Multicellular development requires the precise management of cellular behaviors including proliferation, migration, and differentiation. These are coordinated through intercellular communication pathways, such as growth factor signaling, that couple extracellular information with internal effectors, including transcription factors (TFs) (Fantauzzo and Soriano, 2015; Lemmon and Schlessinger, 2010). The balance between opposing transcription programs is tuned by signaling pathways which activate specific TFs or in some cases cofactors that direct the behavior of a common TF. One example of the latter is the essential transcription factor Serum Response Factor (SRF) (Posern and Treisman, 2006). SRF is necessary for the expression of immediate early genes (IEGs) in cells stimulated with serum or growth factors, as well as many genes related to the actin cytoskeleton, contractility, and muscle differentiation.

SRF binds a conserved DNA regulatory sequence known as a CArG box, a motif found at many cytoskeletal and growth-factor inducible gene promoters (Mohun et al., 1991; Norman et al., 1988; Sun et al., 2006b). SRF can, however, effect at least two unique transcriptional programs by coupling with two families of cofactors that compete for a common binding site on SRF itself (Miano, 2003; Wang et al., 2004 Figure 1A). The ternary complex factors (TCFs) are E26 transformation-specific (ETS) family proteins activated by extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1/2 (ERK1/2) phosphorylation (Mylona et al., 2016). Once activated, they bind DNA and promote cellular proliferation by transcribing IEGs in coordination with SRF (Esnault et al., 2017; Gualdrini et al., 2016). There are three TCF members in mouse and human: ELK1, ELK3/NET, and ELK4/SAP1 (Posern and Treisman, 2006). Opposing SRF-TCF activity are the Myocardin Related Transcription Factors (MRTFs). These cofactors rely on SRF to bind DNA, promote cytoskeletal gene expression, and are particularly important in muscle differentiation (Posern and Treisman, 2006). MRTFs bind to and are inhibited by G-actin. Polymerization of G-actin into F-actin liberates MRTFs to translocate to the nucleus and bind SRF (Miralles et al., 2003). This can be promoted by multiple signaling pathways, including phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K), that stimulate guanine nucleotide exchange factors to activate F-actin-promoting Rho-family GTPases (Brachmann et al., 2005; Hanna and El-Sibai, 2013; Jiménez et al., 2000; Vasudevan and Soriano, 2014). MRTFs are also positively and negatively regulated by extensive phosphorylation (Panayiotou et al., 2016). Three MRTFs are known to interact with SRF: Myocardin itself, MRTF-A/MKL1/MAL, and MRTF-B (Parmacek, 2007). Myocd is expressed specifically in muscle while Mrtfa and Mrtfb are more broadly expressed (Posern and Treisman, 2006). A fourth MRTF, MAMSTR/MASTR, interacts with MEF2 proteins and is not known to bind SRF (Creemers et al., 2006).

Figure 1 with 2 supplements see all

Download asset Open asset

Srf and its cofactors have been extensively studied genetically. Srf^-/- mutant mice die between E6.5 and E8.5 showing defects in mesoderm formation (Arsenian et al., 1998; Niu et al., 2005). Cofactor knockouts are comparatively mild. Single TCF mutants are all fully or partially viable (Ayadi et al., 2001; Cesari et al., 2004; Costello et al., 2004; Weinl et al., 2014) and Elk1; Elk3; Elk4 triple null embryos have not been described in detail but survive until E14.5 without obvious defects (Costello et al., 2010; Gualdrini et al., 2016). Mrtfa^-/- mutant mice are viable (Li et al., 2006; Sun et al., 2006a) whereas Mrtfb^-/- mice are inviable between E13.5-E15.5, exhibiting cardiovascular defects (Li et al., 2012; Oh et al., 2005). Myocd^-/- mice have the most severe phenotype and die at E10.5, also from cardiovascular defects (Espinoza-Lewis and Wang, 2014; Li et al., 2003). Mrtfa; Mrtfb double null mice have not been described, but conditional double mutants have shown these factors exhibit redundancy and broadly phenocopy loss of Srf in several tissues and cell types (Cenik et al., 2016; Guo et al., 2018; Li et al., 2005a; Trembley et al., 2015). However, studies comparing Srf and Mrtfa; Mrtfb mutants are not always identical. In megakaryocytes, loss of Mrtfa and Mrtfb is more severe than loss of Srf and there are large gene expression differences in the two models (Smith et al., 2012; Halene et al., 2010). Indeed, there is evidence that MRTFs may regulate genes independent of SRF or act as cofactors for TFs other than SRF (Asparuhova et al., 2011; Kim et al., 2017). Whether the differences in Srf versus Mrtfa; Mrtfb loss-of-function studies are due to SRF-TCF activity, SRF-independent MRTF activity, or TCF/MRTF-independent SRF activity remains uncertain. These studies are summarized in Supplementary file 1.

One tissue in which SRF was found to be essential is the neural crest (NC) (Newbern et al., 2008; Vasudevan and Soriano, 2014). The NC is a transient developmental population of cells that arises from the dorsal neural tube, migrates ventrally throughout the embryo, and gives rise to numerous cell types including the bone and connective tissue of the face, as well as smooth muscle cells in the cardiac outflow tract (Bronner and Simões-Costa, 2016). The extensive migration, proliferation, and various differentiation outcomes these cells undergo requires accurate coordination, and decades of study have revealed a panoply of signaling pathways and transcription factors important in these processes, including the fibroblast growth factor (FGF) pathway, platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF) pathway, and SRF itself (Brewer et al., 2015; Dinsmore and Soriano, 2018; Newbern et al., 2008; Rogers and Nie, 2018; Tallquist and Soriano, 2003; Vasudevan and Soriano, 2014). We and others have previously shown that Srf is required in the NC for craniofacial and cardiovascular development (Newbern et al., 2008; Vasudevan and Soriano, 2014). Intriguingly, mice homozygous for a hypomorphic allele of Mrtfb die shortly after birth with cardiac outflow tract defects and can be rescued by a neural crest-specific transgene (Li et al., 2005b). Assays in mouse embryonic palatal mesenchyme cells (MEPMs) indicated that stimulation with the secreted ligands fibroblast growth factor (FGF) or platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF) promoted SRF-TCF complex formation, but only PDGF promoted SRF-MRTF interactions, in a PI3K-dependent manner (Vasudevan and Soriano, 2014). Supporting the importance of SRF-MRTF interactions, Srf interacted genetically with Pdgfra but not Fgfr1 in NC (Vasudevan and Soriano, 2014). However, the contributions of each SRF-cofactor transcriptional program to the overall Srf NC phenotype are unclear.

