![]() | ![]() |
Formats:
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Down-Regulation of Nucleosomal Binding Protein HMGN1 Expression during Embryogenesis Modulates Sox9 Expression in Chondrocytes† Protein Section, Laboratory of Metabolism,1 Laboratory of Pathology, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892,2 Department of Biology, Andong National University, 388 Seongcheon-dong, Andong, Gyungsangbuk-do 760-749, South Korea3 *Corresponding author. Mailing address: National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Building 37, Room 3122, 9000 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20892. Phone: (301) 496-5234. Fax: (301) 496-8419. E-mail: bustin/at/helix.nih.gov. Received September 14, 2005; Revised October 14, 2005; Accepted October 25, 2005. This article has been cited by other articles in PMC.Abstract We find that during embryogenesis the expression of HMGN1, a nuclear protein that binds to nucleosomes and reduces the compaction of the chromatin fiber, is progressively down-regulated throughout the entire embryo, except in committed but continuously renewing cell types, such as the basal layer of the epithelium. In the developing limb bud, the expression of HMGN1 is complementary to Sox9, a master regulator of the chondrocyte lineage. In limb bud micromass cultures, which faithfully mimic in vivo chondrogenic differentiation, loss of HMGN1 accelerates differentiation. Expression of wild-type HMGN1, but not of a mutant HMGN1 that does not bind to chromatin, in Hmgn1−/− micromass cultures inhibits Sox9 expression and retards differentiation. Chromatin immunoprecipitation analysis reveals that HMGN1 binds to Sox9 chromatin in cells that are poised to express Sox9. Loss of HMGN1 elevates the amount of HMGN2 bound to Sox9, suggesting functional redundancy among these proteins. These findings suggest a role for HMGN1 in chromatin remodeling during embryogenesis and in the activation of Sox9 during chondrogenesis. During organogenesis of the vertebrate embryo, multipotent progenitor cells undergo a complex process of differentiation according to their fate. Cellular differentiation involves the execution of a preprogrammed, orderly process that involves multiple changes in gene expression. It is well documented that chromatin structure plays a key role in regulating gene expression and that the chromatin structure of specific genes is remodeled during the differentiation. It is therefore possible that nuclear proteins such as the high mobility group N (HMGN), which affect chromatin structure (4), histone modifications (17, 18) and transcription rates (11, 30), may play a role in differentiation processes. The HMG superfamily of proteins consists of three families, HMGA, HMGB, and HMGN, all of which have been shown to modulate the structure and activity of the chromatin fiber (5). Members of the HMGN family bind specifically to the building block of the chromatin fiber, the nucleosome core particle, without any known specificity for the underlying DNA sequence (28). The interaction of the proteins with chromatin is dynamic, and HMGN proteins continuously exchange among nucleosomes (7, 25). The binding of HMGN to nucleosomes reduces the compaction of chromatin fiber and enhances transcription from chromatin templates (11, 22, 30). HMGNs modulate the levels of posttranslational modifications in the histone tails (17), most likely because their presence on nucleosomes affects the ability of nucleosome remodeling complexes to reach their targets. These findings and additional studies suggest that HMGN proteins modulate chromatin-related activities, including transcription (4). The expression level of Hmgn genes is related to cellular differentiation processes, such as erythropoiesis, myogenesis, osteoblast differentiation, kidney organogenesis, preimplantation development of early mouse embryo, and Xenopus embryogenesis (1, 9, 15, 16, 20, 23, 27). Transient depletion of HMGN proteins from one- or two-cell mouse embryos slowed the progression of preimplantation development (20). Overexpression of HMGN1 in myoblasts inhibited their differentiation into myotubes (23). HMGN2 plays a role in the activation of genes regulating kidney organogenesis (16). During Xenopus embryogenesis, either enhancement or depletion of HMGN protein levels led to malformed tadpole embryos (15). These results suggest a link between regulated expression of HMGN proteins and cellular differentiation during embryo development. Here we use in situ hybridization and immunohistochemistry to examine the expression of HMGN1, a major member of the HMGN protein family, during mouse embryogenesis. We find a differentiation-related, global down-regulation of HMGN1 expression throughout the entire embryo; however, in specific cell types the levels of this protein remain high, even in fully differentiated organs. We focus on the developmental down-regulation of HMGN protein during limb bud development and demonstrate that expression of the protein is related to