Mice mutant for both Hoxa1 and Hoxb1 show extensive remodeling of the hindbrain and defects in craniofacial development.

The analysis of mice mutant for both Hoxa1 and Hoxb1 suggests that these two genes function together to pattern the hindbrain. Separately, mutations in Hoxa1 and Hoxb1 have profoundly different effects on hindbrain development. Hoxa1 mutations disrupt the rhombomeric organization of the hindbrain, whereas Hoxb1 mutations do not alter the rhombomeric pattern, but instead influence the fate of cells originating in rhombomere 4. We suggest that these differences are not the consequences of different functional roles for these gene products, but rather reflect differences in the kinetics of Hoxa1 and Hoxb1 gene expression. In strong support of the idea that Hoxa1 and Hoxb1 have overlapping functions, Hoxa1/Hoxb1 double mutant homozygotes exhibit a plethora of defects either not seen, or seen only in a very mild form, in mice mutant for only Hoxa1 or Hoxb1. Examples include: the loss of both rhombomeres 4 and 5, the selective loss of the 2(nd) branchial arch, and the loss of most, but not all, 2(nd) branchial arch-derived tissues. We suggest that the early role for both of these genes in hindbrain development is specification of rhombomere identities and that the aberrant development of the hindbrain in Hoxa1/Hoxb1 double mutants proceeds through two phases, the misspecification of rhombomeres within the hindbrain, followed subsequently by size regulation of the misspecified hindbrain through induction of apoptosis.     

Hoxa2 and Hoxb2 control dorsoventral patterns of neuronal development in the rostral hindbrain

Little is known about how the generation of specific neuronal types at stereotypic positions within the hindbrain is linked to Hox gene-mediated patterning. Here, we show that during neurogenesis, Hox paralog group 2 genes control both anteroposterior (A-P) and dorsoventral (D-V) patterning. Hoxa2 and Hoxb2 differentially regulate, in a rhombomere-specific manner, the expression of several genes in broad D-V-restricted domains or narrower longitudinal columns of neuronal progenitors, immature neurons, and differentiating neuronal subtypes. Moreover, Hoxa2 and Hoxb2 can functionally synergize in controlling the development of ventral neuronal subtypes in rhombomere 3 (r3). Thus, in addition to their roles in A-P patterning, Hoxa2 and Hoxb2 have distinct and restricted functions along the D-V axis during neurogenesis, providing insights into how neuronal fates are assigned at stereotypic positions within the hindbrain.     

Differences in Krox20-dependent regulation of Hoxa2 and Hoxb2 during hindbrain development

During hindbrain development, segmental regulation of the paralogous Hoxa2 and Hoxb2 genes in rhombomeres (r) 3 and 5 involves Krox20-dependent enhancers that have been conserved during the duplication of the vertebrate Hox clusters from a common ancestor. Examining these evolutionarily related control regions could provide important insight into the degree to which the basic Krox20-dependent mechanisms, cis-regulatory components, and their organization have been conserved. Toward this goal we have performed a detailed functional analysis of a mouse Hoxa2 enhancer capable of directing reporter expression in r3 and r5. The combined activities of five separate cis-regions, in addition to the conserved Krox20 binding sites, are involved in mediating enhancer function. A CTTT (BoxA) motif adjacent to the Krox20 binding sites is important for r3/r5 activity. The BoxA motif is similar to one (Box1) found in the Hoxb2 enhancer and indicates that the close proximity of these Box motifs to Krox20 sites is a common feature of Krox20 targets in vivo. Two other rhombomeric elements (RE1 and RE3) are essential for r3/r5 activity and share common TCT motifs, indicating that they interact with a similar cofactor(s). TCT motifs are also found in the Hoxb2 enhancer, suggesting that they may be another common feature of Krox20-dependent control regions. The two remaining Hoxa2 cis-elements, RE2 and RE4, are not conserved in the Hoxb2 enhancer and define differences in some of components that can contribute to the Krox20-dependent activities of these enhancers. Furthermore, analysis of regulatory activities of these enhancers in a Krox20 mutant background has uncovered differences in their degree of dependence upon Krox20 for segmental expression. Together, this work has revealed a surprising degree of complexity in the number of cis-elements and regulatory components that contribute to segmental expression mediated by Krox20 and sheds light on the diversity and evolution of Krox20 target sites and Hox regulatory elements in vertebrates.     