In this study, we further characterize the molecular consequences of losing Srf expression in the NC through marker analysis and expression profiling, finding the most highly downregulated genes to be cytoskeletal in nature. We then test the presumed requirement of SRF-MRTF interactions using a novel Srf^aI allele carrying mutations that prevent SRF-MRTF-DNA ternary complex formation to circumvent MRTF redundancy and control for possible SRF-independent MRTF activity. These embryos have striking developmental defects that are outwardly similar to Myocd mutant mice. Conditional NC mutants reveal an essential role for optimal SRF-MRTF activity in the cardiac crest, whereas the mutation is well-tolerated in the cranial NC. These observations raise the possibility that non-cardiovascular tissue may be able to develop with only minimal SRF-MRTF activity or that SRF can support cytoskeletal gene expression on its own or with other cofactors.

SRF is a ubiquitously expressed transcription factor whose transcriptional output is strongly influenced by its cofactors, the TCFs and MRTFs. These cofactors, in turn, are regulated both by specific expression patterns (e.g. Myocd specifically in muscle) and by signaling pathways, such as ERK1/2 and PI3K (Posern and Treisman, 2006; Figure 1A). We sought to better understand the relationship between SRF, its cofactors, and mutant phenotypes in both a general and a tissue-specific manner.

Our previous study demonstrated a requirement for Srf in the NC lineage (Vasudevan and Soriano, 2014), so we first investigated how loss of SRF in this tissue affected gene expression. We found normal early NC patterning but misexpression of cytoskeleton-related genes in Srf^flox/flox; Wnt1-Cre^Tg/+ embryos (Figure 1C–F, Figure 1—figure supplements 1 and 2E). Comparing the DEGs with known SRF and cofactor targets showed particular enrichment for MRTF targets in our datasets (Figure 1G–H, Figure 1—figure supplement 2F-G), consistent with SRF’s well-known function regulating cytoskeletal genes and the dominant role of MRTF cofactors in the serum response (Esnault et al., 2014). To test the supposition that SRF-MRTF activity would be the main driver of NC SRF activity, we made a new Srf^aI mouse model harboring point mutations that specifically disrupt SRF-MRTF-DNA complex formation (Zaromytidou et al., 2006).

Homozygous Srf^aI/aI embryos died at E10.5 with defects in the yolk sac vasculature, heart, and neural tube and exhibited reduced F-actin levels (Figure 2A–F). Both the timing of lethality and gross appearance of the embryos strongly resemble Myocd^-/- mutant mice (Li et al., 2003). The phenotype is much less severe than Srf^-/- embryos, however, which die around E7.5 and fail to induce mesoderm (Arsenian et al., 1998; Niu et al., 2005). Expression of the Srf^aI allele specifically in the Mesp1^Cre mesodermal lineage also resulted in lethality at E10.5 and defects almost as severe as complete loss of Srf in this same lineage (Figure 3). The similarity of the two alleles in the Mesp1^Cre lineage compared against their strikingly different phenotypes in gastrula-stage embryos suggested there may be time or tissue specific requirements for SRF-MRTF activity.

We went on to test the Srf^aI allele in the NC lineage, where we presumed it would be critically important. Similar to the early embryo, expression of the Srf^aI allele was well tolerated in NC and we found no facial cleft or bleb in our Srf^aI/flox; Wnt1-Cre^Tg/+ mice, as in Srf^flox/flox; Wnt1-Cre^Tg/+ mice (Figure 4A). The allele also failed to interact genetically with Pdgfra in this lineage, suggesting PDGF signaling may rely on MRTF-independent SRF activity (Figure 5—figure supplement 2A-B). Nevertheless, this mutation in NC does have a profound developmental effect as Srf^aI/flox; Wnt1-Cre^Tg/+ mice completed gestation but died by postnatal day 2 with visible cyanosis (Figure 5A). Examination of the cardiac outflow tract revealed numerous defects including PDA, right aortic arch, and one instance of VSD with PTA (Figure 5C–D). This result is reminiscent of mice with a hypomorphic gene trap mutation in Mrtfb and mice carrying a conditional deletion of Myocd in the NC (Huang et al., 2008; Li et al., 2005b), both of which result in early postnatal lethality due to defects in outflow tract development. Similarly, NC conditional Srf mutants on a genetic background that permitted later development exhibit outflow tract defects at E16.5 (Newbern et al., 2008). These studies and our own results together highlight a critical role for SRF-MRTF interactions in cardiac NC development. A summary of the tissue-specific sensitivities we found to loss of Srf or Srf^aI expression is depicted in Figure 5E.

We considered three possible explanations for the tolerance of the Srf^aI allele in NC and early embryo, which are not mutually exclusive: (i) that TCFs are more important than previously recognized or are redundant with MRTFs in some respects, (ii) that different tissues may have different thresholds for SRF-MRTF activity and that our point mutant may interact differently with different MRTF family members, and (iii) that SRF may utilize cofactors other than MRTFs and TCFs or have cofactor-independent (i.e. basal) activity sufficient to support development in some contexts.