chondrocyte differentiation. Chondrocyte differentiation is a multistep genetic program, regulated by combinatorial signaling of various growth and differentiation factor networks (29). Sox9 is a transactivator and master regulator of chondrogenic fate that is required for initiating chondrogenesis and subsequent chondrocyte differentiation (10). We find that the expression patterns of Hmgn1 and Sox9 are complementary both in vivo and in vitro. We demonstrate that in micromass cultures of differentiating limb bud cells, the expression of Sox9 and the rate of differentiation are modulated by the levels of HMGN1 protein and that HMGN1 is present in Sox9 chromatin of chondrogenic cells and absent from this gene in nonchondrogenic cells. We demonstrate that the close homologue HMGN2 is also associated with Sox9 chromatin and that loss of HMGN1 increases the amount of HMGN2 on the Sox9 gene. Taken together with previous studies, our results suggest that HMGN proteins affect chromatin remodeling and cellular differentiation during embryogenesis. MATERIALS AND METHODS Mouse strains. Hmgn1−/− mice were previously described (3). Whole-mount in situ hybridization. Whole-mount in situ hybridizations were done according to the method of Wilkinson (34) with minor modifications: punctured, and proteinase K-digested embryos were rinsed with phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) containing 0.1% Tween 20 and immediately fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde (PFA). Blocking reagent (Roche Diagnostics) was used at a concentration of 1.5%. For the Hmgn1 in situ hybridization probe, the 1.2-kb mouse Hmgn1 cDNA cloned in pBluescriptII KS (Stratagene) was linearized by HindIII and XmaI to synthesize sense and antisense probes, respectively. For the Sox9 probe, 500 bp of sequence 3′ to the DNA binding domain of mouse Sox9 cDNA was generated by reverse transcription-PCR using the oligonucleotides 5′-ACCAATACTTGCCACCCAAC-3′ and 5′-TAGGAGCCGGAGTTCTGATG-3′, cloned in pCR2.1-TOPO (Invitrogen), and linearized with BamH I to synthesize the antisense probe. Sense and antisense RNA probes were prepared by transcription of the linearized plasmids using T3 and T7 RNA polymerases (Stratagene) with digoxigenin-11-UTP (Roche Diagnostics). Cell culture and transfections. Embryonic day 10.5 (E10.5) limb buds were collected in Dulbecco's modified PBS (GIBCO) at 4°C. Mesenchymal cells were dissociated in Dulbecco's modified PBS containing 0.1% trypsin, 0.4 mM EDTA, and 0.1% collagenase at 37°C for 10 min, resuspended in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium-F12 medium (GIBCO) with 10% fetal bovine serum, 50 U/ml penicillin, and 50 mg/ml streptomycin, at 2 × 107 cells/ml, and a 10-μl drop of cell suspension was placed in the center of a well in a standard 24-well polystyrene tissue culture dish or on Labteck chamber slides. Cells were allowed to adhere for 1 h at 37°C and 5% CO2, and 1 ml of medium was added to the culture. Medium was changed every 2 days. Alcian blue staining and quantification were performed as previously described (12). For transient expression of the DNA in micromass cultures, 8 × 106 limb bud mesenchymal cells were resuspended in the 0.4 ml of ice-cold PBS with 20 μg of plasmid DNA in 4-mm wide electroporation cuvettes and electroporated with a BTX T820 electroporator (Genetronics Inc.) using a single 225-V square pulse at 50 ms. HMGN1-YFP and HMNG1(S20,24E)_YFP (where YFP is yellow fluorescent protein) expression vectors were as previously described (26). Transfection efficiency was assessed by YFP after 2 days of culture, and chondrocyte differentiation was assessed by Alcian blue staining (12) or immunostaining for Sox9 after another 4 days of culture. For Alcian blue quantification, the experiments were repeated three times. Mouse embryonic fibroblasts (MEFs) were prepared as previously described (3). Confocal microscopy. Micromass cultures were grown on Lab-Tek chambered cover slides (Nalgen), and immunostaining was performed as previously described (26) except that the micromass cultures were fixed with 4% PFA in PBS for 10 min, washed with PBS, and permeabilized for 40 min in PBS containing 1% Triton X-100 and blocked overnight in PBS containing 1% fetal bovine serum. Micromass cultures were incubated 6 h with the primary antibody (anti-Sox9) (H-90; Santa Cruz) at a 1:100 dilution and with anti-HMGN1 at a 1:200 dilution. The micromass was washed in PBS three times for 20 min each time, incubated for 2 h with the secondary antibody labeled with either AlexaFluor 488 or AlexaFluor 594 (Molecular Probes). DNA was stained with Hoechst 33258 at 0.5 μg/ml in PBS for 10 min. Microscopy was performed on a Zeiss LSM 510 confocal setting, using a 63× differential interference contrast objective (1.4 numeric aperture). Stacks (57 μm thick) were collected through the entire micromass. Histology. Embryos were fixed in 4% PFA, dehydrated and embedded in paraffin, and sectioned at a thickness of 5 μm. Sections were deparaffinized and