Roles of Hoxa1 and Hoxa2 in patterning the early hindbrain of the mouse

Early in its development, the vertebrate hindbrain is transiently subdivided into a series of compartments called rhombomeres. Genes have been identified whose expression patterns distinguish these cellular compartments. Two of these genes, Hoxa1 and Hoxa2, have been shown to be required for proper patterning of the early mouse hindbrain and the associated neural crest. To determine the extent to which these two genes function together to pattern the hindbrain, we generated mice simultaneously mutant at both loci. The hindbrain patterning defects were analyzed in embryos individually mutant for Hoxa1 and Hoxa2 in greater detail and extended to embryos mutant for both genes. From these data a model is proposed to describe how Hoxa1, Hoxa2, Hoxb1, Krox20 (Egr2) and kreisler function together to pattern the early mouse hindbrain. Critical to the model is the demonstration that Hoxa1 activity is required to set the anterior limit of Hoxb1 expression at the presumptive r3/4 rhombomere boundary. Failure to express Hoxb1 to this boundary in Hoxa1 mutant embryos initiates a cascade of gene misexpressions that result in misspecification of the hindbrain compartments from r2 through r5. Subsequent to misspecification of the hindbrain compartments, ectopic induction of apoptosis appears to be used to regulate the aberrant size of the misspecified rhombomeres.     

Compensatory defects associated with mutations in Hoxa1 restore normal palatogenesis to Hoxa2 mutants.

The rhombencephalic neural crest play several roles in craniofacial development. They give rise to the cranial sensory ganglia and much of the craniofacial skeleton, and are vital for patterning of the craniofacial muscles. The loss of Hoxa1 or Hoxa2 function affects the development of multiple neural crest-derived structures. To understand how these two genes function together in craniofacial development, an allele was generated that disrupts both of these linked genes. Some of the craniofacial defects observed in the double mutants were additive combinations of those that exist in each of the single mutants, indicating that each gene functions independently in the formation of these structures. Other defects were found only in the double mutants demonstrating overlapping or synergistic functions. We also uncovered multiple defects in the attachments and trajectories of the extrinsic tongue and hyoid muscles in Hoxa2 mutants. Interestingly, the abnormal trajectory of two of these muscles, the styloglossus and the stylohyoideus, blocked the attachment of the hyoglossus to the greater horn of the hyoid, which in turn correlated exactly with the presence of cleft palate in Hoxa2 mutants. We suggest that the hyoglossus, whose function is to depress the lateral edges of the tongue, when unable to make its proper attachment to the greater horn of the hyoid, forces the tongue to adopt an abnormal posture which blocks closure of the palatal shelves. Unexpectedly, in Hoxa1/Hoxa2 double mutants, the penetrance of cleft palate is dramatically reduced. We show that two compensatory defects, associated with the loss of Hoxa1 function, restore normal attachment of the hyoglossus to the greater horn thereby allowing the palatal shelves to lift and fuse above the flattened tongue.     

Expression of the mouse labial-like homeobox-containing genes, Hox 2.9 and Hox 1.6, during segmentation of the hindbrain.

The sequence of a mouse Hox 2.9 cDNA clone is presented. The predicted homeodomain is similar to that of the Drosophila gene labial showing 80% identity. The equivalent gene in the Hox 1 cluster is Hox 1.6 which shows extensive similarity to Hox 2.9 both within and outside the homeodomain. Hox 2.9 and Hox 1.6 are the only two mouse members of the labial-like family of homeobox-containing genes as yet identified. Hox 2.9 has previously been shown to be expressed in a single segmental unit of the developing hindbrain (rhombomere) and has been predicted to be involved in conferring rhombomere identity. To analyse further the function of Hox 2.9 during development and to determine if the other mouse labial-like gene Hox 1.6, displays similar properties, we have investigated the expression patterns of these two genes and an additional rhombomere-specific gene, Krox 20, on consecutive embryonic sections at closely staged intervals. This detailed analysis has enabled us to draw the following conclusions: (1) There are extensive similarities in the temporal and spatial expression of Hox 2.9 and Hox 1.6, throughout the period that both genes are expressed in the embryo (7 1/2 to 10 days). At 8 days the genes occupy identical domains in the neuroectoderm and mesoderm with the same sharp anterior boundary in the presumptive hindbrain. These similarities indicate a functional relationship between the genes and further suggest that the labial-like genes are responding to similar signals in the embryo. (2) By 9 days the neuroectoderm expression of both genes retreats posteriorly along the anteroposterior (AP) axis. The difference at this stage between the expression patterns is the persistence of Hox 2.9 in a specific region of the hindbrain, illustrating the capacity of Hox 2.9 to respond to additional positional regulatory signals and indicating a unique function for this gene in the hindbrain. (3) The restriction of Hox 2.9 expression in the hindbrain occurs at 8 1/2 days, approximately the same time as Krox 20 is first detected in the posterior adjoining domain. The mutually exclusive expression of Hox 2.9 and Krox 20 demarcated by sharp expression boundaries suggest that compartmentalisation of cells within the hindbrain has occurred up to 6 h before rhombomeres (morphological segments) are clearly visible. (4) Hox 2.9 expression is confined to the region of rhombomere 4 that shows cell lineage restriction and, unlike Krox 20, is expressed throughout the period that rhombomeres are visible (to 11 1/2 days).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)     

