How enhancers regulate wavelike gene expression patterns

  1. Christine Mau
  2. Heike Rudolf
  3. Frederic Strobl
  4. Benjamin Schmid
  5. Timo Regensburger
  6. Ralf Palmisano
  7. Ernst HK Stelzer
  8. Leila Taher  Is a corresponding author
  9. Ezzat El-Sherif  Is a corresponding author
  1. Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Germany
  2. Goethe Universität Frankfurt am Main, Germany
  3. Graz University of Technology, Austria
  4. The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, United States

Abstract

A key problem in development is to understand how genes turn on or off at the right place and right time during embryogenesis. Such decisions are made by non-coding sequences called 'enhancers'. Much of our models of how enhancers work rely on the assumption that genes are activated de novo as stable domains across embryonic tissues. Such view has been strengthened by the intensive landmark studies of the early patterning of the anterior-posterior (AP) axis of the Drosophila embryo, where indeed gene expression domains seem to arise more or less stably. However, careful analysis of gene expression patterns in other model systems (including the AP patterning in vertebrates and short-germ insects like the beetle Tribolium castaneum) painted a different, very dynamic view of gene regulation, where genes are oftentimes expressed in a wavelike fashion. How such gene expression waves are mediated at the enhancer level is so far unclear. Here we establish the AP patterning of the short-germ beetle Tribolium as a model system to study dynamic and temporal pattern formation at the enhancer level. To that end, we established an enhancer prediction system in Tribolium based on time- and tissue-specific ATAC-seq and an enhancer live reporter system based on MS2 tagging. Using this experimental framework, we discovered several Tribolium enhancers, and assessed the spatiotemporal activities of some of them in live embryos. We found our data consistent with a model in which the timing of gene expression during embryonic pattern formation is mediated by a balancing act between enhancers that induce rapid changes in gene expression patterns (that we call 'dynamic enhancers') and enhancers that stabilizes gene expression patterns (that we call 'static enhancers'). However, more data is needed for a strong support for this or any other alternative models.

Data availability

Raw sequence files and scaled coverage tracks (in bigWig format) have been deposited in the Gene Expression Omnibus database under accession number GSE235410. Scaled coverage tracks were also uploaded to the iBeetleBase Genome Browser (https://ibeetle-base.uni-goettingen.de/genomebrowser/) (107). Matlab codes for the Speed Regulation and Enhancer Switching models can be found in (Kuhlmann L, El-Sherif E. Speed regulation and gradual enhancer switching models as flexible and evolvable patterning mechanisms. BioRxiv. 2018 Feb 7), and can be modified based on information and parameter values indicated in Materials and Methods (Computational Modeling) to generate the simulations presented in this study. Generated transgenic Tribolium lines are available upon request.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Christine Mau

    Department of Biology, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Heike Rudolf

    Department of Biology, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Frederic Strobl

    Buchmann Institute for Molecular Life Sciences, Goethe Universität Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Benjamin Schmid

    Optical Imaging Centre Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9327-2296
  5. Timo Regensburger

    Department of Biology, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Ralf Palmisano

    Optical Imaging Centre Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4283-2115
  7. Ernst HK Stelzer

    Buchmann Institute for Molecular Life Sciences, Goethe Universität Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1545-0736
  8. Leila Taher

    Institute of Biomedical Informatics, Graz University of Technology, Graz, Austria
    For correspondence
    leila.taher@tugraz.at
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-2013-5426
  9. Ezzat El-Sherif

    Department of Biology, The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, Edinburg, United States
    For correspondence
    ezzat.elsherif@utrgv.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1738-8139

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (EL 870/2-1)

  • Ezzat El-Sherif

Studienstiftung des Deutschen Volkes

  • Christine Mau

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

Copyright

© 2023, Mau 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.

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. Christine Mau
  2. Heike Rudolf
  3. Frederic Strobl
  4. Benjamin Schmid
  5. Timo Regensburger
  6. Ralf Palmisano
  7. Ernst HK Stelzer
  8. Leila Taher
  9. Ezzat El-Sherif
(2023)
How enhancers regulate wavelike gene expression patterns
eLife 12:e84969.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.84969

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.84969

Further reading

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Sabrina Benas, Ximena Fernandez, Emilio Kropff
    Research Article

    Entorhinal grid cells implement a spatial code with hexagonal periodicity, signaling the position of the animal within an environment. Grid maps of cells belonging to the same module share spacing and orientation, only differing in relative two-dimensional spatial phase, which could result from being part of a two-dimensional attractor guided by path integration. However, this architecture has the drawbacks of being complex to construct and rigid, path integration allowing for no deviations from the hexagonal pattern such as the ones observed under a variety of experimental manipulations. Here, we show that a simpler one-dimensional attractor is enough to align grid cells equally well. Using topological data analysis, we show that the resulting population activity is a sample of a torus, while the ensemble of maps preserves features of the network architecture. The flexibility of this low dimensional attractor allows it to negotiate the geometry of the representation manifold with the feedforward inputs, rather than imposing it. More generally, our results represent a proof of principle against the intuition that the architecture and the representation manifold of an attractor are topological objects of the same dimensionality, with implications to the study of attractor networks across the brain.

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Physics of Living Systems
    Divyoj Singh, Sriram Ramaswamy ... Mohd Suhail Rizvi
    Research Article Updated

    Planar cell polarity (PCP) – tissue-scale alignment of the direction of asymmetric localization of proteins at the cell-cell interface – is essential for embryonic development and physiological functions. Abnormalities in PCP can result in developmental imperfections, including neural tube closure defects and misaligned hair follicles. Decoding the mechanisms responsible for PCP establishment and maintenance remains a fundamental open question. While the roles of various molecules – broadly classified into ‘global’ and ‘local’ modules – have been well-studied, their necessity and sufficiency in explaining PCP and connecting their perturbations to experimentally observed patterns have not been examined. Here, we develop a minimal model that captures the proposed features of PCP establishment – a global tissue-level gradient and local asymmetric distribution of protein complexes. The proposed model suggests that while polarity can emerge without a gradient, the gradient not only acts as a global cue but also increases the robustness of PCP against stochastic perturbations. We also recapitulated and quantified the experimentally observed features of swirling patterns and domineering non-autonomy, using only three free model parameters - rate of protein binding to membrane, the concentration of PCP proteins, and the gradient steepness. We explain how self-stabilizing asymmetric protein localizations in the presence of tissue-level gradient can lead to robust PCP patterns and reveal minimal design principles for a polarized system.