subjected to antigen retrieval by microwaving for 10 min in 10 mM citric acid buffer (pH 6.0). After endogenous peroxidase activities were quenched by treatment with 1% H 2O 2 in PBS for 30 min, sections were blocked with 5% goat serum-PBS for 30 min, incubated overnight with primary antibody at 4°C, washed three times with PBS, incubated with biotinylated secondary antibodies for 1 h at room temperature, and stained with the Vectastain ABC Elite kit (Vector Laboratories) using diaminobenzidine as substrate. Sections were counter-stained with hematoxylin and mounted in Permount (Fisher Scientific). For immunofluorescence, the procedure was identical except that AlexaFluor 488-labeled goat anti-rabbit (Invitrogen) was used to visualize the primary antibody. ChIP assay, RNA analysis, and real-time reverse transcription-PCR. Chromatin was prepared from E10.5 mouse limb buds and MEFs and immunoprecipitated with a chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) assay kit (Upstate Biotechnology) (17) using either anti-HMGN1, mouse immunoglobulin G (Santa Cruz) or no antibody as a negative control. Primer sets numbered 1 to 21 (see Fig. Fig.7)7
RNA dot blot analysis was performed as previously described (33) with a mouse RNA master dot blot (BD-Clonetech). In these blots the amount of RNA spotted from each tissue is normalized to that of eight housekeeping genes (see manufacturer's instructions). DNase I digestion assay. To prepare nuclei, E10.5 limb bud cells or MEFs were suspended and swollen in ice-cold lysis buffer (10 mM Tris [pH 7.4], 3 mM CaCl2, 2 mM Mg Cl2); the swollen cells were resuspended in an equal volume of buffer containing 10 mM Tris, pH 7.4, 10 mM NaCl, 3 mM Mg Cl2, and 0.5% NP-40 and then homogenized with a Dounce homogenizer and centrifuged at 800 × g for 10 min at 4°C. Nuclear pellets were stored in 25% glycerol, 5 mM Mg acetate, 50 mM Tris (pH 8.0), 0.1 mM EDTA, and 12 mM 2-mercaptoethanol at −70°C. Nuclei (1 μg of DNA) were digested with DNase I in buffer containing 50 mM Tris (pH 7.4), 100 mM NaCl, 10 mM MgCl2, 5% glycerol, and 1 mM dithiothreitol at 37°C for 15 min. Purified genomic DNA was digested as controls. Digestion was terminated by adding proteinase K buffer (20 mM Tris [pH 8.0], 100 mM KCl, 50 mM Mg Cl2, 1% Tween 20, 1% NP-40, 1 mg/ml proteinase K) at 55°C for 3 h. The control primer for beta-globin spans exon 2 of the beta-globin gene: forward, 5′-TGAAGGCCCATGGCAAGA-3′; reverse, 5′-GCCCTTGAGGCTGTCCAA. RESULTS Progressive down-regulation of Hmgn1 expression during mouse embryogenesis. Whole-mount in situ hybridization and immunostaining analyses revealed that the expression of Hmgn1 is selectively down-regulated during mouse embryogenesis. In 7.5-day-old mouse embryos (E7.5), the expression of Hmgn1 was high in the epiblast, weak in the extra-embryonic ectoderm, and absent from the ectoplacental cone (Fig. (Fig.1A,1A
Quantitative RNA dot blot analysis fully supports the conclusion of the in situ analyses (Fig. (Fig.1C).1C To discern the developmental pattern of Hmgn1 expression in the internal organs of the embryos, we analyzed the presence of HMGN1 protein in multiple serial sections by immunohistochemistry using affinity-purified anti-mouse HMGN1 antibody. Representative results from several tissues (Fig. (Fig.2)2
Neural tube. In E10.5 transverse sections, HMGN1 protein is visible throughout the embryo, including the surface ectoderm, neural tube, dorsal root ganglia, and the mesenchymal cells (Fig. (Fig.2A).2A Stomach. At E12.5, HMGN1 was detected in both the epithelial and mesenchymal layers of the developing stomach (Fig. (Fig.2B),2B Lung. At E12.5 HMGN1 was detected throughout the developing lung, both in the epithelial and in the dense mesenchymal cells (Fig. (Fig.2C,2C To examine whether the HMGN1 expression levels are related to cellular proliferation, we compared the expression patterns of HMGN1 with that of PCNA. Comparison of the PCNA-stained panels with the HMGN1-stained panels reveals that the expression of HMGN1 and PCNA do not always overlap, which is an indication that in the developing embryo the levels of HMGN1 are not linked to cellular proliferation per se, a finding consistent with previous observations in other experimental systems (16, 24). Our analyses revealed that in every tissue examined, the expression of HMGN1 was down-regulated as organ differentiation proceeded during development. However, the levels of the protein remained high in progenitor cells, such as the basal skin layer cells that are committed and poised for further differentiation and renewal. Thus, the dot blot RNA analysis, the in situ hybridization, and the immunofluorescence analyses indicate a differentiation-related down-regulation of HMGN1 expression. Reciprocal expression patterns of Hmgn1 and Sox9 in the developing limb bud. To gain additional insights into the role of HMGN1 in developmental processes, we focused on its possible involvement in the differentiation of the limb bud, where Hmgn1 expression correlated inversely with mesenchymal chondrogenic differentiation. Whole-mount in situ hybridization demonstrates clearly that the expression of Hmgn1 is down-regulated during development and is complementary to that of Sox9, a major transactivator involved in the initiation and propagation of chondrogenesis (Fig. (Fig.3).3
