|
Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M201831200 on April 18, 2002
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 277, Issue 26, 23872-23881, June 28, 2002
Cooperative Interaction of Xvent-2 and GATA-2 in the Activation
of the Ventral Homeobox Gene Xvent-1B*
Henner
Friedle and
Walter
Knöchel
From the Abteilung Biochemie, Universität Ulm,
Albert-Einstein Allee 11, Ulm 89081, Germany
Received for publication, February 23, 2002, and in revised form, April 16, 2002
 |
ABSTRACT |
The Xvent family of homeobox transcription
factors is essential for the establishment of the dorsal-ventral body
axis during Xenopus embryogenesis. In contrast to
Xvent-2B and other members of the Xvent-2 subfamily,
Xvent-1B is not a direct response gene of bone
morphogenetic protein-4 signaling. Xvent-1B is
activated by Xvent-2, but CHX experiments revealed the requirement of
additional factors. In this study, we report on the cooperative effect
of Xvent-2 and the zinc finger transcription factor GATA-2 on the promoter of the Xvent-1B gene. We show that
GATA-2 is a direct target gene of bone morphogenetic
protein-4 and that GATA-2 interacts with Xvent-2 to activate
transcription of Xvent-1B. Both transcription factors bind
to distinct elements within the Xvent-1B promoter, and
GATA-2 physically interacts with the C-terminal domain of Xvent-2.
Promoter/reporter studies in Xenopus embryos revealed that
full activation of Xvent-1B requires both Xvent-2 and
GATA-2. Moreover, the two factors are sufficient to direct
transcription of Xvent-1B in the presence of CHX at the
ventral side of the embryo. The failure of both factors to activate
Xvent-1B on the dorsal side suggests the existence of a
dorsal inhibitor. This inhibitor is likely a component of the dorsal
Wnt signaling pathway because nuclear translocation of -catenin
before midblastula transition results in a suppression of
Xvent-1B transcription.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The establishment of the dorsal-ventral body axis in vertebrate
embryogenesis is the result of antagonisms among different growth
factors and/or their mediators. One of the first steps in the early
development in Xenopus laevis is the accumulation of -catenin in the future dorsal signaling center, the
Nieuwkoop center (1). The interaction of -catenin with
high mobility group box transcription factors of the
LEF/TCF1 family leads to the
activation of other dorsal factors such as the homeobox transcription
factor siamois (2). All of these molecules are components of
the dorsal Wnt signaling pathway and result, when ectopically expressed
on the ventral side, in a dorsalization of the embryo and formation of
a second axis (3).
Another important signaling pathway in early embryogenesis is the BMP
pathway which, in contrast to the dorsal Wnt signal, is responsible for
the activation of ventral molecules (4, 5). In Xenopus, it
has been shown that the autoregulatory loop of BMP-4 expression is
mediated by the ventral homeobox protein Xvent-2 (6). Because Xvents
can mimic all early BMP-2/4 effects, the Xvent transcription factors
are regarded as downstream effectors of BMP-2/4 signaling in early
amphibian development (7). Although most of our knowledge about Vents
is derived from experiments with Xenopus and zebrafish
(8-15), molecular cloning of a human Vent-like gene has recently been
reported (16).
Based upon amino acid sequence comparisons, members of the Xvent family
are divided into two subfamilies, the Xvent-1 (Xvent-1 (8), PV.1 (9),
and Xvent-1B (10)) and Xvent-2 (Xvent-2 (11), Xbr-1b (12), Xom (13),
Vox 15 (14) and Xvent-2B (10)) subfamilies. Besides their sequence
divergence, the two groups differ clearly in their expression patterns,
which already suggests different regulatory mechanisms. It has been
shown that Xvent-2B is a direct target gene of BMP signaling
(10). The BMP mediator Smad1, which is phosphorylated by the BMP type I
receptor, interacts with Smad4 to build a transcriptionally active
complex on the Xvent-2B promoter (17, 18). This is part of a
subsequent, indirect autoregulatory loop in which BMP-4 induces its own
expression by using Xvent-2 as a mediator (6) and a direct
autoregulatory loop in which Xvent-2 activates its own expression (19).
In contrast, Xvent-1B is not up-regulated by BMP signaling
in the absence of de novo protein synthesis and, therefore,
is not regarded as a direct BMP-4 target (10). Instead,
Xvent-1B can be activated by Xvent-2; and because it can
rescue the phenotype caused by the dominant-negative Xvent-2 P(40)
mutant, it has been suggested that Xvent-1 acts downstream of Xvent-2
(10). However, Xvent-2, like BMP-4, is not capable of activating
members of the Xvent-1 family in the presence of cycloheximide (CHX).
This suggests that either another or an additional factor is necessary
for the activation of Xvent-1B. This factor could either be
produced by a target gene of Xvent-2, or it might synergize with
Xvent-2 in a cooperative manner. One possible candidate factor seemed
to be the zinc finger protein GATA-2 (20), which activates
Xvent-1, and when overexpressed as a dominant-interfering
construct, had been shown to suppress specifically expression of the
Xvent-1 but not of the Xvent-2 gene (21). The
GATA-2 gene is induced by BMP-4 (22), and GATA-2 expression
in ventral mesoderm starts at the early gastrula stage (23),
i.e. at the right time and at the right place to suggest this factor as an additional player in the in vivo
regulation of Xvent-1 transcription.
In the present report we have investigated the transcriptional
regulation of the Xvent-1B gene by Xvent-2 and GATA-2. We
have found that GATA-2 is able to activate the Xvent-1B
promoter and that it rescues the effects induced by a dominant-negative
Xvent-2 mutant. In contrast, blocking BMP signaling at the level of the BMP receptor, which leads to an inhibition of endogenous Xvent-2 gene
activity, cannot be compensated for by GATA-2. Therefore, it seems
unlikely that GATA-2 operates downstream of Xvent-2. Instead, this
observation favors a model of a cooperative action between Xvent-2 and
GATA-2 in the activation of Xvent-1B. To test this model we
have performed protein-DNA binding assays. We could define target
elements for both Xvent-2 and GATA-2 factors on the Xvent-1
promoter. It could also be shown that GATA-2 interacts directly with
the C-terminal domain of the Xvent-2 protein.
