The Hox transcription factor Ubx stabilizes lineage commitment by suppressing cellular plasticity in Drosophila

  1. Katrin Domsch
  2. Julie Carnesecchi
  3. Vanessa Disela
  4. Jana Friedrich
  5. Nils Trost
  6. Olga Ermakova
  7. Maria Polychronidou
  8. Ingrid Lohmann  Is a corresponding author
  1. Centre for Organismal Studies, Heidelberg University, Germany
  2. EMBO, Germany

Abstract

During development cells become restricted in their differentiation potential by repressing alternative cell fates, and the Polycomb complex plays a crucial role in this process. However, how alternative fate genes are lineage-specifically silenced is unclear. We studied Ultrabithorax, a multi-lineage transcription factor of the Hox class, in two tissue lineages using sorted nuclei and interfered with Ubx in mesodermal cells. We find that depletion of Ubx leads to the de-repression of genes normally expressed in other lineages. Ubx silences expression of alternative fate genes by retaining the Polycomb Group protein Pleiohomeotic at Ubx targeted genomic regions, thereby stabilizing repressive chromatin marks in a lineage-dependent manner. Our study demonstrates that Ubx stabilizes lineage choice by suppressing the multipotency encoded in the genome via its interaction with Pho. This mechanism may explain why the Hox code is maintained throughout the lifecycle, since it could set a block to transdifferentiation in adult cells.

Data availability

Sequencing data have been deposited in GEO: GSE121754 (all), GSE121670 (RNA-Seq) & GSE121752 (ChIP-Seq).

The following data sets were generated
The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Katrin Domsch

    Developmental Biology, Centre for Organismal Studies, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Julie Carnesecchi

    Developmental Biology, Centre for Organismal Studies, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Vanessa Disela

    Developmental Biology, Centre for Organismal Studies, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Jana Friedrich

    Developmental Biology, Centre for Organismal Studies, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Nils Trost

    Developmental Biology, Centre for Organismal Studies, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5171-018X
  6. Olga Ermakova

    Developmental Biology, Centre for Organismal Studies, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Maria Polychronidou

    Molecular Systems Biology, EMBO, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Ingrid Lohmann

    Developmental Biology, Centre for Organismal Studies, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
    For correspondence
    ingrid.lohmann@cos.uni-heidelberg.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0918-2758

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (LO 844 8/1)

  • Ingrid Lohmann

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

Copyright

© 2019, Domsch 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

  • 3,233
    views
  • 486
    downloads
  • 23
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

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)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Katrin Domsch
  2. Julie Carnesecchi
  3. Vanessa Disela
  4. Jana Friedrich
  5. Nils Trost
  6. Olga Ermakova
  7. Maria Polychronidou
  8. Ingrid Lohmann
(2019)
The Hox transcription factor Ubx stabilizes lineage commitment by suppressing cellular plasticity in Drosophila
eLife 8:e42675.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.42675

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.42675

Further reading

    1. Developmental Biology
    Anastasiia Lozovska, Ana Casaca ... Moises Mallo
    Research Article

    During the trunk to tail transition the mammalian embryo builds the outlets for the intestinal and urogenital tracts, lays down the primordia for the hindlimb and external genitalia, and switches from the epiblast/primitive streak (PS) to the tail bud as the driver of axial extension. Genetic and molecular data indicate that Tgfbr1 is a key regulator of the trunk to tail transition. Tgfbr1 has been shown to control the switch of the neuromesodermal competent cells from the epiblast to the chordoneural hinge to generate the tail bud. We now show that in mouse embryos Tgfbr1 signaling also controls the remodeling of the lateral plate mesoderm (LPM) and of the embryonic endoderm associated with the trunk to tail transition. In the absence of Tgfbr1, the two LPM layers do not converge at the end of the trunk, extending instead as separate layers until the caudal embryonic extremity, and failing to activate markers of primordia for the hindlimb and external genitalia. The vascular remodeling involving the dorsal aorta and the umbilical artery leading to the connection between embryonic and extraembryonic circulation was also affected in the Tgfbr1 mutant embryos. Similar alterations in the LPM and vascular system were also observed in Isl1 null mutants, indicating that this factor acts in the regulatory cascade downstream of Tgfbr1 in LPM-derived tissues. In addition, in the absence of Tgfbr1 the embryonic endoderm fails to expand to form the endodermal cloaca and to extend posteriorly to generate the tail gut. We present evidence suggesting that the remodeling activity of Tgfbr1 in the LPM and endoderm results from the control of the posterior PS fate after its regression during the trunk to tail transition. Our data, together with previously reported observations, place Tgfbr1 at the top of the regulatory processes controlling the trunk to tail transition.

    1. Developmental Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Odessa R Yabut, Jessica Arela ... Samuel J Pleasure
    Research Article

    Mutations in Sonic Hedgehog (SHH) signaling pathway genes, for example, Suppressor of Fused (SUFU), drive granule neuron precursors (GNP) to form medulloblastomas (MBSHH). However, how different molecular lesions in the Shh pathway drive transformation is frequently unclear, and SUFU mutations in the cerebellum seem distinct. In this study, we show that fibroblast growth factor 5 (FGF5) signaling is integral for many infantile MBSHH cases and that FGF5 expression is uniquely upregulated in infantile MBSHH tumors. Similarly, mice lacking SUFU (Sufu-cKO) ectopically express Fgf5 specifically along the secondary fissure where GNPs harbor preneoplastic lesions and show that FGFR signaling is also ectopically activated in this region. Treatment with an FGFR antagonist rescues the severe GNP hyperplasia and restores cerebellar architecture. Thus, direct inhibition of FGF signaling may be a promising and novel therapeutic candidate for infantile MBSHH.