/+, while the interaction was scored as strong when the trans-heterozygous combination (P1 +/+ P2) was lighter than both parents. The w#14.29/w#11.102 combination shown in Figure 5C is an example of a moderate long-distance trans-silencing interaction, while the w#11.16/w#11.102 combination is an example of a strong trans-silencing interaction.
As can be seen in Table 2B, long-distance trans-silencing interactions were observed in half (18 of 36) of the possible trans-heterozygote combinations. In general, long-distance silencing interactions were strongest between the nearest neighbors and weakened as the distance between the partners increased; however, some of the strongly interacting partners were located at considerable distances (8–10 numbered divisions; see Figure 6). While the ff#10.5 transgene did not show any trans-silencing interactions with inserts on the other chromosomal arm (3L), six of the nine transgenes in this group interacted with at least one heteropartner on the opposite arm. In all cases, these interactions fell into the moderate category. As was true for the silencing activity of the Mcp transgene in animals homozygous for a particular insert (homopartners), long-distance trans-silencing between heteropartners requires Pc-G genes (see Table 1).
Long-distance silencing interactions between Mcp transgenes are not restricted to inserts on the third chromosome. We generated all possible pairwise combinations between 14 pairing-sensitive Mcp lines on the second chromosome and 8 pairing-sensitive lines on the X chromosome and then scored the eye-color phenotype as described above. Long-distance trans-silencing was observed in 25% of the second-chromosome trans-heterozygous combinations and 39% of the X-chromosome trans-heterozygous combinations.
Long-distance silencing in cis:
Since trans-silencing interactions are observed between Mcp transgenes located at sites many thousands of kilobases apart, it is clear that the two transgenes do not have to be imbedded in a large region of uninterrupted homolog pairing to establish functional silencing complexes. If homolog pairing is not required for silencing, it would seem possible that long-distance silencing interactions might occur not only in trans, but also in cis. To test this possibility, we generated recombinants between 11 Mcp transgene pairs on the third chromosome that exhibited long-distance trans-silencing interactions. In all cases, the eye color of the cis-combination was either the same or slightly lighter than the trans-combination. The cis-trans comparison for one pair, w#14.29 and w#13.101, is shown in Figure 7A. These findings indicate that the Mcp element can mediate long-distance silencing interactions not only in trans, but also in cis.
|
Rescuing the silencing-defective w#21 transgene by long-distance trans-interactions:
Since only 1 of the 34 w#21 lines showed mini-white silencing as a homozygote, we concluded that the ~800-bp Mcp SalI-XbaI fragment in this transgene is not able to promote the assembly of a functional silencing complex on its own. However, we found that the silencing activity of the ~800-bp SalI-XbaI fragment could be "rescued" when it was combined, in the same transgene, with a "subsidiary" element. Complementing subsidiary elements included adjacent proximal or distal Mcp sequences, as well as heterologous sequences from either the ftz or y genes. We wondered whether the silencing activity of the defective ~800-bp SalI-XbaI fragment could be rescued by long-distance interactions with other pairing-sensitive Mcp transgenes. To answer this question, we tested pairwise combinations between non-pairing-sensitive w#21 insertions (10 on the second and 10 on the third chromosome) and pairing-sensitive Mcp transgene inserts on the same chromosome.
Only 1 out of the 40 pairwise combinations on the second chromosome showed evidence of complementation (Table 3); however, this interaction could be classified as strong because the eye color of the P1+/+P2 flies was lighter than flies heterozygous for either of the parental inserts. On the third chromosome, the frequency of complementation was much higher, and 8 out of 40 pairs were scored as interacting. Two examples of complementing combinations are shown in Figure 7B. These findings indicate that the silencing-defective ~800-bp Mcp fragment can be rescued by long-distance interactions with pairing-sensitive Mcp transgenes. It is interesting to note that one of the complementing partners, ff#13.101, has the same ~800-bp Mcp fragment as w#21; however, this 800-bp fragment is inserted into the ftz reporter. As described above, the ftz reporter has cis-acting elements that can substitute for the subsidiary elements present in larger Mcp fragments.
|
Long-distance silencing interactions are enhanced when the transgene is flanked by scs and scs':
The long-distance regulatory activity of the Mcp element can be enhanced by placing it in a mini-white transgene, w#15 (see Figure 1), which is flanked by scs and scs'. We recovered 12 independent w#15 lines, 7 homozygous viable and 5 homozygous lethal. Five of the 7 homozygous viable lines were pairing sensitive, and the differences in eye color of the hetero- and homozygous animals can be quite dramatic in these lines (see Figure 8). Of the 5 homozygous lethal lines, 3 had a variegated eye-color phenotype that was alleviated by Pc-G mutations. To test for trans-silencing, we generated all possible pairwise combinations between the 5 pairing-sensitive lines and the 3 variegating lethal lines. Analysis of these pairwise combinations reveals that the long-distance silencing activity of Mcp in the w#15 transgene is more robust than in the other Mcp transgenes we tested.
|
As indicated in Table 4, long-distance silencing was observed in each combination of the w#15 inserts on the second chromosome and on the third chromosome. By comparison, the other Mcp transgenes interacted in trans in at most half of the possible pairwise combinations (see Table 2). Since there was only one w#15 insert on the X chromosome, we crossed this line, w#15.60, to the eight X-linked, pairing-sensitive lines tested previously (see above) for trans-silencing interactions. Long-distance trans-silencing interactions were observed with all eight X-linked partners. Again, by comparison, when these eight X-linked transgenes were combined with each other, trans-silencing was observed in less than half of the 28 possible combinations.
|
Long-distance silencing interactions were also observed between w#15 transgenes inserted on different chromosomes. For example, the X-linked transgene w#15.60 interacted with three of the four w#15 inserts on the second chromosome (Figure 8) and with one of the three w#15 inserts on the third chromosome (see Table 4). In fact, all the w#15 transgenes tested interacted with at least one partner on another chromosome. The most potent of these is w#15.48 (Table 4 and Figure 8), which interacts with all but one w#15 transgene on the second chromosome and with the X-linked insert. (Although a systematic study has not been done, we tested whether some of the other Mcp transgenes can establish interchromosomal silencing complexes. We found several combinations in which inserts on different chromosomes interacted.)
