The temporal transcription factor Krüppel has a dual role in the development of neurons.
A neuronal stem cell is a cell that divides to produce another neuronal stem cell plus a cell that can go on to become any one of the different types of neurons or glial cells that are found in the nervous system. Understanding how this happens is a major challenge in developmental neuroscience. In both vertebrates and invertebrates, the capacity of neuronal stem cells to produce specific cell types is determined by a combination of spatial patterning factors, essentially determined by their birth location, and temporal patterning, in which transcription factors that are expressed sequentially in the neuronal stem cells determine the kind of cells that are produced during a given time window (reviewed in Kohwi and Doe, 2013). Now, in eLife, Johannes Stratmann, Hugo Gabilondo, Jonathan Benito-Sipos and Stefan Thor – who are based at Linköping University and Universidad Autónoma de Madrid – report that Krüppel, a transcription factor that is involved in temporal patterning, has a bigger role than was previously realized (Stratmann et al., 2016).
In Drosophila, neuronal stem cells, known as neuroblasts, in the ventral nerve cord (Isshiki et al., 2001), the central brain (Bayraktar and Doe, 2013) and the optic lobes (Li et al., 2013) express a series of different temporal transcription factors as they divide, and this temporal patterning dictates the identity of the neurons that are produced over time. In the ventral nerve cord, Hunchback is expressed first, followed by Krüppel, Pdm, Castor and Grainyhead. Moreover, during the time window in which a given transcription factor is expressed, two or more different types of neurons can be produced. For example, at the end of the Castor window, a neuroblast called NB5-6 divides four times to sequentially produce four different types of neurons: Tv1, Tv2, Tv3 and Tv4 neurons.
The identity of each neuron formed during the Castor window is established by a complex web of transcriptional cascades that depend on Castor and other transcription factors (see Figure 1; Baumgardt et al., 2009; Baumgardt et al., 2007; Benito-Sipos et al., 2011). However, many of the details of the mechanisms that switch these cascades on and off at different times are unknown. Stratmann et al. shed light on the subject by looking at the role of Krüppel (Kr). The neuroblast being studied will already have passed through the Kr temporal window, but this transcription factor is expressed again in the neurons that are produced during the Castor window.
The default fate for neuroblasts at the end of the Castor window is to produce Tv2/3 neurons. However, Stratmann et al. show that Castor first activates Kr expression specifically in Tv1 neurons, which in turn inhibits expression of the nuclear hormone receptor Seven up (Svp). This receptor normally inhibits the expression of a transcription factor called Collier: however, the inhibition of Svp allows for the establishment of a feedforward loop downstream of Collier that leads to the expression of the neuropeptide Nplp1 and the establishment of Tv1 neuron identity (Figure 1).
As the neuroblast divides to produce Tv2 and Tv3, Svp and two other proteins – Squeeze (Sqz) and Nab – are expressed: this all leads to the inhibition of Kr and the repression of Collier. As a consequence the Nplp1 feedforward loop is inhibited and the default Ap/Eya identity in Tv2/3 is established. In the last division, as the neuroblasts gets ready to switch to the next temporal window, the increased expression of Grainyhead (the next temporal transcription factor in the series) has two effects: it promotes the expression of a neuropeptide called FMRFa, and it helps to inhibit Svp expression. The end result is to prevent the establishment of the generic Tv2/3 fate to promote the Tv4 identity. However, Grainyhead cannot inhibit Svp on its own, so another factor must also be expressed during this period to help it repress Svp (Figure 1).
The implications of these observations extend well beyond the details of the NB5-6 lineage and raise additional questions: How is Kr and Sqz expression scheduled? And how is Nab expression delayed to only be present in Tv1? Such delay could be explained by the formation of a feedforward loop in which Castor and Sqz combine to promote Nab expression (Baumgardt et al., 2009). The fact that Cas is only expressed at relatively low levels in Tv1 could also explain the absence of Nab expression in this neuron. Understanding such timing mechanisms will define the logic of this gene network, from the early expression of spatial and temporal transcription factors in the neuroblasts to the expression of the terminal differentiation genes that assign unique identities to neurons.
Many of the factors that are active during the Castor window are also active during other windows. As we have seen, Krüppel is active in neuroblasts during the Kr window and is active again in Tv1 neurons produced during the Castor window. Sub-temporal factors can also have multiple roles: Svp, for example, is expressed early in neuroblasts to regulate the transition from the Hunchback window to the Krüppel window (Kanai et al., 2005), and is also expressed in Tv neurons produced during the Castor window. This raises the question of how common such dual roles are among temporal genes.
The expression of Collier requires the input of several spatial transcription factors (Gabilondo et al., 2016; Karlsson et al., 2010), but this is not the case for the temporal factors Castor and Grainyhead and for the sub-temporal factors (Kr, Sqz, Nab and Svp) downstream of Castor. This suggests that the activation of the feedforward loops, but not of temporal factors, can depend on the activity of spatial factors expressed earlier during neuroblast formation. It will be interesting to test how the earlier expression of spatial factors modulates the DNA landscape of neuroblasts, and their progeny neurons, to control their competence to respond to the activity of temporal and sub-temporal transcription factors. If we can find the answers to such fundamental questions, it will improve our ability to produce specific neurons by controlling the fate of neural stem cells.
Temporal fate specification and neural progenitor competence during developmentNature Reviews Neuroscience 14:823–838.https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3618
Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)
Download citations (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)
Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)
Precise control and maintenance of population size is fundamental for organismal development and homeostasis. The three cell types of the mammalian blastocyst are generated in precise proportions over a short time, suggesting a mechanism to ensure a reproducible outcome. We developed a minimal mathematical model demonstrating growth factor signaling is sufficient to guarantee this robustness and which anticipates an embryo's response to perturbations in lineage composition. Addition of lineage-restricted cells both in vivo and in silico, causes a shift of the fate of progenitors away from the supernumerary cell type, while eliminating cells using laser ablation biases the specification of progenitors toward the targeted cell type. Finally, FGF4 couples fate decisions to lineage composition through changes in local growth factor concentration, providing a basis for the regulative abilities of the early mammalian embryo whereby fate decisions are coordinated at the population level to robustly generate tissues in the right proportions.
Lineage specification is governed by gene regulatory networks (GRNs) that integrate the activity of signaling effectors and transcription factors (TFs) on enhancers. Sox17 is a key transcriptional regulator of definitive endoderm development, and yet, its genomic targets remain largely uncharacterized. Here, using genomic approaches and epistasis experiments, we define the Sox17-governed endoderm GRN in Xenopus gastrulae. We show that Sox17 functionally interacts with the canonical Wnt pathway to specify and pattern the endoderm while repressing alternative mesectoderm fates. Sox17 and β-catenin co-occupy hundreds of key enhancers. In some cases, Sox17 and β-catenin synergistically activate transcription apparently independent of Tcfs, whereas on other enhancers, Sox17 represses β-catenin/Tcf-mediated transcription to spatially restrict gene expression domains. Our findings establish Sox17 as a tissue-specific modifier of Wnt responses and point to a novel paradigm where genomic specificity of Wnt/β-catenin transcription is determined through functional interactions between lineage-specific Sox TFs and β-catenin/Tcf transcriptional complexes. Given the ubiquitous nature of Sox TFs and Wnt signaling, this mechanism has important implications across a diverse range of developmental and disease contexts.