Sarah Bray

Notch signalling: a simple pathway becomes complex

A small number of signalling pathways are used iteratively to regulate cell fates, cell proliferation and cell death in development. Notch is the receptor in one such pathway, and is unusual in that most of its ligands are also transmembrane proteins; therefore signalling is restricted to neighbouring cells. Although the intracellular transduction of the Notch signal is remarkably simple, with no secondary messengers, this pathway functions in an enormous diversity of developmental processes and its dysfunction is implicated in many cancers.

Frizzled regulation of Notch signalling polarizes cell fate in the Drosophila eye

The Drosophila eye, a paradigm for epithelial organization, is highly polarized with mirror-image symmetry about the equator. The R3 and R4 photoreceptors in each ommatidium are vital in this polarity; they adopt asymmetrical positions in adult ommatidia and are the site of action for several essential genes,,,,. Two such genes are frizzled (fz) and dishevelled (dsh), the products of which are components of a signalling pathway required in R3, and which are thought to be activated by a diffusible signal,,,,,. Here we show that the transmembrane receptor Notch is required downstream of dsh in R3/R4 for them to adopt distinct fates. By using an enhancer for the Notch target gene Enhancer of split mδ, we show that Notch becomes activated specifically in R4. We propose that Fz/Dsh promotes activity of the Notch ligand Delta and inhibits Notch receptor activity in R3, creating a difference in Notch signalling capacity between R3 and R4. Subsequent feedback in the Notch pathway ensures that this difference becomes amplified. This interplay between Fz/Dsh and Notch indicates that polarity is established through local comparisons between two cells and explains how a signal from one position (for example, the equator in the eye) could be interpreted by all ommatidia in the field.

A model Notch response element detects Suppressor of Hairless–dependent molecular switch

Cell-cell signaling mediated by Notch is critical during many different developmental processes for the specification or restriction of cell fates. Currently, the only known transduction pathway involves a DNA binding protein, Suppressor of Hairless [Su(H)] in Drosophila and CBF1 in mammals, and results in the direct activation of target genes. It has been proposed that in the absence of Notch, Su(H)/CBF1 acts as a repressor and is converted into an activator through interactions with the Notch intracellular domain [1--4]. Recently, we have also suggested that the activation of specific target genes requires synergy between Su(H) and other transcriptional activators [5]. Here we have designed an assay that allows us to directly test these hypotheses in vivo. Our results clearly demonstrate that Su(H) is able to function as the core of a molecular switch, repressing transcription in the absence of Notch and activating in the presence of Notch. In its capacity as an activator, Su(H) can cooperate synergistically with a DNA-bound transcription factor, Grainyhead. These interactions indicate a simple model for Notch target-gene regulation that could explain the precision of gene activation elicited by Notch signaling in different developmental fate decisions.

Asymmetric Localization of Frizzled and the Determination of Notch-Dependent Cell Fate in the Drosophila Eye

BACKGROUND During patterning of the Drosophila eye, a critical step is the Notch-mediated cell fate decision that determines the identities of the R3/R4 photoreceptor pair in each ommatidium. Depending on the decision taken, the ommatidium adopts either the dorsal or ventral chiral form. This decision is directed by the activity of the planar polarity genes, and, in particular, higher activity of the receptor Frizzled confers R3 fate. RESULTS We present evidence that Frizzled does not modulate Notch activity via Rho GTPases and a JNK cascade as previously proposed. We find that the planar polarity proteins Frizzled, Dishevelled, Flamingo, and Strabismus adopt asymmetric protein localizations in the developing photoreceptors. These protein localizations correlate with the bias of Notch activity between R3/R4, suggesting that they are necessary to modulate Notch activity between these cells. Additional data support a mechanism for regulation of Notch activity that could involve direct interactions between Dishevelled and Notch at the cell cortex. CONCLUSIONS In the light of our findings, we conclude that Rho GTPases/JNK cascades are not major effectors of planar polarity in the Drosophila eye. We propose a new model for the control of R3/R4 photoreceptor fate by Frizzled, whereby asymmetric protein localization is likely to be a critical step in modulation of Notch activity. This modulation may occur via direct interactions between Notch and Dishevelled.

Notch signalling in context

The highly conserved Notch signalling pathway functions in many different developmental and homeostatic processes, which raises the question of how this pathway can achieve such diverse outcomes. With a direct route from the membrane to the nucleus, the Notch pathway has fewer opportunities for regulation than do many other signalling pathways, yet it generates exquisitely patterned structures, including sensory hair cells and branched arterial networks. More confusingly, its activity promotes tissue growth and cancers in some circumstances but cell death and tumour suppression in others. Many different regulatory mechanisms help to shape the activity of the Notch pathway, generating functional outputs that are appropriate for each context. These mechanisms include the receptor–ligand landscape, the tissue topology, the nuclear environment and the connectivity of the regulatory networks.

Notch pathway: Making sense of Suppressor of Hairless

Suppressor of Hairless (Su(H)) is a DNA-binding protein component of the Notch signalling pathway, thought to be required, with a fragment of the Notch receptor, for target gene activation. Recent studies show that this is only one side of the story: target gene enhancers may be regulated by Su(H) in a variety of different ways.