Long-distance silencing with more than two partners:
In the experiments described thus far, we examined interactions between two Mcp-containing transgenes, either inserted at precisely the same site (homo) or inserted at different sites (hetero). We wondered whether the establishment of functional silencing complexes between homopartners would be perturbed or enhanced by the presence of potential heteropartners. To address this question, we took advantage of the recombinant chromosomes that were generated to test for long-distance cis-silencing interactions. We used these recombinant chromosomes to examine silencing interactions between three or four possible partners.
The simplest cases are the homozygous recombinants P1P2/P1P2, in which both of the starting homopartners, P1/P1 and P2/P2, have white eyes. Six of the recombinants fell into this category. In all six cases, the silencing activity of the heteropartners (either as P1+/+P2 or as P1P2/++) was weaker than the homopartners (P1/P1 and P2/P2), and the eyes were pigmented (though less pigmented than at least one of the two "parental" transgenes, P1/+ or P2/+). If interactions between heteropartners interfere with homopartner interactions, weakening the silencing activity, the eyes of the P1P2/P1P2 homozygotes should become pigmented. In all six cases, however, the eye color of the P1P2/P1P2 combination is white. In the five remaining P1P2 recombinants, at least one of the homopartner interactions (P1-P1 or P2-P2) does not completely silence mini-white, and the flies have pigmented eyes. In these recombinants, it should be possible to detect both a weakening (more pigmentation than the homopartner) or a strengthening (less pigmentation than the homopartner) of the silencing interactions. In all five cases, the eye color of the P1P2/P1/P2 animals was that expected for the "sum" of the eye colors observed in the P1/P1 and P2/P2 animals. These results are consistent with the idea that homopartner interactions are the preferred configuration.
If silencing complexes are preferentially established between homopartners, do these interactions inhibit the formation of silencing complexes with a heteropartner? To address this question, we examined the eye color of animals that have three interacting Mcp transgenes, P1P2/P1+. For these experiments, we specifically chose combinations in which the eye color of the homopartner P1/P1 was white. In this case, if the P2 transgene can interact with the P1/P1 homopartners, the eye color of the P1P2/P1+ animals should be lighter than that of the control P2/+ animals. As can be seen in Table 5, homopartner interactions can weaken heteropartner interactions; several transgenes (e.g., ff13.101/w#14.29 or ff#10.5/w#12.43) that establish silencing complexes in pairs do not interact when a homopartner is available. However, the presence of a homopartner does not exclude heteropartner interactions (e.g., w#12.43/w#11.102 or w#14.17/w#11.102 in Table 5 and Figure 9). In fact, as illustrated in the bottom panels of Figure 9, tripartite silencing complexes can be established even between w#15 transgenes located on different chromosomes (e.g., w#15.60 and w#15.102 on the X and second chromosomes or w#15.60 and w#15.48 on the X and third chromosomes, respectively). In general, when a tripartite silencing complex can be established between a single P2 heteropartner and a P1 homopartner pair, a silencing complex can also be established in the reciprocal combination, between a P2 homopartner pair and a P1 heteropartner (see Figure 9). In the examples shown in Figure 9, the eye color of the reciprocal tripartite combinations are quite similar; however, this is not always the case.
|
|
The 0.81-kb Mcp fragment is sufficient to mediate long-distance "pairing" interactions:
One supposition we have made in the preceding sections is that long-distance silencing is mediated by sequences in the Mcp element and not by sequences elsewhere in the various transgenes. However, all of the transgenes tested for long-distance silencing have in common not only the Mcp element, but also sequences from the mini-white gene and scs'. Hence, it is conceivable that these other sequences could either mediate or contribute to "homologous pairing" between transgenes inserted at distant sites. To ascertain if the Mcp element alone is sufficient to promote these long-distance regulatory interactions, we asked whether functional silencing complexes could be established between Mcp transgenes sharing as few sequences as possible. For this purpose, we took advantage of the second chromosome pairing-sensitive wy#2.63 transgene line, which contains yellow instead of mini-white as the transformation marker (plus the white enhancer). We crossed this yellow transgene line to 16 pairing-sensitive mini-white transgenes on the second chromosomes. Long-distance silencing interactions were scored if the wy#2.63 +/+ P{Mcp, mini-white} trans-heterozygotes had a lighter eye pigmentation than the P{Mcp, mini-white}/+ controls.
Mini-white silencing was observed in half (or 8/16) of the trans-heterozygotes. This frequency is equivalent if not greater than that observed in crosses between Mcp transgenes containing additional homologous sequences, such as mini-white or ftz (for the second chromosome the frequency was 25%). In three cases, long-distance silencing was observed when the wy#2.63 line was combined with an ff#15 transgene. As can be seen from Figure 1, the only sequence in common between wy#2 and ff#15 is the central 0.81-kb Mcp fragment, which contains the DNase I-hypersensitive site (and the P vector). This finding argues that the central 0.81-kb Mcp sequence is sufficient to mediate long-distance silencing interactions.
While mini-white silencing was observed in many of the wy#2/P{Mcp, mini-white} combinations, there was little obvious silencing of the y gene. The one exception is a combination between wy#2.63 and the transgene line ff#15.3, in which y expression is clearly variegated (not shown). This combination also gave the strongest reduction in mini-white expression among the eight wy#2/P{Mcp, mini-white} interacting pairs.
Long-distance interactions with other PREs:
Silencing interactions between homo- and, in some cases, heteropartners have been described for, among others, the engrailed, escargot (esg), iab-7, and bxd PREs (
Mcp can mediate long-distance enhancer-promoter interactions:
A second supposition is that long-distance silencing involves some type of "pairing" between Mcp elements, which brings transgenes inserted at different sites (or on different chromosomes) in close proximity. If this is correct, then this pairing might bring an enhancer located on one Mcp transgene in close enough proximity to a promoter located on another Mcp transgene to trans-activate expression. To test for Mcp-mediated, long-distance trans-activation, we combined two different pairs of transgenes, w#21 and wy#1 and yw#1 and wy#2 (see Figure 1). In the first combination, the w enhancer in the wy#1 transgene could potentially trans-activate the mini-white reporter in the w#21 transgene. In the second combination, we could observe not only trans-activation of mini-white, but also trans-activation of yellow. To trans-activate, the enhancer and promoter must be brought together by the pairing of the Mcp elements, and, at the same time, must overcome the inhibitory effects of any Pc-G complexes assembled on the paired Mcp elements. We only tested transgene pairs that were inserted on the same chromosome; however, many inserts that showed no silencing activity when homozygous were included in this collection.
