![]() | ![]() |
Formats:
|
||||||||||||||||
A genome-wide survey of the evolutionarily conserved Wnt pathways in the sea urchin Strongylocentrotus purpuratus. 1Developmental, Molecular, and Cellular Biology Group, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA 2Unité de Biologie du Développement, UMR 7009, CNRS, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Observatoire Océanologique, 06230 Villefranche-sur-Mer, France 3 Department of Zoology, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, Hawaii * Corresponding author. Duke University, DCMB Group, LSRC Bldg Rm. B359A, Research Drive, Durham, NC, 27708. Tel: +1-919-613-8188. Fax: +1-919-613-8177. * E-mail address: dmcclay/at/duke.edu Abstract The Wnt pathways are evolutionarily well-conserved signal transduction pathways that are known to play important roles in all Metazoans investigated to date. Here, we examine the Wnt pathway genes and target genes present in the genome of the echinoderm Strongylocentrotus purpuratus. Analysis of the Wnt genes revealed that eleven of the thirteen reported Wnt subfamilies are represented in sea urchin, with the intriguing identification of a Wnt-A ortholog thought to be absent in deuterostomes. A phylogenetic study of the Frizzled proteins, the Wnt receptors, performed throughout the animal kingdom showed that not all Frizzled subfamilies were present in the metazoan common ancestor, e.g. Fz3/6 emerged later during evolution. Using sequence analysis, orthologs of the vast majority of the cellular machinery involved in transducing the three types of Wnt pathways were found in the sea urchin genome. Further, of about one hundred target genes identified in other organisms, more than half have clear echinoderm orthologs. Thus, these analyses produce new inputs in the evolutionary history of the Wnt genes in an animal occupying a position that offers great insights into the basal properties of deuterostomes. Keywords: Sea urchin, genome survey, Wnt, Frizzled, canonical, planar cell polarity (PCP), Wnt/calcium Introduction The Wnt pathways are evolutionarily conserved signaling pathways that regulate multiple aspects of metazoan development. They are required throughout development, from early axis specification to organogenesis (e.g. Logan and Nusse, 2004; Cadigan and Nusse, 1997; Katoh, 2005; Veeman et al., 2003a). The Wnt pathways operate by three distinct mechanisms referred to as the canonical pathway, the planar cell polarity (PCP) pathway and the calcium/Wnt pathway (Fig.S1). Of these three signaling the canonical Wnt pathway is the best characterized. Its activation results in entry of β-catenin into the nucleus of the cell where in concert with a TCF/Lef family member it activates transcription of target genes (Nusse, 1999). The PCP pathway operates through small G proteins such as RhoA and Rac to activate target genes, usually through the inducement of an AP-1 transcriptional complex (Hwang et al., 2005; Veeman et al., 2003b). The third Wnt pathway, the calcium/Wnt pathway, utilizes other small GTPases to control calcium-dependent molecules, including CamKII and PKC, leading to the transcriptional activation of its target genes (Kohn and Moon, 2005). Each of the three Wnt pathways is activated in the same way by the binding of a Wnt ligand to a Frizzled receptor. Transduction of the ligand/receptor interaction subsequently involves more than a hundred proteins that relay and modify the signal on the way to target actuation in a Wnt-pathway specific manner. Proteins in the canonical Wnt pathway regulate the stability and movement of the key transcriptional activator β-catenin (Logan and Nusse, 2004). This pathway is principally required in many organisms for axis specification and endoderm differentiation (Croce and McClay, 2006; Imai et al., 2000; Wikramanayake et al., 2004; Zorn et al., 1999). The PCP pathway is not commonly associated with tissue specification but is known instead to control cytoskeletal rearrangements and cell movements such as convergent extension (CE) occurring during gastrulation in deuterostomes (Croce et al., 2006; Heisenberg et al., 2000; Kilian et al., 2003; Wallingford et al., 2002). Finally, the calcium/Wnt pathway also acts on cellular behavior regulating cell adhesion and movement. However, this pathway functions through a different set of proteins that modulate the intracellular concentrations of free calcium and cyclic guanosine monophosphate (cGMP) (Wang and Malbon, 2003). To date, in addition to the main Wnt pathways components, more than eighty other molecules have been reported as modifiers that amplify, degrade, stabilize, or alter the trajectory of the signals (Klein and Mlodzik, 2005; Logan and Nusse, 2004; Wang and Malbon, 2003). Most of these proteins have been identified in fully sequenced genomes, including human, ascidian and flies, though some of them have also been reported from individual studies in other more basal organisms such as cnidarians. Here, we present the first exhaustive report of the Wnt pathways genes in the phylum Echinodermata. Emerging just after the protostome/deuterostome divergence, the Echinodermata offer insights into the earliest and the most basic of the deuterostome animals (Fig.1A
