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

  • 3,099
    views
  • 466
    downloads
  • 21
    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
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Nathan D Harry, Christina Zakas
    Research Article

    New developmental programs can evolve through adaptive changes to gene expression. The annelid Streblospio benedicti has a developmental dimorphism, which provides a unique intraspecific framework for understanding the earliest genetic changes that take place during developmental divergence. Using comparative RNAseq through ontogeny, we find that only a small proportion of genes are differentially expressed at any time, despite major differences in larval development and life history. These genes shift expression profiles across morphs by either turning off any expression in one morph or changing the timing or amount of gene expression. We directly connect the contributions of these mechanisms to differences in developmental processes. We examine F1 offspring – using reciprocal crosses – to determine maternal mRNA inheritance and the regulatory architecture of gene expression. These results highlight the importance of both novel gene expression and heterochronic shifts in developmental evolution, as well as the trans-acting regulatory factors in initiating divergence.

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Developmental Biology
    Deepak Adhikari, John Carroll
    Insight

    The formation of large endolysosomal structures in unfertilized eggs ensures that lysosomes remain dormant before fertilization, and then shift into clean-up mode after the egg-to-embryo transition.