Somite subdomains, muscle cell origins, and the four muscle regulatory factor proteins

We show by immunohistology that distinct expression patterns of the four muscle regulatory factor (MRF) proteins identify subdomains of mouse somites. Myf-5 and MyoD are, at specific stages, each expressed in both myotome and dermatome cells. Myf-5 expression is initially restricted to dorsal cells in all somites, as is MyoD expression in neck somites. In trunk somites, however, MyoD is initially expressed in ventral cells. Myogenin and MRF4 are restricted to myotome cells, though the MRF4-expressing cells are initially less widely distributed than the myogenin-expressing cells, which are at all stages found throughout the myotome. All somitic myocytes express one or more MRFs. The transiently distinct expression patterns of the four MRF proteins identify dorsal and ventral subdomains of somites, and suggest that skeletal muscle cells in somites originate at multiple sites and via multiple molecular pathways.     

Differential expression of two MyoD genes in fast and slow muscles of gilthead seabream ( Sparus aurata)

Members of the myogenic regulatory gene family, including MyoD, Myf5, Myogenin and MRF4, are specifically expressed in myoblast and skeletal muscle cells and play important roles in regulating skeletal muscle development and growth. They are capable of converting a variety of non-muscle cells into myoblasts and myotubes. To better understand their roles in the development of fish muscles, we have isolated the MyoD genomic genes from gilthead seabream (Sparus aurata), analyzed the genomic structures, patterns of expression and the regulation of muscle-specific expression. We have demonstrated that seabream contain two distinct non-allelic MyoDgenes, MyoD1 and MyoD2. Sequence analysis revealed that these two MyoD genes shared a similar gene structure. Expression studies demonstrated that they exhibited overlapping but distinct patterns of expression in seabream embryos and adult slow and fast muscles. MyoD1 was expressed in adaxial cells that give rise to slow muscles, and lateral somitic cells that give rise to fast muscles. Similarly, MyoD2 was initially expressed in both slow and fast muscle precursors. However, MyoD2 expression gradually disappeared in the adaxial cells of 10- to 15-somite-stage embryos, whereas its expression in fast muscle precursor cells was maintained. In adult skeletal muscles, MyoD1 was expressed in both slow and fast muscles, whereas MyoD2 was specifically expressed in fast muscles. Treating seabream embryos with forskolin, a protein kinase A activator, inhibited MyoD1 expression in adaxial cells, while expression in fast muscle precursors was not affected. Promoter analysis demonstrated that both MyoD1 and MyoD2 promoters could drive green fluorescence protein expression in muscle cells of zebrafish embryos. Together, these data suggest that the two non-allelic MyoD genes are functional in seabream and their expression is regulated differently in fast and slow muscles. Hedgehog signaling is required for induction of MyoDexpression in adaxial cells.     

MRFs家族基因在翘嘴鳜成体不同组织及器官中的表达特征

生肌调节因子(MRFs)家族成员包括MRF4、Myf5、Myogenin和MyoD,是肌肉形成的关键控制因素,其作为一种转录因子在肌肉的发育分化过程中发挥重要作用。本研究通过RT-qPCR方法分析MRFs家族基因在翘嘴鳜成体中不同组织及器官的表达情况,阐明其在肌肉组织中的特异性表达。结果显示:MRFs家族基因在成体翘嘴鳜肌肉、心脏、肝脏、脾脏、肾脏、肠道和脑组织及器官中均检测到表达,且在肌肉中的表达量显著高于其他组织及器官中的表达量(p<0.05)。为研究生肌调节因子在翘嘴鳜肌肉发育过程中的作用提供了基础资料。     

Differential binding of quadruplex structures of muscle-specific genes regulatory sequences by MyoD, MRF4 and myogenin

Four myogenic regulatory factors (MRFs); MyoD, Myf-5, MRF4 and Myogenin direct muscle tissue differentiation. Heterodimers of MRFs with E-proteins activate muscle-specific gene expression by binding to E-box motifs d(CANNTG) in their promoters or enhancers. We showed previously that in contrast to the favored binding of E-box by MyoD-E47 heterodimers, homodimeric MyoD associated preferentially with quadruplex structures of regulatory sequences of muscle-specific genes. To inquire whether other MRFs shared the DNA binding preferences of MyoD, the DNA affinities of hetero- and homo-dimeric MyoD, MRF4 and Myogenin were compared. Similarly to MyoD, heterodimers with E47 of MRF4 or Myogenin bound E-box more tightly than quadruplex DNA. However, unlike homodimeric MyoD or MRF4, Myogenin homodimers associated weakly and nonpreferentially with quadruplex DNA. By reciprocally switching basic regions between MyoD and Myogenin we demonstrated dominance of MyoD in determining the quadruplex DNA-binding affinity. Thus, Myogenin with an implanted MyoD basic region bound quadruplex DNA nearly as tightly as MyoD. However, a grafted Myogenin basic region did not diminish the high affinity of homodimeric MyoD for quadruplex DNA. We speculate that the dissimilar interaction of MyoD and Myogenin with tetrahelical domains in muscle gene promoters may differently regulate their myogenic activities.     