Material and methods Resources of genes sequences The genomic sequence of Strongylocentrotus purpuratus was deciphered and provided by BCM-HGSC [Baylor College of Medicine- Human Genome Sequencing Center] (http://www.hgsc.bcm.tmc.edu/blast/blast.cgi?organism=Spurpuratus). Additional genomic resources were avalaible from several ESTs databases all accessible online at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genome/seq/BlastGen/BlastGen.cgi?taxid=7668. Proteins sequences for Wnt pathways related genes and targets from other animals were obtained from Genbank (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Genbank/index.html) (Benson et al., 2005), Ensembl (http://www.ensembl.org/index.html) (Hubbard et al., 2005), Pfam (http://www.sanger.ac.uk/Software/Pfam/) (Bateman et al., 2004), StellaBase (http://www.stellabase.org/) (Sullivan et al., 2006), Aniseed (Ascidian Network for In Situ Expression and Embryological Data) (http://crfb.univ-mrs.fr/aniseed/index.php) and by BLAST searches (Altschul et al., 1997) at the National Center for Biotechnology Information (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/blast/). Sea urchin sequences were all identified by blastp and blastn, using as guidance against genomic databases confirmed genes identified from a range of diverse animal species. All predicted sequences were reciprocally blasted against non-redundant NCBI databases leading to the identification of the best human hit, which was reblasted against the S. purpuratus genomic sequences for bi-directional best-hit analysis. Phylogenetic Analysis Proteins alignments were carried out using ClustalX (Thompson et al., 1997) and saved as nexus files. Phylogenetic trees were generated using four complementary methods when needed. First, neighbor-joining trees (Saitou and Nei, 1987) were run with the PAUP 4.0 program (Swofford, 1998) and with 5000 bootstrap replicates. Second, unweighted maximum parsimony reconstructions were performed for each tree with a heuristic search of 1000 replicates. Third, Maximum likelihood trees were computed using RAxML VI-1.0 (Stamatakis et al., 2005) and employing the Jones-Taylor-Thornton model of amino acid substitution, with otherwise default settings. Finally, Bayesian trees were performed with Mr. Bayes v.3.1.1 (Huelsenbeck et al., 2001; Ronquist and Huelsenbeck, 2003) and analyses were run for 500000 generations and node probabilities were calculated after a burn-in of 50000 generations. All trees were displayed with TreeView X 0.5.0, saved as svg files, and colored and converted into JPG with Adobe Illustrator. Accession numbers of all sequences used for those trees are available in tables S1 and S2 in supplementary materials. Embryonic expression and RT-PCR Embryonic expression of annotated sequences was confirmed using the tiling array database (Samanta et al., 2006). For the Wnt genes additional RT-PCR was performed from total RNA from various developmental stages. After extraction using the method of Cathala et al. (1983), cDNA were synthesized with a TaqMan kit from Clontech. RT-PCRs were carried out using standard protocol with specific primers designed against S. purpuratus Wnt predicted sequences. Results 1. The activators of the Wnt pathways: Wnt and Frizzled proteins 1.a. Wnt family The Wnt signaling molecules are a large family of secreted glycoproteins characterized by an invariant pattern of 22 to 24 highly conserved cysteine residues usually present in the last 70 C-terminal amino-acids (Van Ooyen et al., 1985). In humans, nineteen Wnt proteins have been identified that define twelve distinct subfamilies named from Wnt-1 to Wnt-11 and Wnt-16 (Miller, 2002) (Fig.1B In silico analysis of the Strongylocentrotus purpuratus genomic sequence revealed the presence of eleven Wnt genes, including Wnt-1, -4, -5 and -8 (Table S1). To determine whether these genes were expressed, EST and tiling data were evaluated (Samanta et al., 2006) and RT-PCR analysis was performed on S. purpuratus cDNA at different developmental stages (Table S1). Based on these three independent methods, we conclude that the eleven Wnt genes identified are expressed during development. Moreover, the RT-PCR analysis at different developmental stages indicated that more than one Wnt is expressed at each stage. At the gastrula stage, for example, nine of the eleven Wnts are transcribed (Fig.2A