Analysis of the Xvent-1B promoter by microinjection of
different deletion mutants further supports the cooperative function of
these two transcription factors. Whereas activation by GATA-2 is
strictly dependent on Xvent-2 binding elements, Xvent-2 also seems to
activate Xvent-1B in a GATA-2 independent manner, albeit at
a much lower extent. Furthermore, although Xvent-2 is unable to
activate Xvent-1B in the presence of CHX, a combination of Xvent-2 and GATA-2 is sufficient to up-regulate Xvent-1B
expression if injected on the ventral side. However, overexpression of
GATA-2 and Xvent-2 on the dorsal side does not lead to an activation of
Xvent-1B transcription in CHX-treated embryos, even if
coinjected with BMP-4. This suggests that activation of
Xvent-1B on the ventral side of embryos in vivo
is the result not only of the presence of Xvent-2 and GATA-2 proteins,
but also the absence of dorsal inhibitors.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Constructs and Plasmids--
Xvent-1B promoter fragments
were created by PCR using the following primers: upstream, -249
(5'-CGGGATCCATGGGATTCTGTGCCG-3'), 164
(5'-CGGGATCCACTGGAGCCAGGACCAGG-3'); downstream, +52 (5'-CCCAAGCTTCTGAAGGGAAGGCTGCT-3'), -164
(5'-CGGGATCCGAGTCTGTCAGGTTAGTG-3'). Nucleotide
positions refer to the published sequence (10). The resulting PCR
products were digested with BamHI/HindIII and
cloned into BglII/HindIII of the pGL3-basic
vector (Promega). The Xvent-1B/pGL3 construct 55/+52 was
obtained by digesting the -164/+52 PCR fragment with Sau3A
and the -249/ /+52 construct by fusing the -249/ 164 and -55/+52
fragments. The GATA-mutated (Gm) Xvent-1B promoter fragment
( 249/Gm/+52) was constructed by fusion of two PCR-generated fragments
via an artificial EcoRI site using the following primers: upstream fragment, 249 (as described) and -192
(5'-GGAATTCTTGGAGGTTTCAGTTGGAG-3'); downstream fragment,
-197 (5'-GGAATTCAAGGTGAAATCACTAACCTG-3') and +52 (as
described). The PCR products were digested with
BamHI/EcoRI ( 249/ 192) or with
EcoRI/HindIII ( 197/+52) and ligated at their EcoRI restriction sites. A mutation of the putative LEF/TCF
binding site was introduced by fusing the -55/+52 promoter construct
with a PCR fragment generated by using the -249 upstream primer (see above) and a mutated reverse primer starting at -52
(5'-CGGGATCCATATAAGCGGGAGAACCAGAA-3'; mutated positions are underlined).
Microinjections and Luciferase Assays--
Microinjections were
performed with in vitro fertilized Xenopus
embryos, dejellied in 2% cysteine hydrochloride in 0.1 × MBSH (10 mM HEPES pH 7.4, 88 mM NaCl, 1 mM KCl, 2.4 mM NaHCO3, 0.82 mM MgSO4, 0.41 mM
CaCl2, 0.66 mM KNO3) and staged
according to Nieuwkoop and Faber (24). Before injection, embryos were
placed into 1 × MBSH containing 4% Ficoll. Deletion mutants were
injected dorsally or ventrally at the four-cell stage (20 pg/blastomere). In vitro transcribed capped mRNAs
(mMessage-mMachineTM SP6 Kit, Ambion) were purified over RNeasy columns
(Qiagen) for microinjection. Linearization and transcription of DNA
were performed as indicated: pSP64T3-BMP-4 (Xenopus BMP-4,
BamHI, SP6); pSP64T3-Xvent-2 (Xvent-2, EcoRI,
SP6); pSP64-GATA-2 (NotI, SP6). RNA was injected at the following concentrations: 500 pg/blastomere BMP-4, 200-400
pg/blastomere Xvent-2, 50 pg/blastomere GATA-2. As an internal control,
the pRL-CMV renilla reporter plasmid (Promega) was coinjected to allow for normalization of firefly luciferase values.
Injected embryos were cultured until stage 11 and snap-frozen in liquid
nitrogen. Luciferase assays were performed according to the
manufacturer's protocol, except that 10 µl of passive lysis buffer
was used per embryo (Dual Luciferase Assay System, Promega). Luciferase
activities of firefly and renilla were determined separately using 20 µl of supernatant (centrifuged for 10 min at 4 °C).
Protein Preparation--
Fusion proteins were expressed in
Escherichia coli BL21(DE3)Plus (Stratagene) and purified as
described recently by Henningfeld et al. (19).
35S-Labeled proteins were prepared using the TNT-coupled
transcription-translation system (Promega).
Preparation of Embryonic Extracts--
Protein extracts
containing Myc-tagged Xvent-2 (MT-Xvent-2) were essentially prepared as
reported previously (19).
GST Pull-down Assay--
To 20 µl of glutathione-Sepharose
(Amersham Biosciences) in 500 µl of binding buffer (50 mM
Tris-HCl, pH 8.0, 50 mM KCl, 5 mM
MgCl2, 1 mM dithiothreitol, 0.2% Nonidet P-40,
and 10% glycerol) an equal amount (5 µg) of purified GST or GST
fusion proteins and 5 µl of 35S-labeled proteins were
added. After incubation at 4 °C for 2 h (rotating slowly), the
reactions were washed four times with wash buffer (50 mM
Tris-HCl, pH 7.5, 150 mM NaCl, 1 mM EDTA, and 0.2% Nonidet P-40), and 30 µl of 2 × SDS loading buffer was
added. The samples were boiled 5 min and analyzed on a 10%
SDS-polyacrylamide gel. The gel was Coomassie stained to visualize GST
proteins, dried, and subjected to PhosphorImager analysis. For
pull-down assays from cell extracts, experiments were performed with 25 µg of total protein from Xenopus. Western analysis was
performed with the anti-Myc antibody 9E10.
RT-PCR--
Xenopus embryos were injected into both
dorsal and ventral blastomeres at the four-cell stage with 500 pg of
BMP-4, 400 pg of Xvent-2, or 50 pg of GATA-2 RNA. Lithium treatment was
carried out at stage 5 for 15 min with 300 mM lithium
chloride. At stage 7.0 embryos were treated with 25 µg/ml CHX (Sigma)
until control embryos reached stage 10.5. Total RNA was isolated using
RNeasy minicolumns (Qiagen; RNeasy protocol for isolation of total RNA from animal tissues). DNase digestion was performed by adding 1.5 µl
of RNase-free DNase I (Roche Molecular Biochemicals) and 5 µl of 25 mM MgCl2 to 50 µl of total RNA. The reaction
was incubated for 20 min at 37 °C followed by inactivation of DNase
by heating for 10 min at 75 °C. cDNA synthesis was performed
under the following conditions: 1 × RT reaction buffer (Amersham
Biosciences), 10 ng of (dT)12-18, 10 ng of random primer,
0.2 mM dNTPs, 26.8 units of RNAguardTM RNase inhibitor
(Amersham Biosciences), 10 units of Moloney murine leukemia virus
reverse transcriptase (Amersham Biosciences), and 600 ng of total RNA.
For PCRs the following primers and annealing conditions were
used. For histone H4, the upstream primer was
5'-CGGGATAACATTCAGGGTATCACT-3', and the downstream primer was
5'-ATCCATGGCGGTAACTGTCTTCCT-3' with 56 °C annealing temperature. For
Xvent-1B, the upstream primer was 5'-TTCCCTTCAGCATGGTTCAA-3', and the
downstream primer was 5'-GCATCTCCTTGGCATATTTGG-3' with 56 °C
annealing temperature. For GATA-2, the upstream primer was
5'-AGGAACTTTCCAGGTGCATGCAGGAG-3', and the downstream primer was
5'-CGAGGTGCAAATTATTATGTTAC-3' with 56 °C annealing temperature.