More detailed immunohistochemical analyses of sections from the developing limb bud region verified the reciprocal expression of Hmgn1 and Sox9. The expression of Hmgn1 decreased while that of Sox9 increased as the prechondrogenic mesenchyme condensed in the cartilage primordia. Thus, in the E10.5 and E12.5 forelimb buds, Sox9 protein was observed in the proximal region (Fig. (Fig.3L)3L Reciprocal expression patterns of Hmgn1 and Sox9 in micromass cultures. To gain additional insights into the role of HMGN1 in chondrocyte differentiation, we analyzed the pattern of Hmgn1 and Sox9 expression in a micromass culture system (Fig. (Fig.4A),4A
Confocal immunofluorescence analysis of the fully formed 5-day-old nodules revealed reciprocity in HMGN1 and Sox9 protein levels at the single-cell resolution. The fully differentiated nodules present after 5 days of growth in micromass culture were clearly depleted of HMGN1 protein, while the undifferentiated cells surrounding the nodules expressed high levels of HMGN1 protein (Fig. (Fig.4D,4D Thus, the expression levels of Hmgn1 and Sox9 in the micromass cultures faithfully reproduce the Hmgn1 and Sox9 expression patterns observed in mouse embryos. Chondrocyte differentiation is associated with decreased levels of HMGN1 protein and increased levels of Sox9. Taken together, the data demonstrate reciprocity in the expression of Hmgn1 and Sox9. HMGN1 modulates chondrocyte differentiation. The reciprocal expression of HMGN1 and Sox9 raises the possibility that HMGN1 modulates the rate of chondrocyte differentiation. To test this possibility, we first compared the rate of nodule formation in micromass cultures prepared from cells derived from the limb buds of wild-type and Hmgn1−/− E10.5 embryos. On the basis of Alcian blue staining, Hmgn1−/− cultures were found to be differentiated faster than Hmgn1+/+ cultures at all time points examined (Fig. (Fig.5A).5A
To further test this possibility, we examined the effect of HMGN1 on cartilage nodule formation by reexpressing HMGN1 protein in Hmgn1−/− cultures. To this end, E10.5 limb bud mesenchymal cells prepared from Hmgn1−/− embryo were transiently transfected with vectors expressing either YFP (control) or the HMGN1-YFP fusion protein. Fluorescent analysis of the cells verified that the expression level of the control plasmid transcribing YFP was similar to that of the plasmid transcribing the HMGN1-YFP fusion protein (Fig. (Fig.6A,6A
To test whether the HMGN1-induced inhibition of nodule formation is related to the ability of the protein to bind to chromatin, we expressed the double point mutant HMGN1(S20,24E)-YFP fusion protein, rather than the wild-type fusion protein, in the Hmgn1−/− E10.5 limb bud cells. The HMGN1(S20,24E) mutant enters the nucleus but does not bind nucleosomes (26). In contrast to the wild-type HMGN1, this mutant did not affect Sox9 expression (Fig. (Fig.6A,6A Specific binding of HMGN1 to the Sox9 gene. The interrelationship between HMGN1 and Sox9 expression raised the possibility that HMGN1 protein is directly involved in the regulation of Sox9 gene expression. We therefore tested whether HMGN1 protein was directly associated with the Sox9 gene by using a ChIP assay with affinity-purified antibodies against mouse HMGN1. The ChIP analyses were performed with chromatin isolated either from nonchondrogenic MEFs or from E10.5 limb bud cells, which contain both prechondrogenic cells and chondrocytes (Fig. 3A and B The DNA purified from the immunoprecipitated chromatin was amplified with 21 primer sets spanning an approximately 10-kb long genomic region encompassing the Sox9 gene and its 4.4-kb 5′ and 5.7-kb 3′ flanking regions. In limb bud cells, but not in MEFs, these analyses identified three regions in the Sox9 chromatin as enriched in HMGN1: a region 2 kb upstream of the promoter, exon 2, and exon 3 (Fig. 7A and B To test whether the presence of HMGN1 is associated with changes in chromatin structure, we first focused on the region spanned by primer set 3 (Fig. (Fig.7A),7A Enhanced binding of HMGN2 on the Sox9 gene in Hmgn1−/− mice. The lack of phenotype in Hmgn1−/− mice raises the possibility that homeostatic mechanisms, perhaps involving HMGN2, compensate for loss of HMGN1 protein. The levels of HMGN2 RNA and protein in Hmgn1−/− mice is the same as in their Hmgn1+/+ littermates (not shown). ChIP analysis with affinity pure antibodies to HMGN2 revealed the levels of this protein in the 10.5-day limb bud Sox9 chromatin are higher than in the Sox9 chromatin of MEFs (Fig. (Fig.8).8