We found that the white enhancer in one insert can trans-activate the mini-white reporter in another insert. However, the frequency of long-distance trans-activation is quite low, much less than the frequency of long-distance silencing that is observed when two different pairing-sensitive inserts are combined (>30%). In the first combination, w#21+/+wy#1, the white enhancer stimulated the mini-white reporter in only 1 out of >200 pairs. This pair consists of w#21.124 and wy#1.83. By themselves, neither of these transgenes shows variegation (as a heterozygote) or pairing-sensitive silencing as a homozygote. (The silencing activity of the defective 800-bp Mcp element in w#21.124 can, however, be complemented by pairing-sensitive Mcp transgenes. Additionally, the eye color of w#21.124/+ animals gets darker in a Psc1/+ and a su(z)21/+ background; Table 6.) The eye color of the w#21.124/wy#1.83 is uniform, clearly darker yellow than the light yellow eye color of the w#21.124/+ control (data not shown).
|
In the second combination, yw#1 and wy#2, trans-activation was observed in only 1 out of 66 pairs. In this case, the white enhancer in the wy#2.50 transgene trans-activates the mini-white gene in the yw#1.103 transgene. As can be seen in Figure 10, the eye color of the control yw#1.103 line is yellow to dark yellow and typically shows some evidence of variegation. This line is pairing sensitive, and in homozygous yw#1.103 flies, mini-white expression is repressed. When trans to the wy#2.50 transgene, mini-white expression is activated and the eye pigmentation is orange or light red, though still variegated (see Figure 10). No trans-activation of the y gene was observed.
|
As was found for long-distance silencing, long-distance activation can occur not only in trans, but also in cis. We recombined each pair of interacting transgenes, w#21.124 and wy#1.83 and yw#1.103 and wy#2.50, to generate the cis-configuration. In both cases, the long-distance activation in cis was equivalent to, if not slightly stronger than, that observed in trans. Though we have not determined the cytological position of the two pairs of inserts in polytene chromosomes, our recombination data indicate that the yw#1.103 and wy#2.50 pair are separated by >9 cM. The other pair also appears to be separated by a fairly large distance.
We wondered whether mutations in Pc-G group genes (which are known to suppress silencing) and in zeste (which are known to influence w expression) had any effect on trans-activation. As might be expected for a pairing-sensitive line, mutations in several Pc-G genes were found to suppress variegation and darken the eye color of yw#1.103 heterozygotes (see Table 6) and homozygotes (not shown). These mutations also darken the eye color of yw#1.103 wy#2.50/++ flies, indicating that Pc-G-mediated silencing may be counteracting the long-distance activation of the yw#1.103 mini-white by the wy#2.50 white enhancer. Some of the Pc-G mutations also have a slight but discernible effect on mini-white expression in heterozygous w#21.124 flies and when w#21.124 is combined with wy#1.83 (Table 6).
For zeste, we tested the effects of three different alleles, the neomorphic mutations z1 and zop6 and the loss-of-function mutation za. None of the z mutations have any effect on the mini-white transgene alone, and the eye color of w#21.124/+ or yw#1.103/+ flies carrying the z mutations is the same as in a wild-type z background. This is expected, since neither transgene carries the white enhancer and critical sites for Zeste protein action are located in the enhancer. However, as shown in Figure 10, the z1 mutation reduces the eye pigmentation of yw#1.103, wy#2.50/++ flies, indicating that it interferes with the long-distance activation of the yw#1.103 mini-white gene by the wy#2.50 white enhancer. Similar results were obtained for zop and za and for the other interacting transgene pair (see Table 6). These findings support the idea that the Mcp element mediates direct interactions between the white enhancer in one transgene and the promoter of the mini-white reporter in the other transgene.
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
| TOPABSTRACTMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONLITERATURE CITED |
|---|
Mcp functions as a silencer:
In the studies described here, we have examined the biological activities of the BX-C Mcp element using transgene assays. The Mcp element in BX-C is defined by three overlapping deletions (
We tested precisely the same 800-bp Mcp fragment in mini-white- and y-silencing assays. In our experiments, this Mcp fragment was unable to establish a functional silencing complex on its own. It could, however, promote the formation of functional silencing complexes when combined (in the same transgene) with additional Mcp fragments located either proximally or distally to the 800-bp fragment. These nearby Mcp sequences were not the only sequences that could complement the ~800-bp fragment; silencing activity could also be rescued by sequences from the ftz and y genes. Like the proximal and distal Mcp fragments, the complementing heterologous sequences have little, if any, silencing activity on their own and, hence, might serve a somewhat different function from that of the central ~800-bp Mcp fragment.
In other studies, we have characterized another Abd-B PRE, the iab-7 PRE (
These observations raise the question of whether the Mcp element is simply a PRE or has additional functions that are perhaps analogous to those of the Fab-7 boundary. In the case of Fab-7, it was possible to dissect the region using both transgene assays (
Long-distance interactions:
The most unusual feature of the Mcp element is its ability to promote long-distance interactions. Regulatory interactions are observed between Mcp transgenes inserted at different sites on the same chromosomal arm, on different chromosomal arms, and even between transgenes inserted on different chromosomes. The long-distance regulatory activity of the Mcp element is unusual. Among the previously characterized PREs from BX-C and other genetic loci, pairing-sensitive silencing is generally observed only between interacting partners inserted at the same site (
An exception to this general rule has been reported by
How does Mcp promote regulatory interactions over long distances? One model is suggested by studies on the trans-inactivation of a wild-type brown (bw) gene by brownDominant (bwD), an insertional mutation that has a large block of heterochromatic satellite repeats (
However, there are a number of reasons to believe that the compartmentalization model does not apply to Mcp-mediated pairing. First, Mcp transgenes interact poorly with transgenes containing other PREs, including the gypsy bxd PRE transgenes described above (C. SIGRIST and V. PIRROTTA, unpublished data). Unless each PRE has its own special subnuclear compartment, these other PREs should be as effective as an Mcp partner in the targeting process. Second, the "defective" Mcp element (the 0.8-kb fragment) in the w#21 transgene can be rescued by long-distance interactions with a functional Mcp partner. In the compartmentalization model, the "defective" Mcp element would not be expected to enter the Pc-G compartment and, hence, should not be rescued by the functional partner. Third, contrary to the expectations of the compartmentalization model, we have found that the Mcp element can mediate not only long-distance silencing, but also long-distance activation.