The first possibility is that TCF factors play a more important role than previously thought or can act redundantly with MRTFs. Because TCF triple mutant embryos survive until E14.5 without obvious morphological defects (Costello et al., 2010), we find it unlikely that TCF-specific activity could explain the tolerance of Srf^aI during gastrulation or in NC. However, it has been shown that some SRF targets can be bound and regulated by both MRTF and TCF factors (Esnault et al., 2014), raising the possibility of cofactor redundancy. Yet, most studies to date indicate that rather than acting redundantly, MRTFs and TCFs mediate distinct and opposing phenotypic outcomes, contractility and proliferation, respectively (Gualdrini et al., 2016; Wang et al., 2004). Indeed, a potential result of this competition is that the consequences of suppressing SRF-MRTF interactions could vary according to the level of TCF expression in a given cell type. While we cannot rule out the possibility that TCFs are the primary SRF cofactors in NC or function redundantly to MRTFs without further genetic experiments, this explanation is difficult to reconcile with the existing literature. Although there is no known Srf allele that blocks TCF binding while leaving MRTF binding unperturbed, the V194E mutation (V189E in mouse) disrupts SRF interaction with both cofactors (Ling et al., 1998). Generating a mouse model of this allele would shed considerable light on the question of TCF/MRTF redundancy.

A second explanation is that non-muscle lineages may be able to function with minimal, but not zero, SRF-MRTF activity. It is possible that the Srf^aI allele substantially impairs but does not eliminate SRF-MRTF-DNA complex formation and functions as a hypomorph. In vitro gel shift assays for SRF-MRTF-DNA complex formation using purified components and single molecule imaging of SRF in cells both indicate a substantial disruption of SRF-MRTF activity for this allele, but the gel shift experiments that first characterized these mutations detected 5–10% residual complex formation (Hipp et al., 2019; Zaromytidou et al., 2006). Our own data demonstrate that homozygous Srf^aI/aI embryos grossly phenocopy Myocd^-/- mutants (Figure 2) and Srf^aI/flox; Mesp1-Cre^Tg/+ and Srf^flox/flox; Mesp1-Cre^Tg/+ embryos were similar, though not identical (Li et al., 2003). On the other hand, double conditional mutants for Mrtfa/Mrtfb largely do phenocopy Srf conditional mutants in several tissues (Cenik et al., 2016; Guo et al., 2018; Li et al., 2005a; Trembley et al., 2015). Therefore, we may be observing differing dosage requirements for SRF-MRTF activity in distinct tissues. Muscle lineages, such as cardiovascular cells affected by Mesp1^Cre and NC-derived outflow tract smooth muscle affected by Wnt1-Cre, may need optimal SRF-MRTF output and are therefore strongly affected by the Srf^aI allele. Non-muscle lineages such as the cranial NC may survive and develop properly with only residual SRF-MRTF transcription. The Srf^aI allele might more strongly suppress Myocardin compared to MRTFA/B, which could also contribute to the tissue-specific requirements we observe. Two predictions of this threshold model are that conditional ablation of Mrtfa/Mrtfb in NC would phenocopy conditional loss of Srf and that Mrtfa/Mrtfb double mutant embryos should succumb around E7.5 as Srf null embryos do. Conversely, non-muscle lineages where conditional ablation of Mrtfa/Mrtfb yields Srf-like phenotypes, such as podocytes and epicardium, should be indifferent to the Srf^aI mutations.

The issue of SRF tissue-specific dosage effects may have relevance to human disease. A recent study performed targeted sequencing of SRF in nonsyndromic conotruncal heart defect patients and identified two novel mutations with reduced transcriptional output, one from a patient with VSD and the other with Tetralogy of Fallot with right aortic arch (Mengmeng et al., 2020). Thus, tuning of SRF output may modulate disease in a tissue-specific manner. Along these lines, mutations in MYOCD cause congenital megabladder and associated cardiovascular phenotypes such as PTA and VSD in humans, but monoallelic mutations affect only males whereas biallelic mutations affect both sexes (Houweling et al., 2019). Furthermore, heterozygosity for FLNA, a gene we found strongly affected by loss of Srf in mouse NC, causes the human disease Periventricular Heterotopia I and affected females present with PDA, whereas hemizygous males die during gestation (Fox et al., 1998). Intriguingly, NC-specific conditional knockout of Flna causes perinatal lethality with outflow tract defects in mice (Feng et al., 2006). It would be interesting to further explore the notion of tissue-specific thresholds for SRF-cofactor complexes in future studies.

A third explanation is that SRF functions with additional factors that regulate gene expression independent of or redundantly with MRTFs (and/or TCFs) or has sufficient basal activity to support development in some tissues. Although MRTFs and TCFs are the most well-studied SRF cofactors, many other TFs have been shown to interact with SRF, including but not limited to Homeodomain proteins (Chen et al., 1996; Chen et al., 2002; Grueneberg et al., 1992; Shin et al., 2002), GATA factors (Belaguli et al., 2000; Morin et al., 2001), and Forkhead-family transcription factors (Freddie et al., 2007; Liu et al., 2005), as well as the Initiator-binding protein TFII-I (Grueneberg et al., 1997; Kim et al., 1998). Many of these studies were performed in muscle cells and it is unclear which cofactors might act independently of MRTFs. However, several of these genes or their orthologues are expressed in the cranial NC at E10.5 and E11.5, when cleft formation begins in Srf^flox/flox; Wnt1-Cre^Tg/+ embryos (Minoux et al., 2017). One candidate is the homeodomain protein PRRX1/PHOX1/MHOX, which was shown to form complexes with SRF mediated by TFII-I (Grueneberg et al., 1997). Double mutants for Prrx1 and its orthologue Prrx2 have defects of the craniofacial skeleton, aortic arch arteries, and ductus arteriosus (Bergwerff et al., 2000; Lu et al., 1999). Gtf2i mutants (the gene encoding TFII-I) rarely survive past E10.5 but can exhibit a facial cleft, hemorrhaging, and hypoplastic pharyngeal arches (Enkhmandakh et al., 2009). Whether SRF mediates transcription on its own, independently of MRTFs and TCFs, or perhaps using additional tissue-specific cofactors, would be exciting to determine.

In conclusion, we found that the primary transcriptional consequence of losing Srf in NC was a defect in actin cytoskeleton-related gene expression. Using a novel Srf^aI allele to perturb SRF’s interactions with MRTFs, the primary cofactors regulating the cytoskeletal transcription program, we uncovered a crucial role for SRF-MRTF activity in the cardiac NC, but surprisingly found the mutation well-tolerated in the cranial NC. Further study will be necessary to determine the relevant SRF-cofactor ensembles in different developmental contexts.

