The Mechanism of σ-Crystallin Gene Regulation: Cooperation of Lens-Specific and Non-Specific Elements1

Employing δ-crystallin gene as a model, we have investigated tissue-specific gene regulation. Our approach was to analyze regulatory elements associated with the gene utilizing gene transfer techniques. Introduction of the chicken δ1-crystallin gene into the genome of developing mouse embryos resulted in lens-specific expression, indicating that the elements governing the tissue specificity are located in the DNA sequence introduced. Through analysis of various regions of the δ1-crystallin gene and the associated DNA sequences, we identified a lens-specific enhancer in the third intron of the gene. It was demonstrated that this enhancer alone is sufficient to account for lens specificity of the δ1-crystallin gene. Dissection of the δ1-crystallin enhancer and functional assessment by multiplication of enhancer fragments demonstrated the cooperative interaction of lens-specific and nonspecific elements in the enhancer. The mechanism by which heterologous elements cooperate in generating enhancer activity unquestionably provides great flexibility to the regulatory system, and may account for developmental modulation of gene activity superimposed on tissue specificity.     

Spatial specification of mammalian eye territories by reciprocal transcriptional repression of Pax2 and Pax6

We have studied the molecular basis of the Pax2 and Pax6 function in the establishment of visual system territories. Loss-of-function mutants have revealed crucial roles for Pax2 in the generation of the optic stalk and for Pax6 in the development of the optic cup. Ectopic expression of Pax6 in the optic stalk under control of Pax2 promoter elements resulted in a shift of the optic cup/optic stalk boundary indicated by the presence of retinal pigmented cells on the optic stalk. By studying mouse embryos at early developmental stages we detected an expansion of Pax2 expression domain in the Pax6(-/-) mutant and of Pax6 expression domain in the Pax2(-/-) embryo. These results suggest that the position of the optic cup/optic stalk boundary depends on Pax2 and Pax6 expression, hinting at a possible molecular interaction. Using gel shift experiments, we confirmed the presence of Pax2- and Pax6-binding sites on the retina enhancer of the Pax6 gene and on the Pax2 upstream control region, respectively. Co-transfection experiments revealed a reciprocal inhibition of Pax2 promoter/enhancer activity by Pax6 protein and vice versa. Based on our findings, we propose a model for Pax gene regulation that establishes the proper spatial regionalization of the mammalian visual system.     

Pax6 is misexpressed in Sox1 null lens fiber cells

Sox1 null lens fiber cells fail to elongate and have disrupted expression of gamma-crystallin. We have evaluated the expression of Sox1 and Pax6 proteins during critical stages of lens morphogenesis, with particular focus on fiber cell differentiation. While Pax6 and Sox1 are co-expressed during early stages of fiber cell differentiation, Sox1 up-regulation coincides temporally with the down-regulation of Pax6, and these proteins therefore display a striking inverse expression pattern in the lens fiber cell compartment. Furthermore, Pax6 is inappropriately expressed in the fiber cells of Sox1 null mice and the Pax6 target, alpha5 integrin, is simultaneously misexpressed. Finally, we demonstrate a genetic interaction between Sox1 and Pax6, as Sox1 heterozygosity partially rescues the diameter of Pax6(Sey) lenses by increasing the number of cells in the fiber cell compartment.     

A reconstituted system reveals how activating and inhibitory interactions control DDK dependent assembly of the eukaryotic replicative helicase

During G1-phase of the cell-cycle the replicative MCM2–7 helicase becomes loaded onto DNA into pre-replicative complexes (pre-RCs), resulting in MCM2–7 double-hexamers on DNA. In S-phase, Dbf4-dependent kinase (DDK) and cyclin-dependent-kinase (CDK) direct with the help of a large number of helicase-activation factors the assembly of a Cdc45–MCM2–7–GINS (CMG) complex. However, in the absence of S-phase kinases complex assembly is inhibited, which is unexpected, as the MCM2–7 double-hexamer represents a very large interaction surface. Currently it is unclear what mechanisms restricts complex assembly and how DDK can overcome this inhibition to promote CMG-assembly. We developed an advanced reconstituted-system to study helicase activation in-solution and discovered that individual factors like Sld3 and Sld2 can bind directly to the pre-RC, while Cdc45 cannot. When Sld3 and Sld2 were incubated together with the pre-RC, we observed that competitive interactions restrict complex assembly. DDK stabilizes the Sld3/Sld2–pre-RC complex, but the complex is only short-lived, indicating an anti-cooperative mechanism. Yet, a Sld3/Cdc45–pre-RC can form in the presence of DDK and the addition of Sld2 enhances complex stability. Our results indicate that helicase activation is regulated by competitive and cooperative interactions, which restrict illegitimate complex formation and direct limiting helicase-activation factors into pre-initiation complexes.