These and other findings argue that the Mcp element facilitates long-distance regulatory interactions because it is able to locate and then pair with Mcp elements at other sites. All that appears to be required for this activity is the central 800-bp Mcp sequence; this sequence can mediate both long-distance silencing and activation. How does such a short DNA sequence interact specifically with an Mcp partner over large distances, and why does it differ from other DNAs? The first step in pairing must be finding the appropriate partner. Since pairing interactions should be disrupted by mitosis, the Mcp element would have to search for a partner at the beginning of each cell cycle. Unless Mcp targets the transgene to a special subnuclear environment (however, see above), it is difficult to imagine how it could specifically accelerate the search process over that of any other DNA sequence. If this is the case, then searching most probably occurs by a mechanism similar to that proposed for pairing between homologs—a constrained random walk (
The second step would be the initial trans-interaction between the two Mcp elements, while the third step would be the formation and spread of a functional silencing complex around each element. It is at one of these steps that Mcp is most likely to differ from other PREs. We presume that proteins associated with the 800-bp Mcp sequence mediate the initial interactions and promote complex formation. The fact that Mcp can (when closely linked) establish silencing complexes with heterologous PREs (esg and iab-7 PRE) argues that proteins common to different PREs (e.g., the Pc-G proteins) contribute to the establishment of a functional silencing complex. However, since long-distance interactions are generally restricted to Mcp elements, there must be mechanisms for generating specificity. Such specificity mechanisms could be key to the novel long-distance regulatory activities of the Mcp element. One possibility is that specificity is conferred by a special three-dimensional configuration of a set of Pc-G proteins that are common to many different PREs. An alternative, and probably a more likely hypothesis, is that specificity is generated by a combination of proteins, some that are found in most PREs and some that are unique to the 800-bp Mcp element. That non-Pc-G proteins might also play a role in the pairing process is supported by the fact that Mcp can facilitate the activation of a promoter by a distant enhancer without apparently establishing a fully functional silencing complex.
Left unexplained by this model are the effects of insulating elements, such as gypsy or scs/scs'. When interposed between the PRE and the mini-white reporter, these elements block the formation of pairing-sensitive silencing complexes. On the other hand, when these elements flank the PRE and the mini-white reporter, they somehow enhance long-distance interactions, even promoting the formation of silencing complexes between transgenes inserted on different chromosomes. In the former case, these elements might protect the mini-white reporter by blocking the spread of a Pc-G "chromatin structure" along the chromatin fiber from the PRE to the mini-white reporter. The blocking mechanism would be entirely cis-dependent and have no effect on long-distance interactions that can occur in "trans." In the latter case, the insulators might promote long-distance interactions by two different mechanisms. They could help nucleate or stabilize the initial pairing by providing additional protein-protein contacts. Alternatively, the insulators might function after the initial interaction, helping to ensure that pairing results in the formation of a functional silencing complex on each element. The insulators could promote this step by acting in cis to block the action of activators in neighboring sequences, or by ensuring the establishment of a homogenous chromatin environment.
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
1 Present address: Department of Zoology, University of Geneva, CH1211 Geneva, Switzerland. 
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
The authors are indebted to many individuals for providing reagents and stocks. We thank Kathy Mathews, Shige Sakonju, Yash Hiromi, Renato Paro, Ting Wu, Judy Kassis, Julio Vazquez, Francois Karch, Joszi Mihaly, Pam Geyer, Stanley Tiong, and Ian Duncan for fly stocks and/or plasmids. Gretchen Calhoun is acknowledged for sequencing several crucial junctions of the P-element constructs. This work also benefited from discussions with the following people: Julio Vazquez, Shuba Govind, Yash Hiromi, Francois Karch, Joszi Mihaly, Rakesh Mishra, Daniel Pauli, Christian Sigrist, and Judy Kassis. The authors also thank the anonymous reviewers for carefully reading the manuscript and making many useful suggestions. The authors especially acknowledge the Human Frontier Science Program, whose support made this collaborative project possible. In the lab of P.S., M.M. was supported by a European Molecular Biology Organization Long Term Fellowship and by an Advanced Fellowship from the Swiss National Science Foundation. The research of M.M., K.H., and P.S. was supported by a grant from the National Institutes of Health. M.M. and V.P. acknowledge support from the Swiss National Science Foundation. H.G. was supported by the Hungarian National Science Foundation (OTKA T 021051).
Manuscript received April 21, 1999; Accepted for publication July 22, 1999.
| LITERATURE CITED |
|---|
| TOPABSTRACTMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONLITERATURE CITED |
|---|
BORNEMANN, D., E. MILLER, and J. SIMON, 1998 Expression and properties of wild-type and mutant forms of the Drosophila Sex Comb on Midleg (SCM) repressor protein. Genetics 150:675-686
BOULET, A. M., A. LLOYD, and S. SAKONJU, 1991 Molecular definition of the morphogenetic and regulatory functions and the cis-regulatory elements of the Drosophila Abd-B gene. Development 111:393-405[Abstract].
BREEN, T. R. and I. M. DUNCAN, 1986 Maternal expression of genes that regulate the bithorax complex of Drosophila melanogaster.. Dev. Biol. 118:442-456[Medline].
BROWN, J. L., D. MUCCI, M. WHITELEY, M. L. DIRKESEN, and J. A. KASSIS, 1998 The Drosophila Polycomb group gene Pleiohomeotic encodes a DNA binding protein with homology to the transcription factor YY1. Mol. Cell 1:1057-1064[Medline].
BUSTURIA, A. and M. BIENZ, 1993 Silencers in abdominal-B, a homeotic Drosophila gene. EMBO J. 12:1415-1425[Medline].