LightCycler (Roche Molecular Biochemicals) reactions were set up
according to the manufacturer (SYBR-green fast start protocol) and
using the following primers: ODC (upstream primer,
5'-CAAAGCTTGTTCTACGCATAGCA-3'; downstream primer,
5'-GGTGGCACCAAATTTCACACT-3') and Xvent-1B (upstream primer,
5'-GCTGCAGTATTTCAGTCCT-3'; downstream primer,
5'-ATCTGATTTGGTACTTTTCCCA-3').
Electrophoretic Mobility Shift Assay--
The desired promoter
fragments were excised from the pBSII KS+ ( 249/ 13,
XbaI/DdeI; 249/ 164,
XbaI/EcoRI) or pGL3 vector (-164/ 13,
NheI/DdeI) and 3'-labeled on one strand by a
fill-in reaction with [ -32P]dCTP and Klenow DNA
polymerase. Binding reactions were carried out on ice for 30 min in 30 µl of binding buffer (30 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.5, 30 mM KCl, 1 mM MgCl2, 1 mM dithiothreitol, 13.2% glycerol) containing 1 µg
poly(dI-dC) and 1 ng of the gel-purified probe. After 5 min of
preincubation, the protein was added and incubated for 30 min. The
probes were separated on 7% native acrylamide gels in 0.5 × Tris-borate.
DNase I Footprinting--
Binding reactions for DNase I
footprinting were prepared and incubated as described under
"Electrophoretic Mobility Shift Assay." The concentration of
MgCl2 was subsequently raised to 5 mM for DNase
I footprinting, and 0.065 unit (free DNA) or 0.195 unit (DNA + protein)
of DNase I was added at room temperature for 45 s. The DNase I
digestion was stopped by the addition of an equal volume of sample
buffer (66% deionized formamide, 20 mM EDTA, 660 mM sucrose). Sequencing reactions were performed according
to the method of Maxam and Gilbert (25). After preelectrophoresis for
2 h at 70 W, samples were analyzed by 7% denaturing PAGE at 60 W
in 1 × Tris-borate-EDTA.
Whole Mount in Situ Hybridization--
Localization of Xvent-1B
transcripts in gastrula stage embryos was demonstrated by whole
mount in situ hybridization using a digoxygenin-labeled
antisense RNA (10).
 |
RESULTS |
GATA-2 Is a Direct Target of BMP-4 and an Activator for
Xvent-1B--
Because Xvent-2 has been shown not to be sufficient to
activate Xvent-1B in the presence of CHX (10), we have been
searching for additional factors. One candidate was the zinc finger
transcription factor GATA-2, which is induced by BMP signaling (22). It
has been shown that GATA-2 activates Xvent-1 and that a
dominant-interfering GATA-2 (G2en) specifically suppresses
Xvent-1 but has no effect upon Xvent-2 expression
(21). This prompted us to analyze whether GATA-2 is a direct
BMP target gene and to investigate the effects of GATA-2 on the
Xvent-1 gene and the Xvent-1 promoter.
First, RT-PCR analysis was performed to study the BMP-4 induced
activation of GATA-2. BMP-4 RNA was injected into embryos at
the four-cell stage, CHX was added (10) at stage 7.0 prior to MBT, and
the embryos were cultured until control embryos had reached midgastrula
(stage 10.5). Fig. 1A shows
that BMP-4 leads to an increase of GATA-2 transcripts in
both the absence and presence of CHX. This indicates that BMP-4 being
translated at early cleavage stages is sufficient to activate zygotic
transcription of GATA-2 after MBT even in the absence of
protein biosynthesis. We next have analyzed whether GATA-2 is a
regulator of Xvent-1B expression. In agreement with previous reports
(21) we find that GATA 2 leads to a distinct up-regulation of
Xvent-1B; however, no transcripts are detected when injected
embryos were treated with CHX (Fig. 1B). Dorsal activation
of Xvent-1B in GATA-2 or Xvent-2 RNA-injected embryos was
also demonstrated by whole mount in situ hybridization (Fig.
1, C-E). Although both factors led to an ectopic expression of Xvent-1B RNA within the dorsal marginal zone, only Xvent-2 renders
expression within the most dorsal located region, the Spemann
organizer. Taken together, our results suggest that GATA-2 is a direct target of BMP-4 signaling and that GATA-2 activates Xvent-1B, but that additional factors are required because
activation occurs only in the presence of protein biosynthesis.

View larger version (50K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
GATA-2 is activated
directly by BMP-4 and activates Xvent-1B. Xenopus
embryos were injected with BMP-4 RNA (A) or with GATA-2 RNA
(B) into both dorsal blastomeres at the four-cell stage.
Embryos were treated with or without CHX at stage 7.0. Total RNA
isolated from stage 10.5 embryos was subjected to RT-PCR to evaluate
GATA-2 (A) or Xvent-1B (B)
transcripts. Histone H4 transcripts were used as internal controls.
C-E, Xvent-1B transcripts visualized by whole mount
in situ hybridization in wild type embryos (C)
and in embryos injected previously at the four-cell stage dorsally with
250 pg of GATA-2 RNA (D) or with 250 pg of Xvent-2 RNA
(E). Embryos are viewed from the vegetal pole, with the
dorsal side at the top.
|
|
GATA-2 Rescues the Effect of Xvent-2 P(40)--
To investigate
the involvement of GATA-2 in the activation of the
Xvent-1B promoter and to find out whether it acts downstream of Xvent-2 or in a parallel, cooperative mode, we have used the previously described 249/+52 Xvent-1B promoter fragment fused to a
luciferase reporter (10) and performed coinjections of GATA-2 with the
dominant-negative Xvent-2 P(40) RNA (26) or with truncated BMP type I
receptor (tBR) RNA (27), respectively. As shown in Fig.
2, GATA-2 can rescue the suppression
caused by Xvent-2 P(40). This would still be in line with the
downstream as well as with the parallel mechanism for the activation of
Xvent-1B. However, coinjections of GATA-2 RNA with tBR RNA
do not lead to an increase of luciferase activity compared with the
lowered activity caused by injections of tBR. Because tBR injection
suppresses Xvent-2 transcription, these results suggest that GATA-2
action needs endogenous Xvent-2 protein. They further argue for the
cooperative model because blocking the BMP signaling cascade at the
level of the BMP receptor leads to a loss of Xvent-2 protein in the affected cells and therefore prevents GATA-2 from up-regulating the
Xvent-1B promoter.