Histone Chaperones ASF1 and NAP1 Differentially Modulate Removal of Active Histone Marks by LID-RPD3 Complexes during NOTCH Silencing

Histone chaperones are involved in a variety of chromatin transactions. By a proteomics survey, we identified the interaction networks of histone chaperones ASF1, CAF1, HIRA, and NAP1. Here, we analyzed the cooperation of H3/H4 chaperone ASF1 and H2A/H2B chaperone NAP1 with two closely related silencing complexes: LAF and RLAF. NAP1 binds RPD3 and LID-associated factors (RLAF) comprising histone deacetylase RPD3, histone H3K4 demethylase LID/KDM5, SIN3A, PF1, EMSY, and MRG15. ASF1 binds LAF, a similar complex lacking RPD3. ASF1 and NAP1 link, respectively, LAF and RLAF to the DNA-binding Su(H)/Hairless complex, which targets the E(spl) NOTCH-regulated genes. ASF1 facilitates gene-selective removal of the H3K4me3 mark by LAF but has no effect on H3 deacetylation. NAP1 directs high nucleosome density near E(spl) control elements and mediates both H3 deacetylation and H3K4me3 demethylation by RLAF. We conclude that histone chaperones ASF1 and NAP1 differentially modulate local chromatin structure during gene-selective silencing.

Direct Response to Notch Activation: Signaling Crosstalk and Incoherent Logic

Identification of the direct target genes of Notch reveals complex input into multiple signaling pathways that goes beyond coordination of transcriptional networks. Micromanaging Development By combining microarray gene expression data with occupancy by a key DNA binding transducer in the Notch pathway, Krejčí et al. set a gold standard for target genes that are regulated directly by Notch. The analysis also reveals incoherent network logic in which Notch signaling activates both positive and negative regulators of several pathways, which may allow Notch to micromanage multiple signaling networks and poise cells for different responses depending on the context. Detailed analysis of several Notch direct target genes in vivo reveals that many of the identified genes participate in regulation of adult muscle progenitors in Drosophila. Notch is the receptor in one of a small group of conserved signaling pathways that are essential at multiple stages in development. Although the mechanism of transduction impinges directly on the nucleus to regulate transcription through the CSL [CBF-1/Su(H)/LAG-1] DNA binding protein, there are few known direct target genes. Thus, relatively little is known about the immediate cellular consequences of Notch activation. We therefore set out to determine the genome-wide response to Notch activation by analyzing the changes in messenger RNA (mRNA) expression and the sites of CSL occupancy within 30 minutes of activating Notch in Drosophila cells. Through combining these data, we identify high-confidence direct targets of Notch that are implicated in the maintenance of adult muscle progenitors in vivo. These targets are enriched in cell morphogenesis genes and in components of other cell signaling pathways, especially the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) pathway. Also evident are examples of incoherent network logic, where Notch stimulates the expression of both a gene and the repressor of that gene, which may result in a transient window of competence after Notch activation. Furthermore, because targets comprise both positive and negative regulators, cells become poised for both outcomes, suggesting one mechanism through which Notch activation can lead to opposite effects in different contexts.

Regulation of post-embryonic neuroblasts by Drosophila Grainyhead

The Drosophila post-embryonic neuroblasts (pNBs) are neural stem cells that persist in the larval nervous system where they proliferate to produce neurons for the adult CNS. These pNBs provide a good model to investigate mechanisms regulating the maintenance and proliferation of stem cells. The transcription factor Grainyhead (Grh), which is required for morphogenesis of epidermal and tracheal cells, is also expressed in all pNBs. Here, we show that grh is essential for pNBs to adopt the stem cell programme appropriate to their position within the CNS. In grh mutants the abdominal pNBs produced more progeny while the thoracic pNBs, in contrast, divided less and produced fewer progeny than wild type. We investigated three candidates; the Neuroblast identify gene Castor, the signalling molecule Notch and the adhesion protein E-Cadherin, to determine whether they could mediate these effects. Neither Castor nor Notch fulfilled the criteria for intermediaries, and in particular Notch activity was found to be dispensable for the normal proliferation and survival of the pNBs. In contrast E-Cadherin, which has been shown to regulate pNB proliferation, was present at greatly reduced levels in the grh mutant pNBs. Furthermore, ectopic expression of Grh was sufficient to promote ectopic E-Cadherin and two conserved Grh-binding sites were identified in the E-Cadherin/shotgun flanking sequences, arguing that this gene is a downstream target. Thus one way Grh could regulate pNBs is through expression of E-cadherin, a protein that is thought to mediate interactions with the glial niche.

Hairless-Mediated Repression of Notch Target Genes Requires the Combined Activity of Groucho and CtBP Corepressors

ABSTRACT Notch signal transduction centers on a conserved DNA-binding protein called Suppressor of Hairless [Su(H)] in Drosophila species. In the absence of Notch activation, target genes are repressed by Su(H) acting in conjunction with a partner, Hairless, which contains binding motifs for two global corepressors, CtBP and Groucho (Gro). Usually these corepressors are thought to act via different mechanisms; complexed with other transcriptional regulators, they function independently and/or redundantly. Here we have investigated the requirement for Gro and CtBP in Hairless-mediated repression. Unexpectedly, we find that mutations inactivating one or the other binding motif can have detrimental effects on Hairless similar to those of mutations that inactivate both motifs. These results argue that recruitment of one or the other corepressor is not sufficient to confer repression in the context of the Hairless-Su(H) complex; Gro and CtBP need to function in combination. In addition, we demonstrate that Hairless has a second mode of repression that antagonizes Notch intracellular domain and is independent of Gro or CtBP binding.