BUSTURIA, A., C. WRIGHTMAN, and S. SAKONJU, 1997 A silencer is required for maintenance of transcriptional repression throughout Drosophila development. Development 124:4343-4350[Abstract].
CASARES, F. and E. SANCHEZ-HERRERO, 1995 Regulation of the infra-abdominal regions of the bithorax complex of Drosophila by gap genes. Development 121:1855-1866[Abstract].
CELNIKER, S. E., S. SHARMA, D. J. KEELAN, and E. B. LEWIS, 1990 The molecular genetics of the bithorax complex of Drosophila: cis-regulation in the Abdominal-B domain. EMBO J. 9:4227-4286.
CHAN, C. S., L. RASTELLI, and V. PIRROTTA, 1994 A Polycomb response element in the Ubx gene that determines an epigenetically inherited state of repression. EMBO J. 13:2553-2564[Medline].
CHEN, J. D. and V. PIRROTTA, 1993 Multimerization of the Drosophila zeste protein is required for efficient DNA binding. EMBO J. 12:2075-2083[Medline].
CHENG, N. N., D. A. SINCLAIR, R. B. CAMPBELL, and H. W. BROCK, 1994 Interactions of polyhomeotic with Polycomb group genes of Drosophila melanogaster.. Genetics 138:1151-1162[Abstract].
CHIANG, A., M. B. O'CONNOR, R. PARO, J. SIMON, and W. BENDER, 1995 Discrete Polycomb binding sites in each parasegmental domain of the bithorax complex. Development 121:1681-1689[Abstract].
CHRISTEN, B. and M. BIENZ, 1994 Imaginal disc silencers from Ultrabithorax: evidence for Polcomb response elements. Mech. Dev. 48:255-266[Medline].
CUMBERLEDGE, S., A. ZARATZIAN, and S. SAKONJU, 1990 Characterization of two RNAs transcribed from the cis-regulatory region of the abd-A domain within the Drosophila bithorax complex. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 87:3259-3263
DERNBURG, A., K. BROMAN, J. FUNG, W. MARSHALL, and J. PHILIPS et al., 1996 Perturbations of nuclear architecture by long distance chromosome interactions. Cell. 85:745-759[Medline].
DREESEN, T. D., S. HENIKOFF, and K. LOUGHNEY, 1991 A pairing-sensitive element that mediates trans-inactivation is associated with the Drosophila brown gene. Genes Dev. 5:331-340
DUNCAN, I., 1987 The bithorax complex. Annu. Rev. Genet. 21:285-319[Medline].
FAUVARQUE, M. O. and J. M. DURA, 1993 polyhomeotic regulatory sequences induce developmental-regulator-dependent variegation and targeted P-element insertions in Drosophila.. Genes Dev. 52:343-355.
FUNG, J. C., W. MARSHALL, A. DERNBURG, D. A. AGARD, and J. W. SEDAT, 1998 Homologous chromosome pairing in Drosophila melanogaster proceeds through multiple independent initiations. J. Cell Biol. 141:5-20
GELBART, W., 1982 Synapsis-dependent allelic complementation at the decapentaplegic gene complex in Drosophila melanogaster.. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 79:2636-2640
GEMKOW, M. J., P. J. VERVEER, and D. J. ARNDT-JOVIN, 1998 Homologous association of the Bithorax complex during embryogenesis: consequences for transvection in Drosophila melanogaster.. Development 125:4541-4552[Abstract].
GEYER, P. K. and V. G. CORCES, 1987 Separate regulatory elements are responsible for the complex pattern of tissue-specific and developmental transcription of the yellow locus in Drosophila melanogaster.. Genes Dev. 1:996-1004
GEYER, P. K., M. M. GREEN, and V. G. CORCES, 1990 Tissue-specific transcriptional enhancers may act in trans on the gene located in the homologous chromosome: the molecular basis of transvection in Drosophila.. EMBO J. 9:2247-2256[Medline].
GINDHART, J. G., JR. and T. C. KAUFMAN, 1995 Identification of Polycomb and trithorax group responsive elements in the regulatory region of the Drosophila homeotic gene Sex combs reduced.. Genetics 139:797-814[Abstract].
GOLDSBOROUGH, A. S. and T. B. KORNBERG, 1996 Reduction of transcription by homologue asynapsis in Drosophila imaginal discs. Nature 381:807-810[Medline].
GYURKOVICS, H., J. GAUSZ, J. KUMMER, and F. KARCH, 1990 A new homeotic mutation of the Drosophila bithorax complex removes a boundary separating two domains of regulation. EMBO J. 9:2579-2585[Medline].
HAGSTROM, K., M. MULLER, and P. SCHEDL, 1996 Fab-7 functions as a chromatin domain boundary to ensure proper specification by the Drosophila bithorax complex. Genes Dev. 10:3204-3215.
HAGSTROM, K., M. MULLER, and P. SCHEDL, 1997 A Polycomb and GAGA dependent silencer adjoins the Fab-7 boundary in the Drosophila bithorax complex. Genetics 146:1365-1380[Abstract].
HENDRICKSON, J. E. and S. SAKONJU, 1995 Cis and trans interactions between the iab regulatory regions and abdominal-A and Abdominal-B in Drosophila melanogaster.. Genetics 139:835-848[Abstract].
HENIKOFF, S., 1997 Nuclear organization and gene expression: homologous pairing and long-range interactions. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 9:388-395[Medline].
HENIKOFF, S. and T. D. DREESEN, 1989 Trans-inactivation of the Drosophila brown gene: evidence for transcriptional repression and somatic pairing dependence. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 86:6704-6708
HENIKOFF, S., J. M. JACKSON, and P. B. TALBERT, 1995 Distance and pairing effects on the browndominant heterochromatin element in Drosophila. Genetics 149:1007-1017.
HIROMI, Y., A. KUROIWA, and W. J. GEHRING, 1985 Control elements of the Drosophila segmentation gene fushi tarazu. Cell 43:603-613[Medline].
HOPPMAN, R., D. DUNCAN, and I. DUNCAN, 1995 Transvection in the iab-5,6,7 region of the bithorax complex of Drosophila: homology independent interactions in trans.. Genetics 139:815-833[Abstract].