View larger version (13K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
GATA-2 rescues the effects of Xvent-2
P(40). The wild type Xvent-1B promoter fragment
( 249/+52) fused to the luciferase (Luc) reporter gene was
coinjected into both ventral blastomeres of Xenopus embryos
at the four-cell stage with 400 pg of dominant-negative Xvent-2 RNA
(Xvent-2 P(40)), 400 pg of tBR RNA, 50 pg of GATA-2 RNA, or
a combination of these RNAs, as indicated. Luciferase activity was
measured at stage 11.
|
|
GATA-2 Interacts Directly with Xvent-2--
To find out whether
Xvent-2 physically interacts with GATA-2, we prepared a GST-Xvent-2
fusion construct and performed pull-down assays with radiolabeled
GATA-2 protein. Fig. 3A shows
that GATA-2 can interact with the GST-Xvent-2 fusion protein, whereas
GST alone is not able to bind to GATA-2 under these conditions. To confirm this result and to investigate whether in vivo
translated Xvent-2 binds to GATA-2, a GST-GATA-2 fusion protein was
constructed and incubated with Xenopus extracts containing
Myc-tagged Xvent-2 protein. As shown by immunoblotting in Fig.
3B, binding of Xvent-2 and GATA-2 was also detected under
these circumstances. Additional experiments revealed that GST-GATA-2
was also able to bind to radiolabeled Xvent-2 P(40) (see Fig.
3C). This is an important finding because GATA-2 RNA
injection resulted in a rescue of luciferase activity suppressed by
injection of this dominant-negative Xvent-2 RNA.

View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
GATA-2 interacts with the C-terminal domain
of Xvent-2. A, GATA-2 was labeled with
[35S]methionine by in vitro
transcription/translation and incubated with GST or GST-Xvent-2. After
washing, the reactions were analyzed by 10% SDS-PAGE. B,
extracts from Xenopus embryos containing Myc-tagged
(MT) Xvent-2 were incubated with GST or GST-GATA-2. Bound
Xvent-2 was detected by Western blot analysis using a Myc antibody.
C, Xvent-2 including the mutants Xvent-2 C, Xvent-2 N,
and Xvent-2 P(40) were labeled with [35S]methionine and
incubated with GST or GST-GATA-2. Reactions were analyzed by 10%
SDS-PAGE.
|
|
To gain more information about the interaction of GATA-2 and Xvent-2,
we performed pull-down experiments with different Xvent-2 mutants
lacking either the N-terminal (Xvent-2 N) or the C-terminal domains
(Xvent-2 C) (Fig. 3C). Whereas Xvent-2 N, which is
missing almost half of the full-length protein, binds to GATA-2,
Xvent-2 C does not, suggesting that interaction of GATA-2 with
Xvent-2 requires the C-terminal part of Xvent-2 protein. Thus, it is
concluded that GATA-2 binds to the C-terminal domain of Xvent-2 and
that this interaction is not disrupted by the P(40) mutation within the homeodomain.
GATA-2 and Xvent-2 Bind to Distinct Elements on the Xvent-1B
Promoter--
The cooperative action of GATA-2 and Xvent-2 suggests
that both transcription factors should bind to distinct elements in the
Xvent-1B promoter. We performed gel shift assays with
different Xvent-1B promoter fragments together with bacterially
expressed full-length GATA-2 and Xvent-2 proteins. As shown
schematically in Fig. 4A,
Xvent-2 and GATA-2 proteins bind to 249/ 13 and -249/ 164 Xvent-1B promoter fragments, respectively. When the
3'-part from positions -164 to 13 was used, only Xvent-2 protein
leads to a shift. Using the Xvent-2 P(40) protein, no binding could be detected to any of these promoter fragments. These results suggest that
the dominant-negative effect of this mutant is caused by a loss of DNA
binding activity.

View larger version (53K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
GATA-2 and Xvent-2 bind to the
Xvent-1B promoter. A, schematic
summary of results from electrophoretic mobility shift assay with
32P-labeled fragments of the Xvent-1B promoter
and Xvent-2, Xvent-2 P(40), or GATA-2 proteins (as indicated). + indicates retardation of the DNA fragment; indicates no retardation.
B-D, DNase I footprinting analysis of GATA-2 (B)
or Xvent-2 protein (C) to the 32P-labeled
249/ 13 or of Xvent-2 to the 32P-labeled 249/ 164
Xvent-1B promoter fragment (D).
G/A indicates guanine and adenine residues from
chemical sequencing reactions; triangles show increasing
amounts of protein (from 40 to 160 ng). Protected regions are indicated
by vertical lines, and GATA-2 and Xvent-2 target motifs are
shown in boxes.
|
|
To gain more detailed information about the binding sequences of GATA-2
and Xvent-2, we performed DNase I protection assays using the
Xvent-1B promoter fragment from position -249 to 13 (Fig.
4, B and C). Fig. 4B shows that GATA-2
protected only one region between positions -202 and -175 containing
a canonical GATA-2 binding site 5'-TGATA-3' (28). In contrast, Xvent-2
protects two regions (Fig. 4C), a proximal region within
positions -111 and 74 and a more distal region between -229 and
-175. These findings confirm the results obtained from the gel shift
experiments. The distal region, which overlaps with the
GATA-2-protected region, was resolved further into three distinct
elements by using a truncated 249/ 164 promoter fragment (Fig.
4D). Inspection of all the Xvent-2 binding sites revealed
the accumulation of nine motifs (see boxes in Fig. 4) that
can be aligned to the consensus sequence 5'-CC/TAAT-3'. This sequence
is in good agreement with results obtained from random oligonucleotide
selection (29) as well as the recently reported 5'-CTAAT-3' motif as an
Xvent-2 target site on the BMP-4 and Xvent-2
genes (6, 19).
Activities of Xvent-2 and GATA-2 Elements on the Xvent-1B
Promoter--
DNA-protein binding assays have revealed that the
Xvent-1B promoter contains binding elements for Xvent-2 and
GATA-2. To analyze the biological relevance of these elements, we have
coinjected different promoter deletions with RNAs for these factors
(Fig. 5). The longest mutant used for
these experiments (-249/+52 Xvent-1B) contains the GATA-2 as well as
the proximal and the distal Xvent-2-binding elements. Coinjections of
this promoter fragment with GATA-2 or Xvent-2 RNA result in an increase
of luciferase activity. A 5'-deletion starting at position -164 and
missing the GATA-2 and distal Xvent-2 binding sites cannot be activated
by GATA-2 but is still activated by Xvent-2 RNA injection. This
activation is most likely the result of the proximal binding site
because a 55/+52 promoter fragment was not activated. Vice versa, a
promoter fragment with an internal deletion ( 249/ /+52) missing the
proximal Xvent-2 binding site is also activated by Xvent-2 RNA.
Surprisingly, GATA-2 fails to activate this mutant, even if the GATA-2
binding site is present. To ensure that the canonical target site in
the distally located GATA-2-binding element is required for the
activity of this factor, we have mutated this site and coinjected this
mutant with GATA-2 or Xvent-2 RNA, respectively. As shown in Fig.
5A, Xvent-2 activates this promoter fragment, whereas GATA-2
is completely ineffective.