The NGS data is available on GEO. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=GSE186770.

1. 1. Dinsmore CJ
   2. Soriano P

   (2021) NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus

   ID GSE186770. Differential regulation of cranial and cardiac neural crest by Serum Response Factor.

   https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=GSE186770

1. 1. Arsenian S
   2. Weinhold B
   3. Oelgeschläger M
   4. Rüther U
   5. Nordheim A

   (1998) Serum response factor is essential for mesoderm formation during mouse embryogenesis

   The EMBO Journal 17:6289–6299.

   https://doi.org/10.1093/emboj/17.21.6289

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
2. 1. Asparuhova MB
   2. Ferralli J
   3. Chiquet M
   4. Chiquet-Ehrismann R

   (2011) The transcriptional regulator megakaryoblastic leukemia-1 mediates serum response factor-independent activation of tenascin-C transcription by mechanical stress

   FASEB Journal 25:3477–3488.

   https://doi.org/10.1096/fj.11-187310

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
3. Conference

   1. Axel Visel CA

   (2015) FaceBase Consortium

   RNA-Seq analysis in E13.5 mouse palates.

   https://doi.org/10.25550/TN2

   • Google Scholar
4. 1. Ayadi A
   2. Zheng H
   3. Sobieszczuk P
   4. Buchwalter G
   5. Moerman P
   6. Alitalo K
   7. Wasylyk B

   (2001) Net-targeted mutant mice develop a vascular phenotype and up-regulate egr-1

   The EMBO Journal 20:5139–5152.

   https://doi.org/10.1093/emboj/20.18.5139

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
5. 1. Belaguli NS
   2. Sepulveda JL
   3. Nigam V
   4. Charron F
   5. Nemer M
   6. Schwartz RJ

   (2000) Cardiac tissue enriched factors serum response factor and GATA-4 are mutual coregulators

   Molecular and Cellular Biology 20:7550–7558.

   https://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.20.20.7550-7558.2000

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
6. 1. Bergwerff M
   2. Gittenberger-de Groot AC
   3. Wisse LJ
   4. DeRuiter MC
   5. Wessels A
   6. Martin JF
   7. Olson EN
   8. Kern MJ

   (2000) Loss of function of the Prx1 and Prx2 homeobox genes alters architecture of the great elastic arteries and ductus arteriosus

   Virchows Archiv 436:12–19.

   https://doi.org/10.1007/pl00008193

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
7. 1. Brachmann SM
   2. Yballe CM
   3. Innocenti M
   4. Deane JA
   5. Fruman DA
   6. Thomas SM
   7. Cantley LC

   (2005) Role of phosphoinositide 3-kinase regulatory isoforms in development and actin rearrangement

   Molecular and Cellular Biology 25:2593–2606.

   https://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.25.7.2593-2606.2005

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
8. 1. Brewer JR
   2. Molotkov A
   3. Mazot P
   4. Hoch RV
   5. Soriano P

   (2015) Fgfr1 regulates development through the combinatorial use of signaling proteins

   Genes & Development 29:1863–1874.

   https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.264994.115

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
9. 1. Bronner ME
   2. Simões-Costa M

   (2016) The Neural Crest Migrating into the Twenty-First Century

   Current Topics in Developmental Biology 116:115–134.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.ctdb.2015.12.003

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
10. 1. Cenik BK
    2. Liu N
    3. Chen B
    4. Bezprozvannaya S
    5. Olson EN
    6. Bassel-Duby R

    (2016) Myocardin-related transcription factors are required for skeletal muscle development

    Development 143:2853–2861.

    https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.135855

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
11. 1. Cesari F
    2. Rennekampff V
    3. Vintersten K
    4. Vuong LG
    5. Seibler J
    6. Bode J
    7. Wiebel FF
    8. Nordheim A

    (2004) Elk-1 knock-out mice engineered by Flp recombinase-mediated cassette exchange

    Genesis 38:87–92.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/gene.20003

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
12. 1. Chen CY
    2. Croissant J
    3. Majesky M
    4. Topouzis S
    5. McQuinn T
    6. Frankovsky MJ
    7. Schwartz RJ

    (1996) Activation of the cardiac alpha-actin promoter depends upon serum response factor, Tinman homologue, Nkx-2.5, and intact serum response elements

    Developmental Genetics 19:119–130.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6408(1996)19:2<119::AID-DVG3>3.0.CO;2-C

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
13. 1. Chen F
    2. Kook H
    3. Milewski R
    4. Gitler AD
    5. Lu MM
    6. Li J
    7. Nazarian R
    8. Schnepp R
    9. Jen K
    10. Biben C
    11. Runke G
    12. Mackay JP
    13. Novotny J
    14. Schwartz RJ
    15. Harvey RP
    16. Mullins MC
    17. Epstein JA

    (2002) Hop is an unusual homeobox gene that modulates cardiac development

    Cell 110:713–723.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/s0092-8674(02)00932-7

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
14. 1. Costello PS
    2. Nicolas RH
    3. Watanabe Y
    4. Rosewell I
    5. Treisman R

    (2004) Ternary complex factor SAP-1 is required for Erk-mediated thymocyte positive selection

    Nature Immunology 5:289–298.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/ni1038

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
15. 1. Costello P
    2. Nicolas R
    3. Willoughby J
    4. Wasylyk B
    5. Nordheim A
    6. Treisman R

    (2010) Ternary complex factors SAP-1 and Elk-1, but not net, are functionally equivalent in thymocyte development

    Journal of Immunology 185:1082–1092.

    https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.1000472

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
16. 1. Creemers EE
    2. Sutherland LB
    3. Oh J
    4. Barbosa AC
    5. Olson EN

    (2006) Coactivation of MEF2 by the SAP domain proteins myocardin and MASTR

    Molecular Cell 23:83–96.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2006.05.026

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
17. 1. Crossley PH
    2. Martin GR

    (1995)

    The mouse Fgf8 gene encodes a family of polypeptides and is expressed in regions that direct outgrowth and patterning in the developing embryo

    Development (Cambridge, England) 121:439–451.