DISCUSSION The widespread occurrence of HMGN proteins in vertebrate nuclei and their ability to alter the structure of chromatin and modulate access to nucleosomes raise the possibility that they play a role in gene expression and cellular differentiation. To gain insights into the possible role of HMGN in vertebrate development, we first analyzed the pattern of HMGN1 expression during mouse embryogenesis and then focused on the possible role of this protein in modulating the expression of Sox9, a master regulator of chondrocyte differentiation. A role for HMGN1 in Sox9 expression. Numerous types of experiments suggest a role for HMGN1 in transcription from chromatin templates (4); however, it is still not clear whether HMGN proteins act indiscriminately as general facilitators or whether they play a role in specific gene expression. DNA array analysis of the expression pattern of UV-treated Hmgn1+/+ and Hmgn1−/− fibroblasts (3) and of fibroblasts expressing increased amounts of HMGN3 (32) linked the HMGN proteins to changes in the transcript levels of specific genes. Likewise, studies on Xenopus development suggest that altered expression levels of HMGNs alter the expression of specific genes such as Xbra and chordin (15). These findings and additional studies (17) suggest that HMGN proteins may affect the transcription of specific genes rather than act only as general coregulators of transcription from chromatin. Our present findings that HMGN1 is associated with the Sox9 chromatin of limb bud cells but not of nonchondrogenic MEFs (Fig. (Fig.7)7 The regulation of Sox9 transcription is not fully understood. In human SOX9, regulatory elements are scattered through a 350-kb region upstream of the start of transcription (35). The enhancer of the human SOX9 is located in the first intron, while the promoter of the mouse Sox9 gene is located 193 bp upstream of the transcriptional start site (13, 21). The association of HMGNs with the chromatin of E10.5 limb bud cells may serve to generate a chromatin structure that poises the Sox9 gene for transcription at the proper developmental stage. This view is in agreement with the original suggestion that the binding of HMGNs to chromatin potentiates genes for transcription (31) and with subsequent studies of in vitro reconstituted chromatin templates (reviewed in reference 4). At later developmental stages, when cells are committed to a differentiation pathway, HMGNs may still play a positive role in Sox9 expression; however, high levels of HMGNs may interfere with proper development and Sox9 expression. This view is in agreement with our present observations that ectopic expression of HMGN1 in Hmgn1−/− micromass cultures inhibits the rate of differentiation and Sox9 expression and with previous studies in Xenopus (15) and mice (20) indicating that either depletion or overexpression of HMGN protein interferes with proper embryonic development. Developmental role for HMGN proteins. Our studies link the expression of HMGN1 protein to cellular differentiation. We observe a widespread, progressive down-regulation of Hmgn1 expression during embryonic development in every tissue examined, only a few types of which are shown in Fig. Fig.2.2 These results are consistent with tissue culture studies that demonstrated down-regulation of Hmgn1 expression during erythropoiesis, myogenesis, and osteoblast differentiation (8, 23, 27) and with biochemical studies that linked this down-regulation specifically to differentiation rather than a decreased rate of cellular replication (4). Likewise, during kidney organogenesis, the closely related protein HMGN2 is expressed mainly in cells undergoing inductive interactions and differentiation (16) and is down-regulated in terminally differentiated cells. In the developing limb bud, the expression of Hmgn1 was restricted to the undifferentiated mesenchymal regions. The prechondrogenic regions and the differentiated digits contained very little, if any, HMGN1 (Fig. (Fig.2).2 In X. laevis, misexpression of either of the two major members of the HMGN protein family, HMGN1 or HMGN2, leads to specific, developmentally timed abnormalities in the growing embryos (15). Either overexpression or depletion of HMGNs in Xenopus zygotes caused severe malformations in postblastula development without affecting preblastula development. Significantly, HMGN proteins are expressed only after midblastula transition. The data suggest that once the proteins are synthesized and functional, their levels need to be monitored, and either too much or too little protein leads to developmental abnormalities. In considering molecular mechanisms whereby HMGN proteins affect differentiation processes, we note that in the in vitro micromass cultures, loss of Hmgn1 resulted in faster chondrogenesis. In this system, reexpression of HMGN1 protein in Hmgn1−/− cells restores the wild-type phenotype and retards the rate of differentiation, whereas reexpression of HMGN1(S20,24E), the double point mutant form of HMGN1 which does not bind to nucleosomes, did not restore the wild-type phenotype (Fig. (Fig.55 Since Hmgn1−/− mice seem to develop normally (2), it is likely that homeostatic mechanisms, perhaps involving