View larger version (21K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Effects of Xvent-2 and GATA-2 binding sites
within the Xvent-1B promoter. A, the
wild type Xvent-1B promoter and indicated deletions or
mutations of this fragment (see inset; marks the GATA-2
and # the Xvent-2 binding sites; the arrow
denotes a GATA-2 target sequence, and mutations are indicated by
asterisks) were cloned in front of the luciferase
(Luc) reporter and either injected alone or coinjected with
400 pg of Xvent-2 RNA or 50 pg of GATA-2 RNA into both dorsal
blastomeres of four-cell stage embryos. Luciferase activity was
measured at stage 11. B, pGL3 constructs of the wild type
(WT) or an Xvent-1B promoter mutated in the
GATA-2 binding site (Gm) were coinjected with 50 pg of
GATA-2 and/or 200 pg of Xvent-2 RNA into both dorsal blastomeres of
Xenopus embryos at the four-cell stage. Embryos were
collected at stage 11 for luciferase reporter assay.
|
|
The results obtained from microinjection experiments and from
DNA-protein binding assays support the idea that GATA-2 requires its
own binding site as well as elements responsible for Xvent-2 binding.
In contrast, Xvent-2 seems not only to act in a
GATA-2-dependent manner but can also activate
Xvent-1B in the absence of the GATA-2 binding site.
Therefore, we analyzed whether GATA-2 has any effect on Xvent-2-caused
activation of the Xvent-1B promoter when the GATA-2 binding
site is mutated. Coinjections of Xvent-2 and GATA-2 RNA were performed
with the wild type as well with the mutated promoter fragments (Fig.
5B). As could already be expected from results presented in
Fig. 5A, the wild type promoter was activated strongly by
injection of both RNAs. However, the mutated promoter was repressed
slightly by coinjection with GATA-2 RNA, and even more importantly,
GATA-2 also leads to a distinct suppression of activation caused by
Xvent-2.
GATA-2 and Xvent-2 Are Sufficient to Activate Xvent-1B on the
Ventral Side--
The results presented so far imply that Xvent-2 and
GATA-2 cooperate in the activation of the Xvent-1B promoter.
To analyze whether they are also sufficient to activate transcription
of the Xvent-1B gene if protein synthesis is inhibited, we
have coinjected GATA-2 and Xvent-2 RNA into Xenopus embryos
at the four-cell stage and treated the embryos with CHX before MBT.
Total RNA was isolated for RT-PCR analysis when control embryos had
reached stage 10.5.
It has been shown previously that dorsal injection of Xvent-2 RNA does
not result in Xvent-1B transcription when the embryos are
treated just before MBT with CHX (10). Fig.
6A shows that this failure
also holds true for ventral injection of Xvent-2 and for dorsal
coinjection of Xvent-2 and GATA-2. However, Xvent-1B transcripts are clearly detected in CHX-treated embryos when Xvent-2 and GATA-2 RNAs are coinjected into ventral blastomeres. This means
that GATA-2 cooperates with Xvent-2 and that, although neither of these
factors by itself is sufficient, the two factors together are able to
trigger transcriptional activation of Xvent-1B. There are
two possible explanations for the failure of these factors to evoke the
activation after injection at the dorsal side of the embryo. First, an
additional factor, which is necessary to activate Xvent-1B,
might be missing on the dorsal side, or second, dorsal inhibitors do
not allow transcription of this gene. To address this question, we have
analyzed whether additional ventral signals, i.e. BMP
signaling, could result in an activation of Xvent-1B. We
have coinjected Xvent-2, GATA-2, and BMP-4 RNAs into both dorsal or
ventral blastomeres, respectively. Although ventral injection leads to
an expression of the Xvent-1B gene, no transcripts were
detected after dorsal injection of these RNAs (Fig. 6B). Therefore, even if the existence of additional factors cannot be
excluded, it is more likely that dorsal inhibitors prevent Xvent-1B transcription at the dorsal side.

View larger version (39K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Direct activation of Xvent-1B
by Xvent-2 and GATA-2. Xenopus embryos were
injected with (A) 400 pg of Xvent-2 RNA or Xvent-2 and 50 pg
of GATA-2 RNA or (B) Xvent-2, GATA-2, and 500 pg of BMP-4
RNA at the four-cell stage as indicated. At stage 7, half of the
embryos were treated with CHX. Total RNA was extracted when control
embryos had reached stage 10.5 and subjected to RT-PCR to evaluate
Xvent-1B transcripts. Histone H4 transcripts were determined as an
internal controls.
|
|
Dorsal Wnt Signaling Inhibits Xvent-1B
Transcription--
Dorsalization during early development is achieved
mainly by the canonical Wnt signaling pathway, resulting in the nuclear translocation of -catenin because of an inactivation of glycogen synthase kinase-3 (30). It has also been shown that treatment of
embryos with lithium leads to an inhibition of glycogen synthase kinase-3 and that this procedure, therefore, phenocopies Wnt signaling (31). To analyze the effect of lithium on the regulation of
Xvent-1B, Xvent-2 and GATA-2 RNA were injected into both
ventral blastomeres of four-cell stage embryos. At stage 5, some of the embryos were treated with lithium chloride. At stage 7, they were transferred to CHX-containing medium and cultured until stage 10.5. Because the activation of Xvent-1B by Xvent-2 and GATA-2 in
the presence of CHX is difficult to quantify by conventional methods,
we studied the effects of lithium by using real time PCR on the Roche
LightCycler system. Fig. 7 shows that
treatment with lithium chloride in the absence of CHX suppresses
transcription of Xvent-1B in Xvent-2- and GATA-2-injected as well as in
uninjected embryos. Noteworthy, the activation of Xvent-1B
in the presence of CHX by coinjection of Xvent-2 and GATA-2 (see also
Fig. 6) was abolished completely when embryos were treated with lithium chloride before CHX treatment. This finding suggests that the ubiquitous activation of Wnt signaling throughout the embryo before MBT
results in a suppression of the Xvent-1B gene.

View larger version (11K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
Inhibition of Xvent-1B by
dorsal Wnt signaling. Microinjection of 200 pg of Xvent-2 and 50 pg of GATA-2 RNA into both dorsal blastomeres of Xenopus
embryos at the four-cell stage is shown. Embryos were treated with 300 mM lithium chloride at stage 5 (LiCl St. 5)
and/or 25 µg/ml CHX at stage 7 and cultured until control embryos
reached stage 10.5. cDNA synthesis was performed by using total
RNA. Xvent-1B transcripts were detected using the Roche LightCycler
system and quantified in relation to ornithine decarboxylase.
|
|
Different Mechanisms of Dorsal and Ventral Wnt Pathways Regulate
Xvent-1B--
The canonical Wnt pathway results in an interaction of
-catenin with a high mobility group box transcription factor of the LEF/TCF family (32). To analyze a possible role of Wnt signaling on the
regulation of the Xvent-1B gene, we first searched for LEF/TCF binding motifs within the Xvent promoters and found a putative
LEF/TCF element (5'-CTTTGAT-3') at similar positions in both the
Xvent-1B ( 65/ 59) and Xvent-2B
( 76/ 70) promoters (10). The sequence of this element is
identical to those found in the S1 and S3 sites of the
siamois promoter, which have been shown to interact with
XTCF-3 (33). We mutated this putative LEF/TCF element in the
Xvent-1B promoter and performed coinjections with
Xvent-2/GATA-2 and/or -catenin RNA (Fig.