KARCH, F., B. WEIFFENBACH, M. PEIFER, W. BENDER, and I. DUNCAN et al., 1985 The abdominal region of the bithorax complex. Cell 43:81-96[Medline].
KARCH, F., W. BENDER, and B. WEIFFENBACH, 1990 abd-A expression in Drosophila embryos. Genes Dev. 4:1573-1587
KARCH, F., M. GALLONI, L. SIPOS, J. GAUSZ, and H. GYURKOVICS et al., 1994 Mcp and Fab-7: molecular analysis of putative boundaries of cis-regulatory domains in the bithorax complex of Drosophila melanogaster.. Nucleic Acids Res. 22:3138-3146
KASSIS, J. A., 1994 Unusual properties of regulatory DNA from the Drosophila engrailed gene: three "pairing-sensitive" sites within a 1.6-kb region. Genetics 136:1025-1038[Abstract].
KASSIS, J. A., E. P. VANSICKLE, and S. M. SENSABAUGH, 1991 A fragment of engrailed regulatory DNA can mediate transvection of the white gene in Drosophila.. Genetics 128:751-761[Abstract].
KELLUM, R. and P. SCHEDL, 1991 A position-effect assay for boundaries of higher order chromosomal domains. Cell 64:941-950[Medline].
KENNISON, J. A., 1993 Transcriptional activation of Drosophila homeotic genes from distant regulatory elements. Trends Genet. 9:75-79[Medline].
LEWIS, E. B., 1954 The theory and application of a new method of detecting chromosomal rearrangements in Drosophila melanogaster. Am. Nat. 88:225-239.
LEWIS, E. B., 1955 Some aspects of position pseudoallelism. Am. Nat. 89:73-89.
LEWIS, E. B., 1978 A gene complex controlling segmentation in Drosophila.. Nature 276:565-570[Medline].
LEWIS, E. B., 1985 Regulation of the genes of the bithorax complex in Drosophila.. Cold Spring Harbor Symp. Quant. Biol. 50:155-164
MALLIN, D. R., J. S. MYUNG, J. S. PATTON, and P. K. GEYER, 1998 Polycomb group repression is blocked by the Drosophila suppressor of Hairy-wing [su(Hw)] insulator. Genetics 148:331-339
MACIAS, A., J. CASANOVA, and G. MORATA, 1990 Expression and regulation of the abd-A gene of Drosophila.. Development 110:1197-1207
MARSHALL, W. F., A. DERNBURG, B. HARMON, D. A. AGARD, and J. W. SEDAT, 1996 Specific interactions of chromatin with the nuclear envelope: positional determination within the nucleus in Drosophila melanogaster. Mol. Biol. Cell 7:825-842[Abstract].
MARSHALL, W. F., A. STRAIGHT, J. F. MARKO, J. SWEDLOW, and A. DERNBURG et al., 1997 Interphase chromosomes undergo constrained diffusional motion in living cells. Curr. Biol. 7:930-939[Medline].
MESSMER, S., A. FRANKE, and R. PARO, 1992 Analysis of the functional role of the Polycomb chromodomain in Drosophila melanogaster.. Genes Dev. 6:1241-1254
MIHALY, J., I. HOGGA, J. GAUSZ, H. GYURKOVICS, and F. KARCH, 1997 In situ dissection of the fab-7 region of the bithorax complex into a chromatin domain boundary and a polycomb-response element. Development 124:1809-1820[Abstract].
MIHALY, J., I. HOGGA, S. BARGES, M. GALLONI, and R. K. MISHRA et al., 1998a Chromatin domain boundaries in the Bithorax complex. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 54:60-70[Medline].
MIHALY, J., R. MISHRA, and F. KARCH, 1998b A conserved sequence motif in Polycomb response elements. Mol. Cell 1:1065-1066[Medline].
MÜLLER, J. and M. BIENZ, 1991 Long range repression conferring boundaries of Ultrabithorax expression in the Drosophila embryo. EMBO J. 10:3147-3155[Medline].
PARO, R., 1993 Mechanism of heritable gene expression during development of Drosophila.. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 5:999-1005[Medline].
PATTATUCCI, A. M. and T. C. KAUFMAN, 1991 The homeotic gene Sex combs reduced of Drosophila melanogaster is differentially regulated in the embryonic and imaginal stages of development. Genetics 129:443-461[Abstract].
PIRROTTA, V. and L. RASTELLI, 1994 white gene expression, repressive chromatin domains, and homeotic gene regulation in Drosophila.. Bioessays 16:549-556[Medline].
PIRROTTA, V., 1997 Pc-G complexes and chromatin silencing. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 7:249-258[Medline].
PIRROTTA, V., E. MANET, E. HARDON, S. E. BICKEL, and M. BENSON, 1987 Structure and sequence of the Drosophila zeste gene. EMBO J. 6:791-799[Medline].
QIAN, S. and V. PIRROTTA, 1995 Dosage compensation of the Drosophila white gene requires both the X chromosome environment and multiple intragenic elements. Genetics 139:733-744[Abstract].
SANCHEZ-HERRERO, E., 1991 Control of the expression of the bithorax complex genes abdominal-A and Abdominal-B by cis-regulatory regions in Drosophila embryos. Development 111:437-449[Abstract].
SCHEDL, P., and F. GROSVELD, 1995 Domains and boundaries, pp. 172–196 in Chromatin Structure and Gene Expression, edited by S. C. R. ELGIN. IRL Press, Oxford.
SHIMELL, M. J., J. SIMON, W. BENDER, and M. B. O'CONNOR, 1994 Enhancer point mutation results in a homeotic transformation in Drosophila. Science 264:1968-1971.
SIGRIST, C. J. and V. PIRROTTA, 1997 Chromatin insulator elements block the silencing of a target gene by the Drosophila polycomb response element (PRE) but allow trans interactions between PREs on different chromosomes. Genetics 147:209-221[Abstract].
SIMON, J., 1995 Locking in stable states of gene expression: transcriptional control during Drosophila development. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 7:376-385[Medline].
SIMON, J., M. PEIFER, W. BENDER, and M. O'CONNOR, 1990 Regulatory elements of the bithorax complex that control expression along the anterior-posterior axis. EMBO J. 9:3945-3956[Medline].