Related expression of MyoD and Myf5 with myosin heavy chain isoform types in bovine adult skeletal muscles

Skeletal muscles are characterized as fast and slow muscles, according to the expression pattern of myosin heavy chain (MyHC) isoforms in the muscle fibers. To investigate the relationships between MyHC isoforms and myogenic regulatory factors (MRFs) including MyoD, Myf5, myogenin, and MRF4 in adult skeletal muscles, expressions of these MRFs in the ten muscles of three cows were analyzed by a semi-quantitative RT-PCR. The results showed that MyoD expression was significantly lower in the lingual muscles (TN), masseter (MS) and diaphragm (DP), which lack MyHC-2x (fast glycolytic) expression and abound with MyHC-slow (slow oxidative) and/or MyHC-2a (fast oxidative), than it was in the pectoralis (PP), psoas major (PM), longissimus thoracis (LT), spinnalis (SP), semitendinosus (ST), semimembranosus (SM), and biceps femoris (BF). In contrast, the Myf5 expression in TN, MS, and DP was significantly higher than in PM, LT, ST, SM, and BF. No significant difference was observed in myogenin and MRF4 expression among the muscles tested. The results suggest that MyoD and Myf5 influence the MyHC isoform expression, although the effects are not decisive in specifying the phenotypes of adult muscles.     

Specific activation of the acetylcholine receptor subunit genes by MyoD family proteins

Whether the myogenic regulatory factors (MRFs) of the MyoD family can discriminate among the muscle gene targets for the proper and reproducible formation of skeletal muscle is a recurrent question. We have previously shown that, in Xenopus laevis, myogenin specifically transactivated muscle structural genes in vivo. In the present study, we used the Xenopus model to examine the role of XMyoD, XMyf5, and XMRF4 for the transactivation of the (nicotinic acetylcholine receptor) nAChR genes in vivo. During early Xenopus development, the expression patterns of nAChR subunit genes proved to be correlated with the expression patterns of the MRFs. We show that XMyf5 specifically induced the expression of the delta-subunit gene in cap animal assays and in endoderm cells of Xenopus embryos but was unable to activate the expression of the gamma-subunit gene. In embryos, overexpression of a dominant-negative XMyf5 variant led to the repression of delta-but not gamma-subunit gene expression. Conversely, XMyoD and XMRF4 activated gamma-subunit gene expression but were unable to activate delta-subunit gene expression. Finally, all MRFs induced expression of the alpha-subunit gene. These findings strengthen the concept that one MRF can specifically control a subset of muscle genes that cannot be activated by the other MRFs.     

Specific requirements of MRFs for the expression of muscle specific microRNAs, miR-1, miR-206 and miR-133

The expression of three microRNAs, miR-1, miR-206 and miR-133 is restricted to skeletal myoblasts and cardiac tissue during embryo development and muscle cell differentiation, which suggests a regulation by muscle regulatory factors (MRFs). Here we show that inhibition of C2C12 muscle cell differentiation by FGFs, which interferes with the activity of MRFs, suppressed the expression of miR-1, miR-206 and miR-133. To further investigate the role of myogenic regulators (MRFs), Myf5, MyoD, Myogenin and MRF4 in the regulation of muscle specific microRNAs we performed gain and loss-of-function experiments in vivo, in chicken and mouse embryos. We found that directed expression of MRFs in the neural tube of chicken embryos induced ectopic expression of miR-1 and miR-206. Conversely, the lack of Myf5 but not of MyoD resulted in a loss of miR-1 and miR-206 expression. Taken together our results demonstrate differential requirements of distinct MRFs for the induction of microRNA gene expression during skeletal myogenesis.     

Identification of a critical control element directing expression of the muscle-specific transcription factor MRF4 in the mouse embryo

Skeletal muscle development in the vertebrate embryo critically depends on the myogenic regulatory factors (MRFs) including MRF4 and Myf5. Both genes exhibit distinct expression patterns during mouse embryogenesis, although they are genetically closely linked with multiple regulatory elements dispersed throughout the common gene locus. MRF4 has a biphasic expression profile, first in somites and later in foetal skeletal muscles. Here, we demonstrate by transgenic analysis that elements within a 7.5-kb promoter fragment of the MRF4 gene are sufficient to drive the embryonic wave of expression very similar to the endogenous gene in somites of mouse embryos. In contrast, a 3-kb fragment of the proximal promoter fails to support expression in the myotome, suggesting that essential cis-acting elements are located between -7.5 and -3 kb upstream of MRF4. Further analysis of this sequence delimits an essential region between -6.6 and -5.6 kb that together with the 3-kb promoter fragment directs transgene expression in the epaxial myotome of all somites during the appropriate developmental period. These data provide evidence that the partly overlapping expression patterns of Mrf4 and Myf5 in somites are controlled by distinct regulatory elements. We also show that 11.4 kb sequence upstream of MRF4, including the promoter and the somitic control region identified in this study, is not sufficient to elicit target specificity towards the strong Myf5 (-58/-48 kb) enhancer, suggesting that additional yet unidentified elements are necessary to convey promoter selectivity and protect the MRF4 gene from this enhancer.