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
18. 1. Danielian PS
    2. Muccino D
    3. Rowitch DH
    4. Michael SK
    5. McMahon AP

    (1998) Modification of gene activity in mouse embryos in utero by a tamoxifen-inducible form of Cre recombinase

    Current Biology 8:1323–1326.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/s0960-9822(07)00562-3

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
19. 1. Dinsmore CJ
    2. Soriano P

    (2018) MAPK and PI3K signaling: At the crossroads of neural crest development

    Developmental Biology 444:S79–S97.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ydbio.2018.02.003

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
20. 1. Enkhmandakh B
    2. Makeyev AV
    3. Erdenechimeg L
    4. Ruddle FH
    5. Chimge NO
    6. Tussie-Luna MI
    7. Roy AL
    8. Bayarsaihan D

    (2009) Essential functions of the Williams-Beuren syndrome-associated TFII-I genes in embryonic development

    PNAS 106:181–186.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0811531106

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
21. 1. Esnault C
    2. Stewart A
    3. Gualdrini F
    4. East P
    5. Horswell S
    6. Matthews N
    7. Treisman R

    (2014) Rho-actin signaling to the MRTF coactivators dominates the immediate transcriptional response to serum in fibroblasts

    Genes & Development 28:943–958.

    https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.239327.114

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
22. 1. Esnault C
    2. Gualdrini F
    3. Horswell S
    4. Kelly G
    5. Stewart A
    6. East P
    7. Matthews N
    8. Treisman R

    (2017) ERK-Induced Activation of TCF Family of SRF Cofactors Initiates a Chromatin Modification Cascade Associated with Transcription

    Molecular Cell 65:1081–1095.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2017.02.005

    • Google Scholar
23. 1. Espinoza-Lewis RA
    2. Wang DZ

    (2014) Generation of a Cre knock-in into the Myocardin locus to mark early cardiac and smooth muscle cell lineages

    Genesis 52:879–887.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/dvg.22819

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
24. 1. Fantauzzo KA
    2. Soriano P

    (2015) Receptor tyrosine kinase signaling: regulating neural crest development one phosphate at a time

    Current Topics in Developmental Biology 111:135–182.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.ctdb.2014.11.005

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
25. 1. Fantauzzo KA
    2. Soriano P

    (2017) Generation of an immortalized mouse embryonic palatal mesenchyme cell line

    PLOS ONE 12:e0179078.

    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0179078

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
26. 1. Feng Y
    2. Chen MH
    3. Moskowitz IP
    4. Mendonza AM
    5. Vidali L
    6. Nakamura F
    7. Kwiatkowski DJ
    8. Walsh CA

    (2006) Filamin A (FLNA) is required for cell-cell contact in vascular development and cardiac morphogenesis

    PNAS 103:19836–19841.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0609628104

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
27. 1. Fox JW
    2. Lamperti ED
    3. Ekşioğlu YZ
    4. Hong SE
    5. Feng Y
    6. Graham DA
    7. Scheffer IE
    8. Dobyns WB
    9. Hirsch BA
    10. Radtke RA
    11. Berkovic SF
    12. Huttenlocher PR
    13. Walsh CA

    (1998) Mutations in filamin 1 prevent migration of cerebral cortical neurons in human periventricular heterotopia

    Neuron 21:1315–1325.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/s0896-6273(00)80651-0

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
28. 1. Freddie CT
    2. Ji Z
    3. Marais A
    4. Sharrocks AD

    (2007) Functional interactions between the Forkhead transcription factor FOXK1 and the MADS-box protein SRF

    Nucleic Acids Research 35:5203–5212.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkm528

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
29. 1. Grueneberg DA
    2. Natesan S
    3. Alexandre C
    4. Gilman MZ

    (1992) Human and Drosophila homeodomain proteins that enhance the DNA-binding activity of serum response factor

    Science 257:1089–1095.

    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.257.5073.1089

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
30. 1. Grueneberg DA
    2. Henry RW
    3. Brauer A
    4. Novina CD
    5. Cheriyath V
    6. Roy AL
    7. Gilman M

    (1997) A multifunctional DNA-binding protein that promotes the formation of serum response factor/homeodomain complexes: identity to TFII-I

    Genes & Development 11:2482–2493.

    https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.11.19.2482

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
31. 1. Gualdrini F
    2. Esnault C
    3. Horswell S
    4. Stewart A
    5. Matthews N
    6. Treisman R

    (2016) SRF Co-factors Control the Balance between Cell Proliferation and Contractility

    Molecular Cell 64:1048–1061.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2016.10.016

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
32. 1. Guo B
    2. Lyu Q
    3. Slivano OJ
    4. Dirkx R
    5. Christie CK
    6. Czyzyk J
    7. Hezel AF
    8. Gharavi AG
    9. Small EM
    10. Miano JM

    (2018) Serum Response Factor Is Essential for Maintenance of Podocyte Structure and Function

    Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 29:416–422.

    https://doi.org/10.1681/ASN.2017050473

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
33. 1. Halene S
    2. Gao Y
    3. Hahn K
    4. Massaro S
    5. Italiano JE
    6. Schulz V
    7. Lin S
    8. Kupfer GM
    9. Krause DS

    (2010) Serum response factor is an essential transcription factor in megakaryocytic maturation

    Blood 116:1942–1950.

    https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2010-01-261743

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
34. 1. Hamilton TG
    2. Klinghoffer RA
    3. Corrin PD
    4. Soriano P

    (2003) Evolutionary divergence of platelet-derived growth factor alpha receptor signaling mechanisms

    Molecular and Cellular Biology 23:4013–4025.

    https://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.23.11.4013-4025.2003

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
35. 1. Hanna S
    2. El-Sibai M

    (2013) Signaling networks of Rho GTPases in cell motility

    Cellular Signalling 25:1955–1961.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cellsig.2013.04.009

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
36. 1. Hipp L
    2. Beer J
    3. Kuchler O
    4. Reisser M
    5. Sinske D
    6. Michaelis J
    7. Gebhardt JCM
    8. Knöll B

    (2019) Single-molecule imaging of the transcription factor SRF reveals prolonged chromatin-binding kinetics upon cell stimulation

    PNAS 116:880–889.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1812734116

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
37. 1. Holtz ML
    2. Misra RP

    (2008) Endothelial-specific ablation of serum response factor causes hemorrhaging, yolk sac vascular failure, and embryonic lethality

    BMC Developmental Biology 8:65.

    https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-213X-8-65

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
38. 1. Hong M
    2. Krauss RS

    (2012) Cdon mutation and fetal ethanol exposure synergize to produce midline signaling defects and holoprosencephaly spectrum disorders in mice

    PLOS Genetics 8:e1002999.

