Yusuke Kamachi

Pairing SOX off: with partners in the regulation of embryonic development

The SOX family of high-mobility group (HMG) domain proteins has recently been recognized as a key player in the regulation of embryonic development and in the determination of the cell fate. In the case of certain SOX proteins, they regulate the target genes by being paired off with specific partner factors. This partnering might allow SOX proteins to act in a cell-specific manner, which is key to their role in cell differentiation. The focus of this article is the mechanism of action of SOX proteins, in particular, how SOX proteins specifically pair off with respective partner factors and, as a consequence, select distinct sets of genes as their regulatory targets.

Functional Analysis of Chicken Sox2 Enhancers Highlights an Array of Diverse Regulatory Elements that Are Conserved in Mammals

Sox2 expression marks neural and sensory primordia at various stages of development. A 50 kb genomic region of chicken Sox2 was isolated and scanned for enhancer activity utilizing embryo electroporation, resulting in identification of a battery of enhancers. Although Sox2 expression in the early embryonic CNS appears uniform, it is actually pieced together by five separate enhancers with distinct spatio-temporal specificities, including the one activated by the neural induction signals emanating from Hensens node. Enhancers for Sox2 expression in the lens and nasal/otic placodes and in the neural crest were also determined. These functionally identified Sox2 enhancers exactly correspond to the extragenic sequence blocks conspicuously conserved between chicken and mammals, which are not discernible by sequence comparison among mammals.

Two distinct subgroups of group B Sox genes for transcriptional activators and repressors : their expression during embryonic organogenesis of the chicken

Group B Sox genes, Sox1, -2 and -3 are known to activate crystallin genes and to be involved in differentiation of lens and neural tissues. Screening of chicken genomic sequences for more Group B Sox genes identified two additional genes, Sox14 and Sox21. Proteins encoded by Sox14 and Sox21 genes are similar to each other but distinct from those coded by Sox1-3 (subgroup B1) except for the HMG domain and Group B homology immediately C-proximal of the HMG domain. C-terminal domains of SOX21 and SOX14 proteins function as strong and weak repression domains, respectively, when linked to the GAL4 DNA binding domain. These SOX proteins strongly (SOX21) or moderately (SOX14) inhibited activation of delta1-crystallin DC5 enhancer by SOX1 or SOX2, establishing that Sox14 and Sox21 are repressing subgroup (B2) of Group B Sox genes. This provides the first evidence for the occurrence of repressor SOX proteins. Activating (B1) and repressing (B2) subgroups of Group B Sox genes display interesting overlaps of expression domains in developing tissues (e.g. optic tectum, spinal cord, inner ear, alimentary tract, branchial arches). Within each subgroup, most expression domains of Sox1 and -3 are included in those of Sox2 (e.g. CNS, PNS, inner ear), while co-expression of Sox14 and Sox21 occurs in highly restricted sites of the CNS, with the likely temporal order of Sox21 preceding Sox14 (e.g. interneurons of the spinal cord). These expression patterns suggest that target genes of Group B SOX proteins are finely regulated by the counterbalance of activating and repressing SOX proteins.

Interplay of SOX and POU Factors in Regulation of the Nestin Gene in Neural Primordial Cells

ABSTRACT Intermediate-filament Nestin and group B1 SOX transcription factors (SOX1/2/3) are often employed as markers for neural primordium, suggesting their regulatory link. We have identified adjacent and essential SOX and POU factor binding sites in the Nestin neural enhancer. The 30-bp sequence of the enhancer including these sites (Nes30) showed a nervous system-specific and SOX-POU-dependent enhancer activity in multimeric forms in transfection assays and was utilized in assessing the specificity of the synergism; combinations of either group B1 or group C SOX (SOX11) with class III POU proved effective. In embryonic day 13.5 mouse spinal cord, Nestin was expressed in the cells with nuclei in the ventricular and subventricular zones. SOX1/2/3 expression was confined to the nuclei of the ventricular zone; SOX11 localized to the nuclei of both subventricular (high-level expression) and intermediate (low-level expression) zones. Class III POU (Brn2) was expressed at high levels, localizing to the nucleus in the ventricular and subventricular zones; moderate expression was observed in the intermediate zone, distributed in the cytoplasm. These data support the model that synergic interactions between group B1/C SOX and class III POU within the nucleus determine Nestin expression. Evidence also suggests that such interactions are involved in the regulation of neural primordial cells.

Sox proteins: regulators of cell fate specification and differentiation

Sox transcription factors play widespread roles during development; however, their versatile funtions have a relatively simple basis: the binding of a Sox protein alone to DNA does not elicit transcriptional activation or repression, but requires binding of a partner transcription factor to an adjacent site on the DNA. Thus, the activity of a Sox protein is dependent upon the identity of its partner factor and the context of the DNA sequence to which it binds. In this Primer, we provide an mechanistic overview of how Sox family proteins function, as a paradigm for transcriptional regulation of development involving multi-transcription factor complexes, and we discuss how Sox factors can thus regulate diverse processes during development.

The delta-crystallin enhancer-binding protein delta EF1 is a repressor of E2-box-mediated gene activation.