Knockdown of the complete Hox paralogous group 1 leads to dramatic hindbrain and neural crest defects

The Hox paralogous group 1 (PG1) genes are the first and initially most anterior Hox genes expressed in the embryo. In Xenopus, the three PG1 genes, Hoxa1, Hoxb1 and Hoxd1, are expressed in a widely overlapping domain, which includes the region of the future hindbrain and its associated neural crest. We used morpholinos to achieve a complete knockdown of PG1 function. When Hoxa1, Hoxb1 and Hoxd1 are knocked down in combination, the hindbrain patterning phenotype is more severe than in the single or double knockdowns, indicating a degree of redundancy for these genes. In the triple PG1 knockdown embryos the hindbrain is reduced and lacks segmentation. The patterning of rhombomeres 2 to 7 is lost, with a concurrent posterior expansion of the rhombomere 1 marker, Gbx2. This effect could be via the downregulation of other Hox genes, as we show that PG1 function is necessary for the hindbrain expression of Hox genes from paralogous groups 2 to 4. Furthermore, in the absence of PG1 function, the cranial neural crest is correctly specified but does not migrate into the pharyngeal arches. Embryos with no active PG1 genes have defects in derivatives of the pharyngeal arches and, most strikingly, the gill cartilages are completely missing. These results show that the complete abrogation of PG1 function in Xenopus has a much wider scope of effect than would be predicted from the single and double PG1 knockouts in other organisms.     

Retinoids regulate the anterior expression boundaries of 5' Hoxb genes in posterior hindbrain

We describe the regulatory interactions that cause anterior extension of the mouse 5' Hoxb expression domains from spinal cord levels to their definitive boundaries in the posterior hindbrain between embryonic day E10 and E11.5. This anterior expansion is retinoid dependent since it does not occur in mouse embryos deficient for the retinoic acid-synthesizing enzyme retinaldehyde dehydrogenase 2. A retinoic acid response element (RARE) was identified downstream of Hoxb5 and shown to be essential for expression of Hoxb5 and Hoxb8 reporter transgenes in the anterior neural tube. The spatio-temporal activity of this element overlaps with rostral extension of the expression domain of endogenous Hoxb5, Hoxb6 and Hoxb8 into the posterior hindbrain. The RARE and surrounding sequences are found at homologous positions in the human, mouse and zebrafish genome, which supports an evolutionarily conserved regulatory function.     

Segmental expression of Hoxb2 in r4 requires two separate sites that integrate cooperative interactions between Prep1, Pbx and Hox proteins

Direct auto- and cross-regulatory interactions between Hox genes serve to establish and maintain segmentally restricted patterns in the developing hindbrain. Rhombomere r4-specific expression of both Hoxb1 and Hoxb2 depends upon bipartite cis Hox response elements for the group 1 paralogous proteins, Hoxal and Hoxbl. The DNA-binding ability and selectivity of these proteins depend upon the formation of specific heterodimeric complexes with members of the PBC homeodomain protein family (Pbx genes). The r4 enhancers from Hoxb1 and Hoxb2 have the same activity, but differ with respect to the number and organisation of bipartite Pbx/Hox (PH) sites required, suggesting the intervention of other components/sequences. We report here that another family of homeodomain proteins (TALE, Three-Amino acids-Loop-Extension: Prep1, Meis, HTH), capable of dimerizing with Pbx/EXD, is involved in the mechanisms of r4-restricted expression. We show that: (1) the r4-specific Hoxb1 and Hoxb2 enhancers are complex elements containing separate PH and Prep/Meis (PM) sites; (2) the PM site of the Hoxb2, but not Hoxb1, enhancer is essential in vivo for r4 expression and also influences other sites of expression; (3) both PM and PH sites are required for in vitro binding of Prepl-Pbx and formation and binding of a ternary Hoxbl-Pbxla (or 1b)-Prepl complex. (4) A similar ternary association forms in nuclear extracts from embryonal P19 cells, but only upon retinoic acid induction. This requires synthesis of Hoxbl and also contains Pbx with either Prepl or Meisl. Together these findings highlight the fact that PM sites are found in close proximity to bipartite PH motifs in several Hox responsive elements shown to be important in vivo and that such sites play an essential role in potentiating regulatory activity in combination with the PH motifs.     