HMGN2, compensate for the loss of the HMGN1 protein. Indeed, our ChIP analyses indicate an increase of HMGN2 in the Sox9 chromatin obtained from Hmgn1−/− mice, suggesting functional redundancy among these proteins. We also observed that during embryogenesis and during limb bud development, Hmgn2 is expressed in a pattern that is indistinguishable from that of Hmgn1 (T. Furusawa, unpublished data). Furthermore, we already demonstrated that transient depletion of both Hmgn1 and Hmgn2 transcripts in 1-day-old mouse embryos was necessary to retard the progression of preimplantation development. Depletion of only one of the Hmgn transcripts had no significant effect on the rate of development and did not cause an embryonic developmental delay (20), suggesting a functional overlap that compensates for loss of one of the major components of HMGN protein. In the nucleus, HMGN1 functions as a member of a dynamic network of chromatin binding proteins, involving other HMG proteins and histone H1, which compete for nucleosome binding sites (6, 7). As discussed elsewhere (6), changes in one component of the network may trigger compensatory adjustments in other components of the network and in chromatin, all aimed to optimize the cellular requirement at any given time. Thus, changes in HMGN1 alter the interaction of H1 with chromatin (7) and modify the pattern of posttranslational modification of histones (17, 18). These changes reflect the action of homeostatic mechanisms that allow survival and development of Hmgn1−/− mice, which mostly appear normal. Yet their stress response is significantly impaired, and they are hypersensitive to irradiation by either UV (3) or X ray (2). By analogy, the Hmgn1−/− limb bud cells grown in micromass cultures are placed under conditions in which homeostatic mechanisms operating in the intact embryo are altered, thus leading to changes in Sox9 expression and in differentiation of the micromass. [Supplemental material]
Acknowledgments We thank Susan H. Garfield and Stephen M. Wincovitch (Laboratory of Experimental Carcinogenesis, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute) for help with the confocal microscopy and the NCI CCR Fellows Editorial Board for constructive criticisms of the manuscript. T.F. is a recipient of a fellowship from the Japan Society for Promotion of Sciences. This research was supported by the Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, NIH. Footnotes †Supplemental material for this article may be found at http://mcb.asm.org/. REFERENCES 1. Begum, N., J. M. Pash, and J. S. Bhorjee. 1990. Expression and synthesis of high mobility group chromosomal proteins in different rat skeletal cell lines during myogenesis. J. Biol. Chem. 265:11936-11941. [PubMed] 2. Birger, Y., F. Catez, T. Furusawa, J. H. Lim, M. Prymakowska-Bosak, K. L. West, Y. V. Postnikov, D. C. Haines, and M. Bustin. 2005. Increased tumorigenicity and sensitivity to ionizing radiation upon loss of chromosomal protein HMGN1. Cancer Res. 65:6711-6718. [PubMed] 3. Birger, Y., K. L. West, Y. V. Postnikov, J. H. Lim, T. Furusawa, J. P. Wagner, C. S. Laufer, K. H. Kraemer, and M. Bustin. 2003. Chromosomal protein HMGN1 enhances the rate of DNA repair in chromatin. EMBO J. 22:1665-1675. [PubMed] 4. Bustin, M. 2001. Chromatin unfolding and activation by HMGN(*) chromosomal proteins. Trends Biochem. Sci. 26:431-437. [PubMed] 5. Bustin, M. 1999. Regulation of DNA-dependent activities by the functional motifs of the high-mobility-group chromosomal proteins. Mol. Cell. Biol. 19:5237-5246. [PubMed] 6. Bustin, M., F. Catez, and J. H. Lim. 2005. The dynamics of histone H1 function in chromatin. Mol. Cell 17:617-620. [PubMed] 7. Catez, F., H. Yang, K. J. Tracey, R. Reeves, T. Misteli, and M. Bustin. 2004. Network of dynamic interactions between histone H1 and high-mobility-group proteins in chromatin. Mol. Cell. Biol. 24:4321-4328. [PubMed] 8. Crippa, M. P., J. M. Nickol, and M. Bustin. 1991. Developmental changes in the expression of high mobility group chromosomal proteins. J. Biol. Chem. 266:2712-2714. [PubMed] 9. Crippa, M. P., J. M. Nickol, and M. Bustin. 1991. Differentiation-dependent alteration in the chromatin structure of chromosomal protein HMG-17 gene during erythropoiesis. J. Mol. Biol. 217:75-84. [PubMed] 10. de Crombrugghe, B., V. Lefebvre, and K. Nakashima. 2001. Regulatory mechanisms in the pathways of cartilage and bone formation. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 13:721-727. [PubMed] 11. Ding, H. F., S. Rimsky, S. C. Batson, M. Bustin, and U. Hansen. 1994. Stimulation of RNA polymerase II elongation by chromosmal protein HMG-14. Science 265:796-799. [PubMed] 12. Hatakeyama, Y., R. S. Tuan, and L. Shum. 2004. Distinct functions of BMP4 and GDF5 in the regulation of chondrogenesis. J. Cell Biochem. 91:1204-1217. [PubMed] 13. Kanai, Y., and P. Koopman. 1999. Structural and functional characterization of the mouse Sox9 promoter: implications for campomelic dysplasia. Hum. Mol. Genet. 8:691-696. [PubMed] 14. Kelly, R. G., and M. E. Buckingham. 