8A). Interestingly, not only
the wild type ( 249/+52), but also the mutated ( 249/Tm/+52) promoter
is suppressed significantly by injection of -catenin RNA, suggesting
an inhibitory mechanism that is independent of this putative LEF/TCF
element.

View larger version (13K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 8.
Effects of pre- and post-MBT Wnt signaling on
Xvent-1B promoter activity. A, Xenopus
embryos were injected at the four-cell stage into both ventral
blastomeres with 200 pg of Xvent-2/50 pg of GATA-2 and/or 500 pg of
-catenin RNA together with 20 pg of the wild type (WT)
-249/+52 or a 249/Tm/+52 Xvent-1B (see inset;
the arrow denotes a LEF/TCF target sequence, and mutations
are indicated by asterisks). B, 20 pg of
-249/+52, 249/Tm/+52, or -249/Gm/+52 Xvent-1B promoter
pGL3 DNA was injected with or without 350 pg of CMV-Xwnt-8
DNA into both dorsal blastomeres of four-cell stage embryos. Luciferase
(Luc) activity was measured at stage 11.
|
|
In contrast to dorsal Wnts, Xwnt-8 is expressed zygotically in the
ventro/lateral part of the embryo and has been described as a ventral
activator of the Xvent genes (34). Therefore, we have also
investigated the effect of Xwnt-8 DNA injection on the Xvent-1B promoter. DNA must be injected because RNA present
before MBT evokes a dorsalizing response similar to overexpression of -catenin. The cytomegalovirus promoter renders ubiquitous activation of the Xwnt-8 gene within the embryo after the onset of
zygotic transcription. In contrast to injection of -catenin RNA,
Xwnt-8 protein synthesized after MBT activates the wild type
Xvent-1B promoter and depends upon the LEF/TCF binding site
because there was no effect on the mutated -249/Tm/+52 promoter (Fig.
8B). In addition, the activation of Xvent-1B by
Wnt-8 is not affected by mutating the GATA-2-binding element.
In summary, these results suggest that dorsal Wnt signaling suppresses
the activation of Xvent-1B on the dorsal side of the embryo.
This inhibition is independent of the putative LEF/TCF element which,
in contrast, is necessary for the activation of Xvent-1B by
ventral Wnt-8 signaling after MBT.
 |
DISCUSSION |
To investigate the epistatic relationship between Xvent
genes and to learn about their regulation, we have analyzed here the transcriptional control mechanism of the Xvent-1B gene in
Xenopus embryos during gastrulation. Unlike the members of
Xvent-2 subfamily, Xvent-1B is not a direct
target of BMP signaling. Although it can be activated by Xvent-2 and is
regarded as a downstream target of Xvent-2, Xvent-2 is not sufficient
for this activation process because it does not occur in the presence
of CHX (10). In a search for additional factors, we show here that the
zinc finger transcription factor GATA-2, which previously had been
reported to be expressed upon BMP-4 signaling and to affect Xvent-1 but not Xvent-2 expression (21, 22), functions as another regulator of the
Xvent-1 promoter. We demonstrate that GATA-2 is a direct target gene of BMP signaling and that, together with Xvent-2, it is
also essential for the activation of Xvent-1B. This finding contrasts to a previous report showing that PV.1, a closely related member of Xvent-1, and GATA-2 repress each other during blood formation
(35). Although this discrepancy may be the result of the different
developmental context, it is evident from our work and that of others
(21) that GATA-2 at the early gastrula stage is able to activate the
Xvent-1B promoter, if endogenous Xvent-2 protein is present.
To investigate a direct physical interaction between Xvent-2 and
GATA-2, pull-down experiments using GST fusion proteins were performed.
GATA-2 interacted with the full-length Xvent-2 protein as well as with
truncated versions containing the C-terminal domain. Obviously, this
type of interaction is different from the previously described binding
between the homeoprotein Nkx2.5 and the zinc finger transcription
factor GATA-4, where the interaction depended primarily upon amino
acids within the homeodomain (36).
The dominant-negative Xvent-2 P(40), which is characterized by a L/P
exchange preceding the third helix of the homeodomain (26), also
exhibited a strong binding behavior for GATA-2. This result is
interesting because GATA-2 rescued Xvent-2 P(40)-induced suppression of
Xvent-1B promoter activity. Consistent with the fact that
both factors, GATA-2 and Xvent-2, activate the Xvent-1B promoter, gel shift experiments identified binding sites for Xvent-2 and GATA-2. Although Xvent-2 P(40) cannot bind to the Xvent-2 elements
on the Xvent-1B promoter, it has, nevertheless, an
inhibitory effect on the transcription of the Xvent-1B gene.
These results support the idea that GATA-2 and Xvent-2 cooperatively
activate Xvent-1B and that the dominant-negative action of
Xvent-2 P(40) results from a loss of endogenous GATA-2 available to
bind to endogenous Xvent-2 because it is sorted out by an excess of
Xvent-2 P(40). This effect can be compensated for by an overexpression of GATA-2. The protein binds to the dominant-negative as well as to the
remaining endogenous wild type Xvent-2 and therefore rescues expression
of Xvent-1B.
The binding sites of GATA-2 and Xent-2 were determined by gel shift and
subsequent DNase I footprinting experiments. The Xvent-1 promoter region contains a canonical GATA core motif including the
flanking nucleotides preferred by GATA-2 (28). This motif was clearly
shown to bind to GATA-2. In the case of Xvent-2, we have found two
protected regions containing various elements with the consensus
sequence, 5'-CC/TAAT-3', which is identical to those identified within
the BMP-4 and Xvent-2B promoters (6, 19). Furthermore, this sequence is very similar to the target site of the
closely related Xvent-1 protein (5'-CTATTT/C-3'), which was identified
within the XFD-1' promoter (37). The results suggest that
these two transcription factors have similar binding properties.
The requirement of Xvent-2 and GATA-2 binding sites within the
Xvent-1B promoter was studied by microinjection experiments. Mutations of the promoter affecting the GATA-2 and the proximal Xvent-2
binding sites clearly affect the ability of GATA-2 to activate
Xvent-1B. Obviously, GATA-2 requires its own as well as the
proximal Xvent-2-binding element. However, Xvent-2 injections led in
all cases to an increase of luciferase activity except for a minimal
promoter fragment lacking the distal as well as the proximal binding
elements. The presence of the GATA-2 binding site appears to be
important for full activation of the Xvent-1B promoter
because coinjection of GATA-2 suppresses Xvent-2 induced activation if
the GATA-2 site is mutated. This means that
GATA-2-dependent activation of the Xvent-1B
promoter requires a proximal Xvent-2 binding site and that full
activation by Xvent-2 requires an intact GATA-2 binding site. These
results clearly demonstrate that both factors cooperate and support the
hypothesis that the effect of overexpressing the Xvent-2 P(40) mutant
is the result of a loss of endogeous GATA-2.
