1. Developmental Biology
  2. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
Download icon

Concentration dependent chromatin states induced by the bicoid morphogen gradient

  1. Colleen E Hannon
  2. Shelby A Blythe
  3. Eric F Wieschaus  Is a corresponding author
  1. Princeton University, United States
Research Article
  • Cited 23
  • Views 3,650
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2017;6:e28275 doi: 10.7554/eLife.28275

Abstract

In Drosophila, graded expression of the maternal transcription factor Bicoid (Bcd) provides positional information to activate target genes at different positions along the anterior-posterior axis. We have measured the genome-wide binding profile of Bcd using ChIP-seq in embryos expressing single, uniform levels of Bcd protein, and grouped Bcd-bound targets into four classes based on occupancy at different concentrations. By measuring the biochemical affinity of target enhancers in these classes in vitro and genome-wide chromatin accessibility by ATAC-seq, we found that the occupancy of target sequences by Bcd is not primarily determined by Bcd binding sites, but by chromatin context. Bcd drives an open chromatin state at a subset of its targets. Our data support a model where Bcd influences chromatin structure to gain access to concentration-sensitive targets at high concentrations, while concentration-insensitive targets are found in more accessible chromatin and are bound at low concentrations. This may be a common property of developmental transcription factors that must gain early access to their target enhancers while the chromatin state of the genome is being remodeled during large-scale transitions in the gene regulatory landscape.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Colleen E Hannon

    Department of Molecular Biology, Princeton University, Princeton, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4402-8107
  2. Shelby A Blythe

    Department of Molecular Biology, Princeton University, Princeton, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Eric F Wieschaus

    Department of Molecular Biology, Princeton University, Princeton, United States
    For correspondence
    efw@princeton.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0727-3349

Funding

Howard Hughes Medical Institute

  • Eric F Wieschaus

National Institutes of Health (F31HD082940)

  • Colleen E Hannon

National Institutes of Health (F32HD072653)

  • Shelby A Blythe

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Joaquín M Espinosa, University of Colorado School of Medicine, United States

Publication history

  1. Received: May 2, 2017
  2. Accepted: September 8, 2017
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: September 11, 2017 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: October 2, 2017 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2017, Hannon et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 3,650
    Page views
  • 767
    Downloads
  • 23
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, Scopus, PubMed Central.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

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)

Further reading

    1. Developmental Biology
    Junjun Jing et al.
    Research Article

    Interaction between adult stem cells and their progeny is critical for tissue homeostasis and regeneration. In multiple organs, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) give rise to transit amplifying cells (TACs), which then differentiate into different cell types. However, whether and how MSCs interact with TACs remains unknown. Using the adult mouse incisor as a model, we present in vivo evidence that TACs and MSCs have distinct genetic programs and engage in reciprocal signaling cross talk to maintain tissue homeostasis. Specifically, an IGF-WNT signaling cascade is involved in the feedforward from MSCs to TACs. TACs are regulated by tissue-autonomous canonical WNT signaling and can feedback to MSCs and regulate MSC maintenance via Wnt5a/Ror2-mediated non-canonical WNT signaling. Collectively, these findings highlight the importance of coordinated bidirectional signaling interaction between MSCs and TACs in instructing mesenchymal tissue homeostasis, and the mechanisms identified here have important implications for MSC–TAC interaction in other organs.

    1. Developmental Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Maria Schörnig et al.
    Research Article

    We generated induced excitatory neurons (iNeurons, iNs) from chimpanzee, bonobo and human stem cells by expressing the transcription factor neurogenin‑2 (NGN2). Single cell RNA sequencing (scRNAseq) showed that genes involved in dendrite and synapse development are expressed earlier during iNs maturation in the chimpanzee and bonobo than the human cells. In accordance, during the first two weeks of differentiation, chimpanzee and bonobo iNs showed repetitive action potentials and more spontaneous excitatory activity than human iNs, and extended neurites of higher total length. However, the axons of human iNs were slightly longer at 5 weeks of differentiation. The timing of the establishment of neuronal polarity did not differ between the species. Chimpanzee, bonobo and human neurites eventually reached the same level of structural complexity. Thus, human iNs develop slower than chimpanzee and bonobo iNs and this difference in timing likely depends on functions downstream of NGN2.