    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1002999

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
39. 1. Houweling AC
    2. Beaman GM
    3. Postma AV
    4. Gainous TB
    5. Lichtenbelt KD
    6. Brancati F
    7. Lopes FM
    8. Made I
    9. Polstra AM
    10. Robinson ML
    11. Wright KD
    12. Ellingford JM
    13. Jackson AR
    14. Overwater E
    15. Genesio R
    16. Romano S
    17. Camerota L
    18. D’Angelo E
    19. Meijers-Heijboer EJ
    20. Creemers EE

    (2019) Loss-of-function variants in myocardin cause congenital megabladder in humans and mice

    The Journal of Clinical Investigation 129:5374–5380.

    https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI128545

    • Google Scholar
40. 1. Huang J
    2. Cheng L
    3. Li J
    4. Chen M
    5. Zhou D
    6. Lu MM
    7. Proweller A
    8. Epstein JA
    9. Parmacek MS

    (2008) Myocardin regulates expression of contractile genes in smooth muscle cells and is required for closure of the ductus arteriosus in mice

    The Journal of Clinical Investigation 118:515–525.

    https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI33304

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
41. 1. Jiménez C
    2. Portela RA
    3. Mellado M
    4. Rodríguez-Frade JM
    5. Collard J
    6. Serrano A
    7. Martínez-A C
    8. Avila J
    9. Carrera AC

    (2000) Role of the PI3K regulatory subunit in the control of actin organization and cell migration

    The Journal of Cell Biology 151:249–262.

    https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.151.2.249

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
42. 1. Kim DW
    2. Cheriyath V
    3. Roy AL
    4. Cochran BH

    (1998) TFII-I enhances activation of the c-fos promoter through interactions with upstream elements

    Molecular and Cellular Biology 18:3310–3320.

    https://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.18.6.3310

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
43. 1. Kim T
    2. Hwang D
    3. Lee D
    4. Kim JH
    5. Kim SY
    6. Lim DS

    (2017) MRTF potentiates TEAD-YAP transcriptional activity causing metastasis

    The EMBO Journal 36:520–535.

    https://doi.org/10.15252/embj.201695137

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
44. 1. Lemmon MA
    2. Schlessinger J

    (2010) Cell signaling by receptor tyrosine kinases

    Cell 141:1117–1134.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2010.06.011

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
45. 1. Li S
    2. Wang DZ
    3. Wang Z
    4. Richardson JA
    5. Olson EN

    (2003) The serum response factor coactivator myocardin is required for vascular smooth muscle development

    PNAS 100:9366–9370.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1233635100

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
46. 1. Li S
    2. Czubryt MP
    3. McAnally J
    4. Bassel-Duby R
    5. Richardson JA
    6. Wiebel FF
    7. Nordheim A
    8. Olson EN

    (2005a) Requirement for serum response factor for skeletal muscle growth and maturation revealed by tissue-specific gene deletion in mice

    PNAS 102:1082–1087.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0409103102

    • Google Scholar
47. 1. Li J
    2. Zhu X
    3. Chen M
    4. Cheng L
    5. Zhou D
    6. Lu MM
    7. Du K
    8. Epstein JA
    9. Parmacek MS

    (2005b) Myocardin-related transcription factor B is required in cardiac neural crest for smooth muscle differentiation and cardiovascular development

    PNAS 102:8916–8921.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0503741102

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
48. 1. Li S
    2. Chang S
    3. Qi X
    4. Richardson JA
    5. Olson EN

    (2006) Requirement of a myocardin-related transcription factor for development of mammary myoepithelial cells

    Molecular and Cellular Biology 26:5797–5808.

    https://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.00211-06

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
49. 1. Li J
    2. Bowens N
    3. Cheng L
    4. Zhu X
    5. Chen M
    6. Hannenhalli S
    7. Cappola TP
    8. Parmacek MS

    (2012) Myocardin-like protein 2 regulates TGFβ signaling in embryonic stem cells and the developing vasculature

    Development 139:3531–3542.

    https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.082222

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
50. 1. Ling Y
    2. West AG
    3. Roberts EC
    4. Lakey JH
    5. Sharrocks AD

    (1998) Interaction of transcription factors with serum response factor identification of the Elk-1 binding surface

    The Journal of Biological Chemistry 273:10506–10514.

    https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.273.17.10506

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
51. 1. Liu ZP
    2. Wang Z
    3. Yanagisawa H
    4. Olson EN

    (2005) Phenotypic modulation of smooth muscle cells through interaction of Foxo4 and myocardin

    Developmental Cell 9:261–270.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.devcel.2005.05.017

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
52. 1. Lu MF
    2. Cheng HT
    3. Kern MJ
    4. Potter SS
    5. Tran B
    6. Diekwisch TG
    7. Martin JF

    (1999) prx-1 functions cooperatively with another paired-related homeobox gene, prx-2, to maintain cell fates within the craniofacial mesenchyme

    Development 126:495–504.

    https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.126.3.495

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
53. 1. Madisen L
    2. Zwingman TA
    3. Sunkin SM
    4. Oh SW
    5. Zariwala HA
    6. Gu H
    7. Ng LL
    8. Palmiter RD
    9. Hawrylycz MJ
    10. Jones AR
    11. Lein ES
    12. Zeng H