The discovery of a Wnt-A ortholog in the sea urchin genome provides the most intriguing result. Wnt-A proteins are presents in cnidarians, ecdysozoans and lophotrochozoans but have not been reported in any chordate lineage to date (Fig.1 Thus, our analysis supports the notion that of the thirteen Wnt subfamilies, twelve were present in the eumetazoan common ancestor; the Wnt-9 subfamily having apparently emerged only in the Bilateria. Further, it appears that the Wnt-A subfamily was present in the common ancestor of deuterostomes, but apparently was lost during chordate evolution. Finally, since only one sea urchin ortholog has been found in each represented Wnt subfamily, it is likely that the common ancestor of the deuterostomes possessed only one Wnt gene per subfamily. 1.b. Frizzled family The Wnt ligands activate each of the three pathways by binding to their cognate cell surface receptors of the Frizzled family (Bhanot et al., 1996). All Frizzled family members possess an extracellular region including a signal peptide and a cysteine-rich Wnt binding domain (CRD), seven transmembrane domains, a characteristic of the G protein coupled receptors, and a cytoplasmic tail displaying the conserved KTXXXW motif (Huang and Klein, 2004). In humans, ten Frizzled genes have been reported that group into five distinct subfamilies. By comparison, only four Frizzled proteins are present in the sea anemone genome and five in the ascidian (Wnt homepage website, Hotta et al., 2003; and our analysis) (Fig.1 Via a tBlastn search on the S. purpuratus genome using human Frizzled sequences, four Frizzled candidates emerged including the previously identified Fz5/8 homolog (Table S1 and Fig.1
In summary, including information from the cnidaria, ecdysozoa, and protostomia in our analysis allowed us to model the evolutionary history of the Frizzled genes. Of the five known Frizzled subfamilies four (Fz1/2/7, Fz4, Fz5/8, and Fz9/10) were already present in the eumetazoan common ancestor, while the Fz3/6 subfamily appears to have arisen later during the emergence of the chordate line. 2. Signaling components of the Wnt pathways Based on a comprehensive search including very helpful information from the Wnt homepage website (http://www.stanford.edu/~rnusse/wntwindow.html) and from many studies throughout the animal kingdom, an exhaustive analysis of proteins reported to be involved in the transduction of the three Wnt signaling pathways from the extracellular compartment to the nucleus (excluding Wnt and Frizzled proteins) is presented in Table S3. It contains 96 genes with additional molecules corresponding to paralogs or subunits of the same proteins. For each protein, the S. purpuratus genome was queried for orthologs and each discovered was examined using the tiling database for expression in the embryo. Overall, orthologs of 88.5% of the Wnt pathways components present in the table were identified in the sea urchin genome. Only eleven Wnt pathway genes could not be identified. Nine of these are associated with canonical Wnt signaling and two are involved in the PCP pathway. Although all reported components of the calcium/Wnt pathway were found, this result does not necessarily mean that this pathway is more conserved than the other two since only eight of 96 proteins in this study were related to the calcium/Wnt pathway. By contrast, two-thirds of the identified proteins play a role in the canonical Wnt pathway, indicating not only that this pathway is stringently controlled by modifiers, but also that this pathway has been better characterized and described than the two non-canonical pathways. Further, among the different cellular compartments where Wnt pathways components act (extracellular, membrane, cytoplasmic and nuclear), each compartment looks to be roughly represented by 90% of all possible components, suggesting that the level of conservation is the same along the cascade of the signal from ligand to target. Thus, the transducing apparatus of the Wnt pathways appears well conserved during evolution. Below we discuss the identification of Dickkopf orthologs and the composition of the SFRP family in the sea urchin genome. 2.a. The Dickkopf proteins The Dickkopf (Dkk) proteins are powerful inhibitors of the canonical Wnt pathway (Glinka et al., 1998; Wu et al., 2000). They have their own cognate receptor, Kremen, for which a sea urchin ortholog has been found (TableS3). To down-regulate Wnt signaling Dkks, in binding to Kremen, also bind to the same Wnt co-receptor LRP as that required by Frizzleds (Mao et al., 2001; Mao et al., 2002; Semenov et al., 2001). Dkk proteins are cysteine-rich secreted proteins that are characterized by the presence of two cysteine-rich domains (CRD1 and CRD2), each of which has a specific highly conserved cysteine distribution (Krupnik et al., 1999). In vertebrates, four Dkk proteins have been reported (Dkk1, Dkk2, Dkk3 and Dkk4) that group into two subfamilies, the Dkk124 and the Dkk3. As yet, no Dkk homologs have been identified in protostomes, including Drosophila or C. elegans, while four Dkk homologs have been reported in the cnidarians Hydra vulgata and Hydra magnipapillata (three Dkk124 a, b and c and one Dkk3) (Augustin et al., 2006; Fedders et al., 2004; Guder et al., 2006). Intriguingly, whereas all vertebrate Dkks and the cnidarian Dkk3 possess the two common CRD motifs, the cnidarian Dkk1/2/4 possesses only one CRD domain that is most homologous to the vertebrate CRD2(Augustin et al., 2006; Guder et al., 2006) (Fig.4C