The question of whether Xvent-2 and GATA-2 are sufficient to activate
the Xvent-1B promoter could not be answered by performing promoter/luciferase assays because these experiments require
translation of the reporter enzyme. However, RT-PCR analysis of
Xvent-1B transcripts in embryos treated with CHX clearly demonstrated
that Xvent-2 and GATA-2 are sufficient for Xvent-1B
activation in the gastrulating embryo, albeit only at the ventral and
not at the dorsal side.
To investigate the suppression of Xvent-1B in the dorsal
hemisphere of the embryo even in the presence of exogenous Xvent-2 and
GATA-2, we focused on inhibitory mechanisms provided by the Wnt
pathway. A pre-MBT Wnt signal results in the nuclear translocation of
-catenin at the future dorsal region. RT-PCR analysis using lithium-treated embryos displayed and mimicked all of the effects of
early pre-MBT Wnt signaling on Xvent-1B repression. Although Xvent-2 and GATA-2 induce transcription of this gene on the ventral side, treatment with lithium chloride completely represses this activation. Identical results are obtained by ventral injection of
Xwnt-8 and -catenin RNA into four-cell stage embryos. In summary, an
artificial pre-MBT Wnt signaling on the ventral side leads to an
inhibition of Xvent-1B. Therefore, it is reasonable to
assume that the dorsal pre-MBT Wnt signal is responsible not only for the suppression of BMP-signaling and for neural development (38), but
also for the dorsal suppression of the Xvent-1B gene. It
should be mentioned, however, that the molecular mechanism and the
components involved in this suppression are not yet identified. It is
also not clear whether the inhibition is a direct or an indirect
response to Wnt signaling. In any case, this mechanism is independent
of BMP-4 gene suppression because coinjection with BMP-4
does not overcome this failure (Fig. 6).
The effects of Wnt signaling are changed dramatically after MBT.
Xwnt-8, which is expressed in the ventro/lateral mesoderm, has already
been shown to be involved in the activation of the Xvent
genes (34). We show here that the identified LEF/TCF site responds
specifically to this activating signal because the Xvent-1B promoter is up-regulated by coinjection of ubiquitously transcribed Xwnt-8 DNA, and mutational disruption of this element
abolishes this response. In contrast, the inhibitory potential of the
pre-MBT signal also being observed for the Xvent-1B promoter
does not require this site because mutation of the LEF/TCF-binding
element did not result in the loss of Xvent-1B repression
caused by -catenin.
Unfortunately, there is not much known about the differences between
early (pre-MBT) and late (post-MBT) Wnt signaling mechanisms. Although
it has been suggested recently that a difference in XTCF-3 dependence
accounts for this change (39), experiments using a
hormone-inducible XTCF-3 led to the conclusion that the same components
of the canonical Wnt signaling pathway including XTCF-3 are required
before and after MBT and that the competence of Wnts to induce a dorsal
axis is lost in the nucleus as a result of changes in the
responsiveness of target promoters (40). Another explanation for the
repressing function of this signaling pathway before the beginning of
zygotic transcription might be an interaction of Xvent-2 and/or GATA-2
with molecules such as CtBP or groucho (41, 42), which are released
from TCF-3 after interaction with -catenin. On the other hand, the
inducing capacity of Xwnt-8 might be regarded as a classical Wnt
signaling process because the LEF/TCF element in the
Xvent-1B promoter is only responsible for activation but not
for suppression. The characterization of Xvent-1B as a gene
being suppressed by pre-MBT and activated by post-MBT signaling and the
identification of the activating element will now facilitate a more
detailed analysis of factors and cofactors that are required for the
change in response to Wnt signaling in the Xenopus blastula.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We are grateful to R. Patient (London), C. Niehrs (Heidelberg), and S. Rastegar (Strasbourg) for generously
providing the DNA constructs used in this study. We also thank A. Schuler-Metz (Ulm) for the Xvent-2 deletion mutants and K. Dillinger
and D. Weber for excellent technical assistance.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
Grant SFB497/A1 and by Fonds der Chemischen Industrie.The costs of publication of this
article were defrayed in part by the
payment of page charges. The article
must therefore be hereby marked
"advertisement" in
accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section
1734 solely to indicate this fact.
To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.:
49-731-502-3280; Fax: 49-731-502-3277; E-mail:
walter.knoechel@medizin.uni-ulm.de.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, April 18, 2002, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M201831200
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
LEF/TCF, lymphoid
enhancer factor/T-cell factor;
BMP, bone morphogenetic protein;
CHX, cycloheximide;
CMV, cytomegalovirus;
GST, glutathione
S-transferase;
MBT, midblastula transition;
RT, reverse
transcription;
tBR, truncated BMP type I receptor;
Tm, promoter mutated
at a TCF target site.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Larabell, C. A.,
Torres, M.,
Rowning, B. A.,
Yost, C.,
Miller, J., Wu, R. M.,
Kimelman, D.,
and Moon, R. T.
(1997)
J. Cell Biol.
136,
1123-1136[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 2.
|
Brannon, M.,
and Kimelman, D.
(1996)
Dev. Biol.
180,
344-347[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 3.
|
Behrens, J.,
von Kries, J. P.,
Kühl, M.,
Bruhn, D.,
Wedlich, D.,
Grosschedl, R.,
and Birchmeier, W.
(1996)
Nature
382,
638-642[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 4.
|
Hogan, B. L. M.
(1996)
Genes Dev.
10,
1580-1594[Free Full Text]
|
| 5.
|
Graff, J. M.
(1997)
Cell
89,
171-174[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 6.
|
Schuler-Metz, A.,
Knöchel, S.,
Kaufmann, E.,
and Knöchel, W.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
34365-34374[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 7.
|
Lemaire, P.
(1996)
Bioessays
18,
701-704[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 8.
|
Gawantka, V.,
Delius, H.,
Hirschfeld, K.,
Blumenstock, C.,
and Niehrs, C.
(1995)
EMBO J.
14,
6268-6279[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 9.
|
Ault, K. T.,
Dirksen, M.-L.,
and Jamrich, M.
(1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
93,
6415-6420[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 10.
|
Rastegar, S.,
Friedle, H.,
Frommer, G.,
and Knöchel, W.
(1999)
Mech. Dev.
81,
139-149[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 11.
|
Onichtchouk, D.,
Gawantka, V.,
Dosch, R.,
Delius, H.,
Hirschfeld, K.,
Blumenstock, C.,
and Niehrs, C.
(1996)
Development
122,
3045-3053[Abstract]
|
| 12.
|
Papalopulu, N.,
and Kintner, C.