    (2010) A robust and high-throughput Cre reporting and characterization system for the whole mouse brain

    Nature Neuroscience 13:133–140.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.2467

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
54. 1. Mengmeng X
    2. Yuejuan X
    3. Sun C
    4. Yanan L
    5. Fen L
    6. Kun S

    (2020) Novel mutations of the SRF gene in Chinese sporadic conotruncal heart defect patients

    BMC Medical Genetics 21:95.

    https://doi.org/10.1186/s12881-020-01032-y

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
55. 1. Miano JM

    (2003) Serum response factor: toggling between disparate programs of gene expression

    Journal of Molecular and Cellular Cardiology 35:577–593.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-2828(03)00110-x

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
56. 1. Miano JM
    2. Ramanan N
    3. Georger MA
    4. Mesy Bentley KL
    5. Emerson RL
    6. Balza RO
    7. Xiao Q
    8. Weiler H
    9. Ginty DD
    10. Misra RP

    (2004) Restricted inactivation of serum response factor to the cardiovascular system

    PNAS 101:17132–17137.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0406041101

    • Google Scholar
57. 1. Minoux M
    2. Holwerda S
    3. Vitobello A
    4. Kitazawa T
    5. Kohler H
    6. Stadler MB
    7. Rijli FM

    (2017) Gene bivalency at Polycomb domains regulates cranial neural crest positional identity

    Science 355:eaal2913.

    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aal2913

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
58. 1. Miralles F
    2. Posern G
    3. Zaromytidou AI
    4. Treisman R

    (2003) Actin dynamics control SRF activity by regulation of its coactivator MAL

    Cell 113:329–342.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/s0092-8674(03)00278-2

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
59. 1. Mohun TJ
    2. Chambers AE
    3. Towers N
    4. Taylor MV

    (1991)

    Expression of genes encoding the transcription factor SRF during early development of Xenopus laevis: identification of a CArG box-binding activity as SRF

    The EMBO Journal 10:933–940.

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
60. 1. Morin S
    2. Paradis P
    3. Aries A
    4. Nemer M

    (2001) Serum response factor-GATA ternary complex required for nuclear signaling by a G-protein-coupled receptor

    Molecular and Cellular Biology 21:1036–1044.

    https://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.21.4.1036-1044.2001

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
61. 1. Muzumdar MD
    2. Tasic B
    3. Miyamichi K
    4. Li L
    5. Luo L

    (2007) A global double-fluorescent Cre reporter mouse

    Genesis 45:593–605.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/dvg.20335

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
62. 1. Mylona A
    2. Theillet FX
    3. Foster C
    4. Cheng TM
    5. Miralles F
    6. Bates PA
    7. Selenko P
    8. Treisman R

    (2016) Opposing effects of Elk-1 multisite phosphorylation shape its response to ERK activation

    Science 354:233–237.

    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aad1872

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
63. 1. Newbern J
    2. Zhong J
    3. Wickramasinghe RS
    4. Li X
    5. Wu Y
    6. Samuels I
    7. Cherosky N
    8. Karlo JC
    9. O’Loughlin B
    10. Wikenheiser J
    11. Gargesha M
    12. Doughman YQ
    13. Charron J
    14. Ginty DD
    15. Watanabe M
    16. Saitta SC
    17. Snider WD
    18. Landreth GE

    (2008) Mouse and human phenotypes indicate a critical conserved role for ERK2 signaling in neural crest development

    PNAS 105:17115–17120.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0805239105

    • Google Scholar
64. 1. Niu Z
    2. Yu W
    3. Zhang SX
    4. Barron M
    5. Belaguli NS
    6. Schneider MD
    7. Parmacek M
    8. Nordheim A
    9. Schwartz RJ

    (2005) Conditional mutagenesis of the murine serum response factor gene blocks cardiogenesis and the transcription of downstream gene targets

    The Journal of Biological Chemistry 280:32531–32538.

    https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M501372200

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
65. 1. Norman C
    2. Runswick M
    3. Pollock R
    4. Treisman R

    (1988) Isolation and properties of cDNA clones encoding SRF, a transcription factor that binds to the c-fos serum response element

    Cell 55:989–1003.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-8674(88)90244-9

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
66. 1. Oh J
    2. Richardson JA
    3. Olson EN

    (2005) Requirement of myocardin-related transcription factor-B for remodeling of branchial arch arteries and smooth muscle differentiation

    PNAS 102:15122–15127.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507346102

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
67. 1. Panayiotou R
    2. Miralles F
    3. Pawlowski R
    4. Diring J
    5. Flynn HR
    6. Skehel M
    7. Treisman R

    (2016) Phosphorylation acts positively and negatively to regulate MRTF-A subcellular localisation and activity

    eLife 5:e15460.

    https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.15460

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
68. 1. Parlakian A
    2. Tuil D
    3. Hamard G
    4. Tavernier G
    5. Hentzen D
    6. Concordet JP
    7. Paulin D
    8. Li Z
    9. Daegelen D

    (2004) Targeted inactivation of serum response factor in the developing heart results in myocardial defects and embryonic lethality

    Molecular and Cellular Biology 24:5281–5289.

    https://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.24.12.5281-5289.2004

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
69. 1. Parmacek MS

    (2007) Myocardin-related transcription factors: critical coactivators regulating cardiovascular development and adaptation

    Circulation Research 100:633–644.

    https://doi.org/10.1161/01.RES.0000259563.61091.e8

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
70. Software

    1. Patro R

    (2019) COMBINE-lab/wasabi, version 8c33cab

    Github.

    https://github.com/COMBINE-lab/wasabi
71. 1. Perez-Garcia V
    2. Fineberg E
    3. Wilson R
    4. Murray A
    5. Mazzeo CI
    6. Tudor C
    7. Sienerth A
    8. White JK
    9. Tuck E
    10. Ryder EJ
    11. Gleeson D
    12. Siragher E
    13. Wardle-Jones H
    14. Staudt N
    15. Wali N
    16. Collins J
    17. Geyer S
    18. Busch-Nentwich EM
    19. Galli A
    20. Smith JC
    21. Robertson E
    22. Adams DJ
    23. Weninger WJ
    24. Mohun T
    25. Hemberger M