2002. The anterior heart-forming field: voyage to the arterial pole of the heart. Trends Genet. 18:210-216. [PubMed] 15. Korner, U., M. Bustin, U. Scheer, and R. Hock. 2003. Developmental role of HMGN proteins in Xenopus laevis. Mech. Dev. 120:1177-1192. [PubMed] 16. Lehtonen, S., and E. Lehtonen. 2001. HMG-17 is an early marker of inductive interactions in the developing mouse kidney. Differentiation 67:154-163. [PubMed] 17. Lim, J. H., F. Catez, Y. Birger, K. L. West, M. Prymakowska-Bosak, Y. V. Postnikov, and M. Bustin. 2004. Chromosomal protein HMGN1 modulates histone H3 phosphorylation. Mol. Cell 15:573-584. [PubMed] 18. Lim, J. H., K. L. West, Y. Rubinstein, M. Bergel, Y. V. Postnikov, and M. Bustin. 2005. Chromosomal protein HMGN1 enhances the acetylation of lysine 14 in histone H3. EMBO J. 19. Megason, S. G., and A. P. McMahon. 2002. A mitogen gradient of dorsal midline Wnts organizes growth in the CNS. Development 129:2087-2098. [PubMed] 20. Mohamed, O. A., M. Bustin, and H. J. Clarke. 2001. High-mobility group proteins 14 and 17 maintain the timing of early embryonic development in the mouse. Dev. Biol. 229:237-249. [PubMed] 21. Morishita, M., T. Kishino, K. Furukawa, A. Yonekura, Y. Miyazaki, T. Kanematsu, S. Yamashita, and T. Tsukazaki. 2001. A 30-base-pair element in the first intron of SOX9 acts as an enhancer in ATDC5. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 288:347-355. [PubMed] 22. Paranjape, S. M., A. Krumm, and J. T. Kadonaga. 1995. HMG17 is a chromatin-specific transcriptional coactivator that increases the efficiency of transcription initiation. Genes Dev. 9:1978-1991. [PubMed] 23. Pash, J. M., P. J. Alfonso, and M. Bustin. 1993. Aberrant expression of high mobility group chromosomal protein 14 affects cellular differentiation. J. Biol. Chem. 268:13632-13638. [PubMed] 24. Pash, J. M., J. S. Bhorjee, B. M. Patterson, and M. Bustin. 1990. Persistence of chromosomal proteins HMG-14/-17 in myotubes following differentiation-dependent reduction of HMG mRNA. J. Biol. Chem. 265:4197-4199. [PubMed] 25. Phair, R. D., and T. Misteli. 2000. High mobility of proteins in the mammalian cell nucleus. Nature 404:604-609. [PubMed] 26. Prymakowska-Bosak, M., T. Misteli, J. E. Herrera, H. Shirakawa, Y. Birger, S. Garfield, and M. Bustin. 2001. Mitotic phosphorylation prevents the binding of HMGN proteins to chromatin. Mol. Cell. Biol. 21:5169-5178. [PubMed] 27. Shakoori, A. R., T. A. Owen, V. Shalhoub, J. L. Stein, M. Bustin, G. S. Stein, and J. B. Lian. 1993. Differential expression of the chromosomal high mobility group proteins 14 and 17 during the onset of differentiation in mammalian osteoblasts and promyelocytic leukemia cells. J. Cell Biochem. 51:479-487. [PubMed] 28. Shirakawa, H., J. E. Herrera, M. Bustin, and Y. Postnikov. 2000. Targeting of high mobility group-14/-17 proteins in chromatin is independent of DNA sequence. J. Biol. Chem. 275:37937-37944. [PubMed] 29. Shum, L., C. M. Coleman, Y. Hatakeyama, and R. S. Tuan. 2003. Morphogenesis and dysmorphogenesis of the appendicular skeleton. Birth Defects Res. C 69:102-122. 30. Trieschmann, L., P. J. Alfonso, M. P. Crippa, A. P. Wolffe, and M. Bustin. 1995. Incorporation of chromosomal proteins HMG-14/-17 into nascent nucleosomes induces an extended chromatin conformation and enhances the utilization of active transcription complexes. EMBO J. 14:1478-1489. [PubMed] 31. Weisbrod, S. 1982. Active chromatin. Nature 27:289-295. 32. West, K. L., M. A. Castellini, M. K. Duncan, and M. Bustin. 2004. Chromosomal proteins HMGN3a and HMGN3b regulate the expression of glycine transporter 1. Mol. Cell. Biol. 24:3747-3756. [PubMed] 33. West, K. L., Y. Ito, Y. Birger, Y. Postnikov, H. Shirakawa, and M. Bustin. 2001. HMGN3a and HMGN3b, two protein isoforms with a tissue-specific expression pattern, expand the cellular repertoire of nucleosome-binding proteins. J. Biol. Chem. 276:25959-25969. [PubMed] 34. Wilkinson, D. G. 1992. In situ hybridization, p. 75-83. In D. G. Wilkinson (ed.), In situ hybridization: a practical approach. IRL Press, Oxford University, Oxford, United Kingdom. 35. Wunderle, V. M., R. Critcher, N. Hastie, P. N. Goodfellow, and A. Schedl. 1998. Deletion of long-range regulatory elements upstream of SOX9 causes campomelic dysplasia. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 95:10649-10654. [PubMed] 36. Zechner, D., Y. Fujita, J. Hulsken, T. Muller, I. Walther, M. M. Taketo, E. B. Crenshaw, 3rd, W. Birchmeier, and C. Birchmeier. 2003. β-Catenin signals regulate cell growth and the balance between progenitor cell expansion and differentiation in the nervous system. Dev. Biol. 258:406-418. [PubMed] |
PubMed related articles
Your browsing activity is empty. Activity recording is turned off. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Trends Biochem Sci. 2001 Jul; 26(7):431-7.
[Trends Biochem Sci. 2001]Mol Cell. 2004 Aug 27; 15(4):573-84.
[Mol Cell. 2004]Science. 1994 Aug 5; 265(5173):796-9.
[Science. 1994]EMBO J. 1995 Apr 3; 14(7):1478-89.