The repressor delta EF1 was discovered by its action on the DC5 fragment of the lens-specific delta 1-crystallin enhancer. C-proximal zinc fingers of delta EF1 were found responsible for binding to the DC5 fragment and had specificity to CACCT as revealed by selection of high-affinity binding sequences from a random oligonucleotide pool. CACCT is present not only in DC5 but also in the E2 box (CACCTG) elements which are the binding sites of various basic helix-loop-helix activators and also the target of an unidentified repressor, raising the possibility that delta EF1 accounts for the E2 box repressor activity. delta EF1 competed with E47 for binding to an E2 box sequence in vitro. In lymphoid cells, endogenous delta EF1 activity as a repressor was detectable, and exogenous delta EF1 repressed immunoglobulin kappa enhancer by binding to the kappa E2 site. Moreover, delta EF1 repressed MyoD-dependent activation of the muscle creatine kinase enhancer and MyoD-induced myogenesis of 10T1/2 cells. Thus, delta EF1 counteracts basic helix-loop-helix activators through binding site competition and fulfills the conditions of the E2 box repressor. In embryonic tissues, the most prominent site of delta EF1 expression is the myotome. Myotomal expression as well as the above results argues for a significant contribution of delta EF1 in regulation of embryonic myogenesis through the modulation of the actions of MyoD family proteins.

Triggering neural differentiation of ES cells by subtype switching of importin-α

Nuclear proteins are selectively imported into the nucleus by transport factors such as importin-α and importin-β. Here, we show that the expression of importin-α subtypes is strictly regulated during neural differentiation of mouse embryonic stem (ES) cells, and that the switching of importin-α subtype expression is critical for neural differentiation. Moreover, reproducing the switching of importin-α subtype expression in undifferentiated ES cells induced neural differentiation in the presence of leukaemia inhibitory factor (LIF) and serum, coordinated with the regulated expression of Oct3/4, Brn2 and SOX2, which are involved in ES–neural identity determination. These transcription factors were selectively imported into the nucleus by specific subtypes of importin-α. Thus, importin-α subtype switching has a major impact on cell differentiation through the regulated nuclear import of a specific set of transcription factors. This is the first study to propose that transport factors should be considered as major players in cell-fate determination.

Mechanism of Regulatory Target Selection by the SOX High- Mobility-Group Domain Proteins as Revealed by Comparison of SOX1/2/3 and SOX9

ABSTRACT SOX proteins bind similar DNA motifs through their high-mobility-group (HMG) domains, but their action is highly specific with respect to target genes and cell type. We investigated the mechanism of target selection by comparing SOX1/2/3, which activate δ-crystallin minimal enhancer DC5, with SOX9, which activates Col2a1 minimal enhancer COL2C2. These enhancers depend on both the SOX binding site and the binding site of a putative partner factor. The DC5 site was equally bound and bent by the HMG domains of SOX1/2 and SOX9. The activation domains of these SOX proteins mapped at the distal portions of the C-terminal domains were not cell specific and were independent of the partner factor. Chimeric proteins produced between SOX1 and SOX9 showed that to activate the DC5 enhancer, the C-terminal domain must be that of SOX1, although the HMG domains were replaceable. The SOX2-VP16 fusion protein, in which the activation domain of SOX2 was replaced by that of VP16, activated the DC5 enhancer still in a partner factor-dependent manner. The results argue that the proximal portion of the C-terminal domain of SOX1/2 specifically interacts with the partner factor, and this interaction determines the specificity of the SOX1/2 action. Essentially the same results were obtained in the converse experiments in which COL2C2 activation by SOX9 was analyzed, except that specificity of SOX9-partner factor interaction also involved the SOX9 HMG domain. The highly selective SOX-partner factor interactions presumably stabilize the DNA binding of the SOX proteins and provide the mechanism for regulatory target selection.

SOX-partner code for cell specification: Regulatory target selection and underlying molecular mechanisms.

Transcriptional regulatory functions of SOX proteins generally require the cooperation of partner factors that bind DNA in the vicinity of the SOX site. Each SOX-partner pair selects a specific group of regulatory target genes, with resultant gene expression patterns characterizing a particular cell differentiation state. Specific examples include the SOX2-OCT3/4 pairing in ES cells and the SOX2-PAX6 pairing in visual system primordia. When a component of a SOX-partner pair is exchanged with another factor, an overt transition of gene expression occurs in a cell, leading to the progression of developmental processes. When a SOX-partner protein pair activates its own genes, the global cell/tissue state is stabilized. Two major molecular mechanisms underlie SOX-partner factor interactions: (1) cooperative DNA binding; and (2) protein interactions dependent upon DNA binding which elicit a large transactivation potential. In vivo evidence for and molecular mechanisms of the cell specification code attributed to the SOX-partner factor complexes are reviewed.

Comparative genomic and expression analysis of group B1 sox genes in zebrafish indicates their diversification during vertebrate evolution

Group B1 Sox genes encode HMG domain transcription factors that play major roles in neural development. We have identified six zebrafish B1 sox genes, which include pan‐vertebrate sox1a/b, sox2, and sox3, and also fish‐specific sox19a/b. SOX19A/B proteins show a transcriptional activation potential that is similar to other B1 SOX proteins. The expression of sox19a and sox3 begins at approximately the 1,000‐cell stage during embryogenesis and becomes confined to the future ectoderm by the shield stage. This is reminiscent of the epiblastic expression of Sox2 and/or Sox3 in amniotes. As development progresses, these six B1 sox genes display unique expression patterns that overlap distinctly from one region to another. sox19a expression is widespread in the early neuroectoderm, resembling pan‐neural Sox2 expression in amniotes, whereas zebrafish sox2 shows anterior‐restricted expression. Comparative genomics suggests that sox19a/b and mammalian Sox15 (group G) have an orthologous relationship and that the B1/G Sox genes arose from a common ancestral gene through two rounds of genome duplication. It seems likely, therefore, that each B1/G Sox gene has gained a distinct expression profile and function during vertebrate evolution. Developmental Dynamics 235:811–825, 2006.