Expression of Hoxa2 in rhombomere 4 is regulated by a conserved cross-regulatory mechanism dependent upon Hoxb1

The Hoxa2 gene is an important component of regulatory events during hindbrain segmentation and head development in vertebrates. In this study we have used sequenced comparisons of the Hoxa2 locus from 12 vertebrate species in combination with detailed regulatory analyses in mouse and chicken embryos to characterize the mechanistic basis for the regulation of Hoxa2 in rhombomere (r) 4. A highly conserved region in the Hoxa2 intron functions as an r4 enhancer. In vitro binding studies demonstrate that within the conserved region three bipartite Hox/Pbx binding sites (PH1-PH3) in combination with a single binding site for Pbx-Prep/Meis (PM) heterodimers co-operate to regulate enhancer activity in r4. Mutational analysis reveals that these sites are required for activity of the enhancer, suggesting that the r4 enhancer from Hoxa2 functions in vivo as a Hox-response module in combination with the Hox cofactors, Pbx and Prep/Meis. Furthermore, this r4 enhancer is capable of mediating a response to ectopic HOXB1 expression in the hindbrain. These findings reveal that Hoxa2 is a target gene of Hoxb1 and permit us to develop a gene regulatory network for r4, whereby Hoxa2, along with Hoxb1, Hoxb2 and Hoxa1, is integrated into a series of auto- and cross-regulatory loops between Hox genes. These data highlight the important role played by direct cross-talk between Hox genes in regulating hindbrain patterning.     

Expression of zebrafish Hoxa1a in neuronal cells of the midbrain and anterior hindbrain

The expression pattern of zebrafish hoxa1a mRNA during embryonic development was studied. Herein, we show that hoxa1a mRNA is expressed in the ventral region of both the midbrain and anterior hindbrain during the developmental period from the pharyngula to the protruding-mouth stages via whole-mount in situ hybridization. Furthermore, double-labeling with anti-zHu antibody confirms that the zebrafish hoxa1a gene is expressed in neuronal cells. The observed temporal and spatial distributions of zebrafish hoxa1a mRNA differ greatly from the expression patterns of zebrafish hoxb1a and hoxb1b paralagous genes. In addition, in embryos injected with mouse ihh mRNA, hoxa1a-expressing cells increase in number with a dorsalized expression pattern in the midbrain.     

Synergy between Hoxa1 and Hoxb1: the relationship between arch patterning and the generation of cranial neural crest

Hoxa1 and Hoxb1 have overlapping synergistic roles in patterning the hindbrain and cranial neural crest cells. The combination of an ectoderm-specific regulatory mutation in the Hoxb1 locus and the Hoxa1 mutant genetic background results in an ectoderm-specific double mutation, leaving the other germ layers impaired only in Hoxa1 function. This has allowed us to examine neural crest and arch patterning defects that originate exclusively from the neuroepithelium as a result of the simultaneous loss of Hoxa1 and Hoxb1 in this tissue. Using molecular and lineage analysis in this double mutant background we demonstrate that presumptive rhombomere 4, the major site of origin of the second pharyngeal arch neural crest, is reduced in size and has lost the ability to generate neural crest cells. Grafting experiments using wild-type cells in cultured normal or double mutant mouse embryos demonstrate that this is a cell-autonomous defect, suggesting that the formation or generation of cranial neural crest has been uncoupled from segmental identity in these mutants. Furthermore, we show that loss of the second arch neural crest population does not have any adverse consequences on early patterning of the second arch. Signalling molecules are expressed correctly and pharyngeal pouch and epibranchial placode formation are unaffected. There are no signs of excessive cell death or loss of proliferation in the epithelium of the second arch, suggesting that the neural crest cells are not the source of any indispensable mitogenic or survival signals. These results illustrate that Hox genes are not only necessary for proper axial specification of the neural crest but that they also play a vital role in the generation of this population itself. Furthermore, they demonstrate that early patterning of the separate components of the pharyngeal arches can proceed independently of neural crest cell migration.     