[EMBO J. 1995]Mol Cell Biol. 1999 Aug; 19(8):5237-46.
[Mol Cell Biol. 1999]J Biol Chem. 2000 Dec 1; 275(48):37937-44.
[J Biol Chem. 2000]Mol Cell Biol. 2004 May; 24(10):4321-8.
[Mol Cell Biol. 2004]Nature. 2000 Apr 6; 404(6778):604-9.
[Nature. 2000]Science. 1994 Aug 5; 265(5173):796-9.
[Science. 1994]J Biol Chem. 1990 Jul 15; 265(20):11936-41.
[J Biol Chem. 1990]J Mol Biol. 1991 Jan 5; 217(1):75-84.
[J Mol Biol. 1991]Mech Dev. 2003 Oct; 120(10):1177-92.
[Mech Dev. 2003]Differentiation. 2001 Jun; 67(4-5):154-63.
[Differentiation. 2001]Dev Biol. 2001 Jan 1; 229(1):237-49.
[Dev Biol. 2001]Curr Opin Cell Biol. 2001 Dec; 13(6):721-7.
[Curr Opin Cell Biol. 2001]EMBO J. 2003 Apr 1; 22(7):1665-75.
[EMBO J. 2003]J Cell Biochem. 2004 Apr 15; 91(6):1204-17.
[J Cell Biochem. 2004]Mol Cell Biol. 2001 Aug; 21(15):5169-78.
[Mol Cell Biol. 2001]EMBO J. 2003 Apr 1; 22(7):1665-75.
[EMBO J. 2003]Mol Cell Biol. 2001 Aug; 21(15):5169-78.
[Mol Cell Biol. 2001]Mol Cell. 2004 Aug 27; 15(4):573-84.
[Mol Cell. 2004]J Biol Chem. 2001 Jul 13; 276(28):25959-69.
[J Biol Chem. 2001]Trends Genet. 2002 Apr; 18(4):210-6.
[Trends Genet. 2002]Development. 2002 May; 129(9):2087-98.
[Development. 2002]Dev Biol. 2003 Jun 15; 258(2):406-18.
[Dev Biol. 2003]Differentiation. 2001 Jun; 67(4-5):154-63.
[Differentiation. 2001]J Biol Chem. 1990 Mar 15; 265(8):4197-9.
[J Biol Chem. 1990]Mol Cell Biol. 2001 Aug; 21(15):5169-78.
[Mol Cell Biol. 2001]J Biol Chem. 2000 Dec 1; 275(48):37937-44.
[J Biol Chem. 2000]Trends Biochem Sci. 2001 Jul; 26(7):431-7.
[Trends Biochem Sci. 2001]EMBO J. 2003 Apr 1; 22(7):1665-75.
[EMBO J. 2003]Mol Cell Biol. 2004 May; 24(9):3747-56.
[Mol Cell Biol. 2004]Mech Dev. 2003 Oct; 120(10):1177-92.
[Mech Dev. 2003]Mol Cell. 2004 Aug 27; 15(4):573-84.
[Mol Cell. 2004]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998 Sep 1; 95(18):10649-54.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998]Hum Mol Genet. 1999 Apr; 8(4):691-6.
[Hum Mol Genet. 1999]Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2001 Oct 26; 288(2):347-55.
[Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2001]Trends Biochem Sci. 2001 Jul; 26(7):431-7.
[Trends Biochem Sci. 2001]Mech Dev. 2003 Oct; 120(10):1177-92.
[Mech Dev. 2003]J Biol Chem. 1991 Feb 15; 266(5):2712-4.
[J Biol Chem. 1991]J Biol Chem. 1993 Jun 25; 268(18):13632-8.
[J Biol Chem. 1993]J Cell Biochem. 1993 Apr; 51(4):479-87.
[J Cell Biochem. 1993]Trends Biochem Sci. 2001 Jul; 26(7):431-7.
[Trends Biochem Sci. 2001]Differentiation. 2001 Jun; 67(4-5):154-63.
[Differentiation. 2001]Mech Dev. 2003 Oct; 120(10):1177-92.
[Mech Dev. 2003]Mech Dev. 2003 Oct; 120(10):1177-92.
[Mech Dev. 2003]Dev Biol. 2001 Jan 1; 229(1):237-49.
[Dev Biol. 2001]Cancer Res. 2005 Aug 1; 65(15):6711-8.
[Cancer Res. 2005]Dev Biol. 2001 Jan 1; 229(1):237-49.
[Dev Biol. 2001]Mol Cell. 2005 Mar 4; 17(5):617-20.
[Mol Cell. 2005]Mol Cell Biol. 2004 May; 24(10):4321-8.
[Mol Cell Biol. 2004]Mol Cell. 2004 Aug 27; 15(4):573-84.
[Mol Cell. 2004]EMBO J. 2003 Apr 1; 22(7):1665-75.
[EMBO J. 2003]Cancer Res. 2005 Aug 1; 65(15):6711-8.
[Cancer Res. 2005]J Cell Biochem. 2004 Apr 15; 91(6):1204-17.
[J Cell Biochem. 2004]