    (2018) Placentation defects are highly prevalent in embryonic lethal mouse mutants

    Nature 555:463–468.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature26002

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
72. 1. Posern G
    2. Treisman R

    (2006) Actin’ together: serum response factor, its cofactors and the link to signal transduction

    Trends in Cell Biology 16:588–596.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcb.2006.09.008

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
73. 1. Rogers CD
    2. Nie S

    (2018) Specifying neural crest cells: From chromatin to morphogens and factors in between

    Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews. Developmental Biology 7:e322.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/wdev.322

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
74. 1. Saga Y
    2. Miyagawa-Tomita S
    3. Takagi A
    4. Kitajima S
    5. Miyazaki J i
    6. Inoue T

    (1999)

    MesP1 is expressed in the heart precursor cells and required for the formation of a single heart tube

    Development 126:3437–3447.

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
75. 1. Shin CH
    2. Liu ZP
    3. Passier R
    4. Zhang CL
    5. Wang DZ
    6. Harris TM
    7. Yamagishi H
    8. Richardson JA
    9. Childs G
    10. Olson EN

    (2002) Modulation of cardiac growth and development by HOP, an unusual homeodomain protein

    Cell 110:725–735.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/s0092-8674(02)00933-9

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
76. 1. Smith EC
    2. Thon JN
    3. Devine MT
    4. Lin S
    5. Schulz VP
    6. Guo Y
    7. Massaro SA
    8. Halene S
    9. Gallagher P
    10. Italiano JE
    11. Krause DS

    (2012) MKL1 and MKL2 play redundant and crucial roles in megakaryocyte maturation and platelet formation

    Blood 120:2317–2329.

    https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2012-04-420828

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
77. 1. Sun Y
    2. Boyd K
    3. Xu W
    4. Ma J
    5. Jackson CW
    6. Fu A
    7. Shillingford JM
    8. Robinson GW
    9. Hennighausen L
    10. Hitzler JK
    11. Ma Z
    12. Morris SW

    (2006a) Acute myeloid leukemia-associated Mkl1 (Mrtf-a) is a key regulator of mammary gland function

    Molecular and Cellular Biology 26:5809–5826.

    https://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.00024-06

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
78. 1. Sun Q
    2. Chen G
    3. Streb JW
    4. Long X
    5. Yang Y
    6. Stoeckert CJ
    7. Miano JM

    (2006b) Defining the mammalian CArGome

    Genome Research 16:197–207.

    https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.4108706

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
79. 1. Tallquist MD
    2. Soriano P

    (2000) Epiblast-restricted Cre expression in MORE mice: a tool to distinguish embryonic vs. extra-embryonic gene function

    Genesis 26:113–115.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1526-968x(200002)26:2<113::aid-gene3>3.0.co;2-2

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
80. 1. Tallquist MD
    2. Soriano P

    (2003) Cell autonomous requirement for PDGFRalpha in populations of cranial and cardiac neural crest cells

    Development 130:507–518.

    https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.00241

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
81. 1. Trembley MA
    2. Velasquez LS
    3. de Mesy Bentley KL
    4. Small EM

    (2015) Myocardin-related transcription factors control the motility of epicardium-derived cells and the maturation of coronary vessels

    Development 142:21–30.

    https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.116418

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
82. 1. Vasudevan HN
    2. Soriano P

    (2014) SRF regulates craniofacial development through selective recruitment of MRTF cofactors by PDGF signaling

    Developmental Cell 31:332–344.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.devcel.2014.10.005

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
83. 1. Vasudevan HN
    2. Mazot P
    3. He F
    4. Soriano P

    (2015) Receptor tyrosine kinases modulate distinct transcriptional programs by differential usage of intracellular pathways

    eLife 4:e07186.

    https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.07186

    • Google Scholar
84. 1. Wang Z
    2. Wang DZ
    3. Hockemeyer D
    4. McAnally J
    5. Nordheim A
    6. Olson EN

    (2004) Myocardin and ternary complex factors compete for SRF to control smooth muscle gene expression

    Nature 428:185–189.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02382

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
85. 1. Weinl C
    2. Wasylyk C
    3. Garcia Garrido M
    4. Sothilingam V
    5. Beck SC
    6. Riehle H
    7. Stritt C
    8. Roux MJ
    9. Seeliger MW
    10. Wasylyk B
    11. Nordheim A
    12. Kirchmair R

    (2014) Elk3 Deficiency Causes Transient Impairment in Post-Natal Retinal Vascular Development and Formation of Tortuous Arteries in Adult Murine Retinae

    PLOS ONE 9:e107048.

    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0107048

    • Google Scholar
86. 1. Xie Z
    2. Bailey A
    3. Kuleshov MV
    4. Clarke DJB
    5. Evangelista JE
    6. Jenkins SL
    7. Lachmann A
    8. Wojciechowicz ML
    9. Kropiwnicki E
    10. Jagodnik KM
    11. Jeon M
    12. Ma’ayan A

    (2021) Gene Set Knowledge Discovery with Enrichr

    Current Protocols 1:e90.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/cpz1.90

    • Google Scholar
87. 1. Zaromytidou AI
    2. Miralles F
    3. Treisman R

    (2006) MAL and Ternary Complex Factor Use Different Mechanisms To Contact a Common Surface on the Serum Response Factor DNA-Binding Domain

    Molecular and Cellular Biology 26:4134–4148.

    https://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.01902-05

    • Google Scholar

Author details

1. Colin J Dinsmore

   Department of Cell, Development and Regenerative Biology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, United States

   Contribution

   Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Validation, Visualization, Writing - original draft, Writing - review and editing

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-6404-1202

2. Philippe Soriano

   Department of Cell, Development and Regenerative Biology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, United States

   Contribution

   Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Project administration, Supervision, Writing - review and editing

   For correspondence

   philippe.soriano@mssm.edu

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0427-926X

• 1,404

  views

• 162

  downloads

• 3

  citations

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