SIMON, J., A. CHIANG, and W. BENDER, 1992 Ten different Polycomb group genes are required for spatial control of the abdA and AbdB homeotic products. Development 114:493-4505[Abstract].
SIMON, J., A. CHIANG, W. BENDER, M. J. SHIMELL, and M. O'CONNOR, 1993 Elements of the Drosophila bithorax complex that mediate repression by Polycomb group products. Dev. Biol. 158:131-144[Medline].
SIPOS, L., J. MIHALY, F. KARCH, P. SCHEDL, and J. GAUSZ et al., 1998 Transvection in the Drosophila Abd-B domain: extensive upstream sequences are involved in anchoring distant cis-regulatory regions to the promoter. Genetics 149:1031-1050
SMOLIK-UTLAUT, S. M. and W. M. GELBART, 1987 The effects of chromosomal rearrangements on the zeste-white interaction in Drosophila melanogaster.. Genetics 116:285-298
TARTOF, K. D. and S. HENIKOFF, 1991 Trans-sensing effects from Drosophila to humans. Cell 65:201-203[Medline].
VAZQUEZ, J. and P. SCHEDL, 1994 Sequences required for enhancer blocking activity of scs are located within two nuclease-hypersensitive regions. EMBO J. 13:5984-5993[Medline].
VAZQUEZ, J., G. FARKAS, M. GASZNER, A. UDVARDY, and M. MULLER et al., 1993 Genetic and molecular analysis of chromatin domains. Cold Spring Harbor Symp. Quant. Biol. 58:45-54
WHITE, R. A. H. and R. LEHMANN, 1986 A gap gene, hunchback, regulates the spatial expression of Ultrabithorax.. Cell 47:311-321[Medline].
WU, C. T. and M. HOWE, 1995 A genetic analysis of the Suppressor 2 of zeste complex of Drosophila melanogaster.. Genetics 140:139-181[Abstract].
WU, C.-T., R. S. JONES, P. F. LASKO, and W. M. GELBART, 1989 Homeosis and the interaction of zeste and white in Drosophila.. Mol. Gen. Genet. 218:559-564[Medline].
ZACHAR, Z., C. H. CHAPMAN, and P. M. BINGHAM, 1985 On the molecular basis of transvection effects and the regulation of transcription. Cold Spring Harbor Symp. Quant. Biol. 50:337-346
ZHOU, J., S. BAROLO, P. SZYMANSKI, and M. LEVINE, 1996 The fab-7 element of the bithorax complex attenuates enhancer promoter interactions in Drosophila embryos. Genes Dev. 10:3195-3201
This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  O. Kyrchanova, S. Toshchakov, Y. Podstreshnaya, A. Parshikov, and P. Georgiev Functional Interaction between the Fab-7 and Fab-8 Boundaries and the Upstream Promoter Region in the Drosophila Abd-B Gene Mol. Cell. Biol., June 15, 2008; 28(12): 4188 - 4195. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. Chetverina, E. Savitskaya, O. Maksimenko, L. Melnikova, O. Zaytseva, A. Parshikov, A. V. Galkin, and P. Georgiev Red flag on the white reporter: a versatile insulator abuts the white gene in Drosophila and is omnipresent in mini-white constructs Nucleic Acids Res., February 11, 2008; 36(3): 929 - 937. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. Gohl, M. Muller, V. Pirrotta, M. Affolter, and P. Schedl Enhancer Blocking and Transvection at the Drosophila apterous Locus Genetics, January 1, 2008; 178(1): 127 - 143. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 I. U. Rafalska-Metcalf and S. M. Janicki Show and tell: visualizing gene expression in living cells J. Cell Sci., July 15, 2007; 120(14): 2301 - 2307. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
O. Kyrchanova, S. Toshchakov, A. Parshikov, and P. Georgiev Study of the Functional Interaction between Mcp Insulators from the Drosophila bithorax Complex: Effects of Insulator Pairing on Enhancer-Promoter Communication Mol. Cell. Biol., April 15, 2007; 27(8): 3035 - 3043. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Brasset, F. Bantignies, F. Court, S. Cheresiz, C. Conte, and C. Vaury Idefix insulator activity can be modulated by nearby regulatory elements Nucleic Acids Res., April 10, 2007; (2007) gkm140v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. M. Lee and C.-t. Wu Enhancer-Promoter Communication at the yellow Gene of Drosophila melanogaster: Diverse Promoters Participate in and Regulate trans Interactions Genetics, December 1, 2006; 174(4): 1867 - 1880. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Qi, H. Jin, T. Lilja, and M. Mannervik Drosophila Reptin and Other TIP60 Complex Components Promote Generation of Silent Chromatin Genetics, September 1, 2006; 174(1): 241 - 251. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. Mihaly, S. Barges, L. Sipos, R. Maeda, F. Cleard, I. Hogga, W. Bender, H. Gyurkovics, and F. Karch Dissecting the regulatory landscape of the Abd-B gene of the bithorax complex Development, August 1, 2006; 133(15): 2983 - 2993. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. Vazquez, M. Muller, V. Pirrotta, and J. W. Sedat The Mcp Element Mediates Stable Long-Range Chromosome-Chromosome Interactions in Drosophila Mol. Biol. Cell, May 1, 2006; 17(5): 2158 - 2165. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Kravchenko, E. Savitskaya, O. Kravchuk, A. Parshikov, P. Georgiev, and M. Savitsky Pairing between gypsy Insulators Facilitates the Enhancer Action in trans throughout the Drosophila Genome Mol. Cell. Biol., November 1, 2005; 25(21): 9283 - 9291. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. L. Brown, D. J. Grau, S. K. DeVido, and J. A. Kassis An Sp1/KLF binding site is important for the activity of a Polycomb group response element from the Drosophila engrailed gene Nucleic Acids Res., September 9, 2005; 33(16): 5181 - 5189. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. Gruzdeva, O. Kyrchanova, A. Parshikov, A. Kullyev, and P. Georgiev The Mcp Element from the bithorax Complex Contains an Insulator That Is Capable of Pairwise Interactions and Can Facilitate Enhancer-Promoter Communication Mol. Cell. Biol., May 1, 2005; 25(9): 3682 - 3689. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. A. Shanower, M. Muller, J. L. Blanton, V. Honti, H. Gyurkovics, and P. Schedl Characterization of the grappa Gene, the Drosophila Histone H3 Lysine 79 Methyltransferase Genetics, January 1, 2005; 169(1): 173 - 184. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 L. Melnikova, F. Juge, N. Gruzdeva, A. Mazur, G. Cavalli, and P. Georgiev Interaction between the GAGA factor and Mod(mdg4) proteins promotes insulator bypass in Drosophila PNAS, October 12, 2004; 101(41): 14806 - 14811. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. J. Peterson, D. R. Mallin, N. J. Francis, C. S. Ketel, J. Stamm, R. K. Voeller, R. E. Kingston, and J. A. Simon Requirement for Sex Comb on Midleg Protein Interactions in Drosophila Polycomb Group Repression Genetics, July 1, 2004; 167(3): 1225 - 1239. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. PAL-BHADRA, U. BHADRA, and J.A. BIRCHLER Interrelationship of RNA Interference and Transcriptional Gene Silencing in Drosophila Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol, January 1, 2004; 69(0): 433 - 438. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 F. Bantignies, C. Grimaud, S. Lavrov, M. Gabut, and G. Cavalli Inheritance of Polycomb-dependent chromosomal interactions in Drosophila Genes & Dev., October 1, 2003; 17(19): 2406 - 2420. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Mahmoudi, L. M. P. Zuijderduijn, A. Mohd-Sarip, and C. P. Verrijzer GAGA facilitates binding of Pleiohomeotic to a chromatinized Polycomb response element Nucleic Acids Res., July 15, 2003; 31(14): 4147 - 4156. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Boivin, C. Gally, S. Netter, D. Anxolabehere, and S. Ronsseray Telomeric Associated Sequences of Drosophila Recruit Polycomb-Group Proteins in Vivo and Can Induce Pairing-Sensitive Repression Genetics, May 1, 2003; 164(1): 195 - 208. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Estrada, F. Casares, A. Busturia, and E. Sanchez-Herrero Genetic and molecular characterization of a novel iab-8 regulatory domain in the Abdominal-B gene of Drosophila melanogaster Development, March 13, 2003; 129(22): 5195 - 5204. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Blanton, M. Gaszner, and P. Schedl Protein:protein interactions and the pairing of boundary elements in vivo Genes & Dev., March 1, 2003; 17(5): 664 - 675. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. A. Drewell, E. Bae, J. Burr, and E. B. Lewis Transcription defines the embryonic domains of cis-regulatory activity at the Drosophila bithorax complex PNAS, December 24, 2002; 99(26): 16853 - 16858. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Rank, M. Prestel, and R. Paro Transcription through Intergenic Chromosomal Memory Elements of the Drosophila Bithorax Complex Correlates with an Epigenetic Switch Mol. Cell. Biol., November 15, 2002; 22(22): 8026 - 8034. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. W. Southworth and J. A. Kennison Transvection and Silencing of the Scr Homeotic Gene of Drosophila melanogaster Genetics, June 1, 2002; 161(2): 733 - 746. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Mongelard, M. Labrador, E. M. Baxter, T. I. Gerasimova, and V. G. Corces Trans-splicing as a Novel Mechanism to Explain Interallelic Complementation in Drosophila Genetics, April 1, 2002; 160(4): 1481 - 1487. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Americo, M. Whiteley, J. L. Brown, M. Fujioka, J. B. Jaynes, and J. A. Kassis A Complex Array of DNA-Binding Proteins Required for Pairing-Sensitive Silencing by a Polycomb Group Response Element From the Drosophila engrailed Gene Genetics, April 1, 2002; 160(4): 1561 - 1571. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J.-L. Chen, K. L. Huisinga, M. M. Viering, S. A. Ou, C.-t. Wu, and P. K. Geyer Enhancer action in trans is permitted throughout the Drosophila genome PNAS, March 19, 2002; 99(6): 3723 - 3728. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
I. Hogga and F. Karch Transcription through the iab-7 cis-regulatory domain of the bithorax complex interferes with maintenance of Polycomb-mediated silencing Development, January 11, 2002; 129(21): 4915 - 4922. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. P. Fitzgerald and W. Bender Polycomb Group Repression Reduces DNA Accessibility Mol. Cell. Biol., October 1, 2001; 21(19): 6585 - 6597. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. S. Mattick and M. J. Gagen Review ArticleThe Evolution of Controlled Multitasked Gene Networks: The Role of Introns and Other Noncoding RNAs in the Development of Complex Organisms Mol. Biol. Evol., September 1, 2001; 18(9): 1611 - 1630. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Busturia, A. Lloyd, F. Bejarano, M. Zavortink, H. Xin, and S. Sakonju The MCP silencer of the Drosophila Abd-B gene requires both Pleiohomeotic and GAGA factor for the maintenance of repression Development, June 1, 2001; 128(11): 2163 - 2173. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. K. Mishra, J. Mihaly, S. Barges, A. Spierer, F. Karch, K. Hagstrom, S. E. Schweinsberg, and P. Schedl The iab-7 Polycomb Response Element Maps to a Nucleosome-Free Region of Chromatin and Requires Both GAGA and Pleiohomeotic for Silencing Activity Mol. Cell. Biol., February 15, 2001; 21(4): 1311 - 1318. [Abstract] [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B Kerber, I Monge, M Mueller, P. Mitchell, and S. Cohen The AP-2 transcription factor is required for joint formation and cell survival in Drosophila leg development Development, January 4, 2001; 128(8): 1231 - 1238. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
- THIS ARTICLE
-
Abstract
- Full Text (PDF)
- Alert me when this article is cited
- Alert me if a correction is posted
- SERVICES
- Email this article to a friend
- Similar articles in this journal
- Similar articles in PubMed
- Alert me to new issues of the journal
- Download to citation manager
- Reprints & Permissions
- CITING ARTICLES
- Citing Articles via HighWire
- Citing Articles via Google Scholar
- GOOGLE SCHOLAR
- Articles by Muller, M.
- Articles by Schedl, P.
- Search for Related Content
- PUBMED
- PubMed Citation
- Articles by Muller, M.
- Articles by Schedl, P.