A simple predictive enhancer syntax for hindbrain patterning is conserved in vertebrate genomes

10Citations
Citations of this article
29Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: Determining the function of regulatory elements is fundamental for our understanding of development, disease and evolution. However, the sequence features that mediate these functions are often unclear and the prediction of tissue-specific expression patterns from sequence alone is non-trivial. Previous functional studies have demonstrated a link between PBX-HOX and MEIS/PREP binding interactions and hindbrain enhancer activity, but the defining grammar of these sites, if any exists, has remained elusive. Results: Here, we identify a shared sequence signature (syntax) within a heterogeneous set of conserved vertebrate hindbrain enhancers composed of spatially co-occurring PBX-HOX and MEIS/PREP transcription factor binding motifs. We use this syntax to accurately predict hindbrain enhancers in 89% of cases (67/75 predicted elements) from a set of conserved non-coding elements (CNEs). Furthermore, mutagenesis of the sites abolishes activity or generates ectopic expression, demonstrating their requirement for segmentally restricted enhancer activity in the hindbrain. We refine and use our syntax to predict over 3,000 hindbrain enhancers across the human genome. These sequences tend to be located near developmental transcription factors and are enriched in known hindbrain activating elements, demonstrating the predictive power of this simple model. Conclusion: Our findings support the theory that hundreds of CNEs, and perhaps thousands of regions across the human genome, function to coordinate gene expression in the developing hindbrain. We speculate that deeply conserved sequences of this kind contributed to the cooption of new genes into the hindbrain gene regulatory network during early vertebrate evolution by linking patterns of hox expression to downstream genes involved in segmentation and patterning, and evolutionarily newer instances may have continued to contribute to line-age-specific elaboration of the hindbrain.

Figures

  • Fig 1. CNEs containing PBX-HOXmotifs driving expression in hindbrain of transgenic zebrafish. Images show expression driven during transient transgenic assays (see methods) between 2 and 3 dpf. Insets show comparison with RFP in rhombomeres 3 and 5. hoxd.10479 (A) at ~42 hpf in ventral r5r6; hoxd.10482 lateral (B) and dorsal (C) views at ~56 hpf in lateral r2, r4, r6, pectoral fin and spinal cord; bnc2.8642 (D) at ~60 hpf in hindbrain; hmx2.9713 (E) at ~60 hpf in hindbrain and spinal cord; dachd.11206 (F) at ~72hpf in hindbrain and spinal cord; foxd3.327 (G) at ~72hpf in ventral r5 and r6; foxd3.365 throughout the central nervous system, most strongly in the ventral hindbrain, and cranial ganglia. fb: forebrain; mb: midbrain; hb: hindbrain; sc: spinal cord; pf: pectoral fin; pa: pharyngeal arches/neural crest; cg: cranial ganglia; r3 r5: rhombomeres 3 and 5.
  • Fig 2. Hindbrain enhancers typically contain both PBX-HOX and MEIS/PREPmotifs within 100bp.Motif discovery on a set of 38 hindbrain enhancers using MEME detects two enriched motifs. The first (A) resembles PBX and HOX binding preferences (B) and the second (C) resembles MEIS and PREP binding preferences (D). Furthermore, in all but one case these motifs occur within 100bp in positive enhancers, schematically represented in (E).
  • Fig 3. Conserved PBX-HOX and MEIS/PREPmotifs predict hindbrain enhancers accurately. Images show expression driven during transient transgenic assays (see methods) between 2 and 3 dpf. Insets show comparison with RFP in rhombomeres 3 and 5. Constructs drive expression in hindbrain and in other tissuesmeis1.1705 (A) in hindbrain and spinal cord; fign.5158 (B) in hindbrain, spinal cord and melanocytes; foxp1.892 (C) in the central nervous system; nr2f2.8394 (D) in hindbrain; pax2.174 (E) in hindbrain and lens; pou3f2.9802 (F) in the central nervous system, heart and muscle; znf703.10897 (G) in hindbrain, spinal cord and pharyngeal arches/neural crest; pou3f1.7785 (H) in hindbrain; tshz3.1.7761 (I) in hindbrain; znf703.10876 (J) in hindbrain and pharyngeal arches/neural crest; shox2.5643 (K) in hindbrain; tshz1.8800 (L) in hindbrain, spinal cord, retina, pineal gland and cranial ganglia; znf503.10105 (M) in hindbrain, spinal cord and pharyngeal arches; znf503.10193 (N) in the central nervous system and cranial ganglia; hoxd.10520/ 1 (O) in the central nervous system, lens, retina, pineal gland and cranial ganglia; and sall3a.2991 (P) in the central nervous system, retina, pineal gland and cranial ganglia. fb: forebrain; mb: midbrain; hb: hindbrain; sc: spinal cord; pa: pharyngeal arches/neural crest; cg: cranial ganglia; mc: melanocytes; msc: trunk muscle cells; le: lens; re: retina; pg: pineal gland.
  • Fig 4. The PBX-HOX and MEIS/PREPmotifs of four enhancers are essential for their function. Histograms for four elements, pax2.174 (A), meis2a.1042 (B),meis1.1705 (C) and foxd3.327 (D), showing the number of embryos with GFP positive cells in forebrain (fb), midbrain (mb), hindbrain (hb) and spinal cord (sc) when expressing wild-type (green), MEIS/PREP site mutant (blue) or PBX-HOX site mutant (red) constructs. Annotation displays p values for one-tailed paired t tests. All mutant constructs show a significant (student's t test p = <0.05) reduction in the number of embryos positive for hindbrain. Wild-type pax2.174 (E) drives expression in hindbrain and lens (green), whereas mutant constructs do not drive this pattern. Wild-type meis2a.1042 (F) drives expression in the central nervous system particularly the anterior hindbrain. Mutant constructs fail to recapitulate this expression. Wild-typemeis1.1705 (G) drives expression in the hindbrain and spinal cord, but mutant constructs drive expression only in spinal cord. Wild-type foxd3.327
  • Fig 5. Distances between PBX-HOX andMEIS/PREPmotifs across the whole human genome.Graph shows the distribution of gaps between PBX-HOX and MEIS/PREPmotifs across the whole genome (black) and human conserved regions defined by GERP (blue).
  • Table 1. Number of hb_40 elements per Mb in different types of sequence.

References Powered by Scopus

Clustal W and Clustal X version 2.0

24652Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

FIMO: Scanning for occurrences of a given motif

2724Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

TRANSFAC®: Transcriptional regulation, from patterns to profiles

1719Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

The vertebrate Hox gene regulatory network for hindbrain segmentation: Evolution and diversification: Coupling of a Hox gene regulatory network to hindbrain segmentation is an ancient trait originating at the base of vertebrates H. J. Parker et al.

54Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Segmental arithmetic: summing up the Hox gene regulatory network for hindbrain development in chordates

41Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Hoxa1 targets signaling pathways during neural differentiation of ES cells and mouse embryogenesis

38Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Grice, J., Noyvert, B., Doglio, L., & Elgar, G. (2015). A simple predictive enhancer syntax for hindbrain patterning is conserved in vertebrate genomes. PLoS ONE, 10(7). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0130413

Readers over time

‘15‘16‘17‘18‘19‘21‘240481216

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 18

72%

Researcher 4

16%

Professor / Associate Prof. 3

12%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14

58%

Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Bi... 7

29%

Environmental Science 2

8%

Nursing and Health Professions 1

4%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Social Media
Shares, Likes & Comments: 10

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0