Meis3 synergizes with Pbx4 and Hoxb1b in promoting hindbrain fates in the zebrafish

Many Hox proteins are thought to require Pbx and Meis co-factors to specify cell identity during embryogenesis. Here we demonstrate that Meis3 synergizes with Pbx4 and Hoxb1b in promoting hindbrain fates in the zebrafish. We find that Hoxb1b and Pbx4 act together to induce ectopic hoxb1a expression in rhombomere 2 of the hindbrain. In contrast, Hoxb1b and Pbx4 acting together with Meis3 induce hoxb1a, hoxb2, krox20 and valentino expression rostrally and cause extensive transformation of forebrain and midbrain fates to hindbrain fates, including differentiation of excess rhombomere 4-specific Mauthner neurons. This synergistic effect requires that Hoxb1b and Meis3 have intact Pbx-interaction domains, suggesting that their in vivo activity is dependent on binding to Pbx4. In the case of Meis3, binding to Pbx4 is also required for nuclear access. Our results are consistent with Hoxb1b and Meis3 interacting with Pbx4 to form complexes that regulate hindbrain development during zebrafish embryogenesis.     

Forskolin-resistant Y1 mutants harbor defects associated with the guanyl nucleotide-binding regulatory protein, Gs

The properties of the adenylate cyclase from forskolin-resistant mutants of Y1 adrenocortical tumor cells was compared with the properties of the enzyme from parental Y1 cells in order to localize the site of mutation. In parental Y1 cells, forskolin stimulated adenylate cyclase activity with kinetics suggestive of an interaction at two sites; in mutant cells, forskolin resistance was characterized by a decrease in enzymatic activity at both sites. Forskolin potentiated the enzyme's responses to NaF and guanyl-5'-yl imidodiphosphate (Gpp(NH)p) in parent and mutant clones, and the mutant enzyme showed the same requirements for Mg2+ and Mn2+ as did the parent enzyme. The adenylate cyclase associated with forskolin-resistant mutants was insensitive to ACTH and was less responsive to Gpp(NH)p than was the parent enzyme. In parental Y1 cells and in the forskolin-resistant mutants, cholera toxin catalyzed the transfer of [32P]ADP-ribose from [32P]NAD+ into three membrane proteins associated with the alpha subunit of Gs; however, the amount of labeled ADP-ribose incorporated into mutant membranes was reduced by as much as 70%. Both parent and mutant membranes were labeled by pertussis toxin to the same extent. The insensitivity of the mutant adenylate cyclase to ACTH and Gpp(NH)p and the selective resistance of the mutant membranes to cholera toxin-catalyzed ADP-ribosylation suggest that a specific defect associated with Gs is involved in the mutation to forskolin resistance in Y1 cells.     

Regulation of Hoxb3 expression in the hindbrain and pharyngeal arches by rae28, a member of the mammalian Polycomb group of genes

During animal development, Hox genes are expressed in characteristic, spatially restricted patterns and specify regional identities along the anterior-posterior (A-P) axis. Polycomb group (PcG) proteins in Drosophila repress Hox expression and maintain the expression patterns during development. Mice deficient for homologues of the Drosophila PcG genes, such as M33, bmi1, mel18, rae28 and eed, show altered Hox expression patterns. In this study, we examined the time course of Hoxb3 expression during late gastrulation and early segmentation of rae28-deficient mice. Hoxb3 was expressed ectopically in pharyngeal arch and hindbrain from embryonic day (E) 9.5 and 10.5, respectively. The anterior boundary of ectopic expression in the hindbrain extended gradually in the rostral direction as development proceeded from E10.5 to E12.5. Expression of kreisler and Krox20, which function as positive regulators of Hoxb3 expression, was not affected in rae28-deficient embryos. Analysis of a neural crest marker, p75, in rae28-deficient mice revealed that the neural crest cells begin to ectopically express Hoxb3 after leaving the hindbrain. Our results suggest that rae28 is not required for the establishment but maintenance of Hoxb3 expression.