(1996)
Dev. Biol.
174,
104-114[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 13.
|
Ladher, R.,
Mohun, T. J.,
Smith, J. C.,
and Snape, A. M.
(1996)
Development
122,
2385-2394[Abstract]
|
| 14.
|
Schmidt, J. E.,
von Dassow, G.,
and Kimelman, D.
(1996)
Development
122,
1711-1721[Abstract]
|
| 15.
|
Imai, Y.,
Gates, M. A.,
Melby, A. E.,
Kimelman, D.,
Schier, A. F.,
and Talbot, W. S.
(2001)
Development
128,
2407-2420[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 16.
|
Moretti, P. A. B.,
Davidson, A. J.,
Baker, E.,
Lilley, B.,
Zon, L. I.,
and D'Andrea, R. J.
(2001)
Genomics
76,
21-29[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 17.
|
Henningfeld, K. A.,
Rastegar, S.,
Adler, G.,
and Knöchel, W.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
21827-21835[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 18.
|
Hata, A.,
Seoane, J.,
Lagna, G.,
Montalvo, E.,
Hemmati-Brivanlou, A.,
and Massagué, J.
(2000)
Cell
100,
229-240[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 19.
|
Henningfeld, K. A.,
Friedle, H.,
Rastegar, S.,
and Knöchel, W.
(2002)
J. Biol. Chem.
277,
2097-2103[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 20.
|
Zon, L. I.,
Mather, C.,
Burgess, S.,
Bolce, M. E.,
Harland, R. M.,
and Orkin, S. H.
(1991)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
88,
10642-10646[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 21.
|
Sykes, T. G.,
Rodaway, A. R. F.,
Walmsley, M. E.,
and Patient, R. K.
(1998)
Development
125,
4595-4605[Abstract]
|
| 22.
|
Maeno, M.,
Mead, P. E.,
Kelley, C., Xu, R. H.,
Kung, H. F.,
Suzuki, A.,
Ueno, N.,
and Zon, L. I.
(1996)
Blood
88,
1965-1972[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 23.
|
Kelley, C.,
Yee, K.,
Harland, R.,
and Zon, L. I.
(1994)
Dev. Biol.
165,
193-205[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 24.
|
Nieuwkoop, P. D.,
and Faber, J.
(1967)
Normal Table of Xenopus laevis (Daudin)
, North Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam
|
| 25.
|
Maxam, A. M.,
and Gilbert, W.
(1980)
Methods Enzymol.
65,
499-560[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 26.
|
Onichtchouk, D.,
Glinka, A.,
and Niehrs, C.
(1998)
Development
125,
1447-1456[Abstract]
|
| 27.
|
Graff, J. M.,
Thies, R. S.,
Song, J. J.,
Celeste, A. J.,
and Melton, D. A.
(1994)
Cell
79,
169-179[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 28.
|
Ko, L. J.,
and Engel, J. D.
(1993)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13,
4011-4022[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 29.
|
Trindade, M.,
Tada, M.,
and Smith, J. C.
(1999)
Dev. Biol.
216,
442-456[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 30.
|
Dominguez, I.,
Itoh, K.,
and Sokol, S. Y.
(1995)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
92,
8498-8502[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 31.
|
Klein, P. S.,
and Melton, D. A.
(1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
93,
8455-8459[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 32.
|
Eastman, Q.,
and Grosschedl, R.
(1999)
Curr. Opin. Cell Biol.
11,
233-240[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 33.
|
Brannon, M.,
Gomperts, M.,
Sumoy, L.,
Moon, R. T.,
and Kimelman, D.
(1997)
Genes Dev.
11,
2359-2370[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 34.
|
Hoppler, S.,
and Moon, R. T.
(1998)
Mech. Dev.
71,
119-129[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 35.
|
Xu, R.-H.,
Ault, K. T.,
Kim, J.,
Park, M.-J.,
Hwang, Y.-S.,
Peng, Y.,
Sredni, D.,
and Kung, H.-f.
(1999)
Dev. Biol.
208,
352-361[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 36.
|
Kasahara, H.,
Usheva, A.,
Ueyama, T.,
Aoki, H.,
Horikoshi, N.,
and Izumo, S.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
4570-4580[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 37.
|
Friedle, H.,
Rastegar, S.,
Paul, H.,
Kaufmann, E.,
and Knöchel, W.
(1998)
EMBO J.
17,
2298-2307[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 38.
|
Baker, J. C.,
Beddington, R. S. P.,
and Harland, R. M.
(1999)
Genes Dev.
13,
3149-3159[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 39.
|
Hamilton, F. S.,
Wheeler, G. N.,
and Hoppler, S.
(2001)
Development
128,
2064-2073
|
| 40.
|
Darken, R. S.,
and Wilson, P. A.
(2001)
Dev. Biol.
234,
42-54[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 41.
|
Roose, J.,
Molenaar, M.,
Peterson, J.,
Hurenkamp, J.,
Brantjes, H.,
Moerer, P.,
van de Wetering, M.,
Destrée, O.,
and Clevers, H.
(1998)
Nature
395,
608-612[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 42.
|
Brannon, M.,
Brown, J. D.,
Bates, R.,
Kimelman, D.,
and Moon, R. T.
(1999)
Development
126,
3159-3170[Abstract]
|
Copyright © 2002 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.

CiteULike Complore Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
V. A. McLin, S. A. Rankin, and A. M. Zorn
Repression of Wnt/{beta}-catenin signaling in the anterior endoderm is essential for liver and pancreas development
Development,
June 15, 2007;
134(12):
2207 - 2217.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. J. Lugus, Y. S. Chung, J. C. Mills, S.-I. Kim, J. A. Grass, M. Kyba, J. M. Doherty, E. H. Bresnick, and K. Choi
GATA2 functions at multiple steps in hemangioblast development and differentiation
Development,
January 15, 2007;
134(2):
393 - 405.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
T. Oren, I. Torregroza, and T. Evans
An Oct-1 binding site mediates activation of the gata2 promoter by BMP signaling
Nucleic Acids Res.,
August 1, 2005;
33(13):
4357 - 4367.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
Y. Cao, S. Knochel, C. Donow, J. Miethe, E. Kaufmann, and W. Knochel
The POU Factor Oct-25 Regulates the Xvent-2B Gene and Counteracts Terminal Differentiation in Xenopus Embryos
J. Biol. Chem.,
October 15, 2004;
279(42):
43735 - 43743.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M.-C. Ramel and A. C. Lekven
Repression of the vertebrate organizer by Wnt8 is mediated by Vent and Vox
Development,
August 15, 2004;
131(16):
3991 - 4000.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
T. J. Sadlon, I. D. Lewis, and R. J. D'Andrea
BMP4: Its Role in Development of the Hematopoietic System and Potential as a Hematopoietic Growth Factor
Stem Cells,
July 1, 2004;
22(4):
457 - 474.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
Copyright © 2002 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
|