Based on these results we looked for Dkk orthologs in the S. purpuratus genome. Two sequences with homology with Dkk genes, particularly within the CRD domains (Fig.4A, B 2.b. The SFRP family Many extracellular proteins have been reported for their role as regulators of Wnt activity. Among them, the SFRPs (secreted Frizzled-related proteins) represent a family of genes characterized by their similarities to Frizzled receptors. As in Frizzleds, the SFRPs contain a peptide signal sequence and a single Cysteine-Rich Domain (CRD) that is very similar to the CRD of Frizzled. However, SFRPs lack transmembrane domains and instead terminate with a netrin-like domain, thus making them secreted proteins. In the extracellular space, SFRP proteins bind to Wnt proteins thereby sequestering the ligands before they reach their cognate receptors. Several SFRPs have been reported and although their preference for Wnt ligands has not yet been established, it appears that they antagonize both canonical and non-canonical Wnt pathways (for reviews see Kawano and Kypta, 2003; Jones and Jomary, 2002). In humans, there are five SFRPs comprising two groups: the SFRP1/2/5 and the SFRP3/4 (Fig.4 3. Target genes of the Wnt pathways Because Wnt signaling plays a key role in development and cancer, many studies have been conducted to determine target genes that are activated by these pathways. Studies, performed mostly on human cell lines, vertebrate embryos, and Drosophila, have led to the identification of approximately one hundred Wnt target genes (listed in table S4). Examination of this table reveals once again that much more information is available regarding the activities and roles of the canonical Wnt pathway versus the non-canonical pathways. To date, more than 90% of identified target genes of the Wnt pathways are activated by the canonical pathway, although a few of them can also be activated by the PCP pathway (Pongracz and Stockley, 2006). Genes targeted by the Wnt pathways were grouped into three sets of molecules: signaling components (either secreted, transmembrane receptors or cytoplasmic proteins), transcription factors and other nuclear proteins, and cell adhesion molecules (Table S4). Some Wnt pathway components were presented as targets in some reports, offering feedback regulation of pathway function but these were excluded from this section. An attempt to identify orthologs of each of the reported target genes yielded recognizable proteins for 57% of the targets (Table S4). Of the three groups of targets, cell adhesion molecules are the least well represented (only 22%), whereas transcription factors were identified as the most recognizable (79%, against 49% for the signaling molecules). In agreement with our results on cell adhesion molecules, many vertebrate adhesion molecules are missing from the sea urchin genome according to the analysis presented in the Whittaker et al., paper (this issue). Among the signaling molecules listed, paralogs or precursors for some of these proteins have been annotated, though it was difficult to conclude in a number of cases that an annotated sea urchin gene was a direct ortholog. This is the case for autotaxin, an ectonucleotide pyrophosphatase / phosphodiesterase (ENPP) protein, osteocalcin, PPAR delta and RAR gamma (see Table S4). Nevertheless, in the future additional functional data may add these genes and others as targets of the Wnt pathways. Alternatively, since these molecules have only been established as Wnt targets in vertebrates, it may be that their regulation has specifically emerged as a new role only in the vertebrate lineages. Finally, some Wnt targets identified in Drosophila melanogaster, such as the transcription factor Stripe, have sea urchin orthologs, but do not have identified orthologs in vertebrates. In contrast, proteins exclusive (to date) to zebrafish or to Xenopus (tagged in yellow and pink respectively) have no recognizable orthologs in S. purpuratus (e.g. transcription factors Dharma/Bozozok, Siamois and Twin). Thus, although preliminary, these data suggest that additional Wnt targets may be found in the vertebrates and that vertebrates have acquired Wnt targets that were not present in the deuterostome common ancestor. Discussion The Wnt pathways, particularly the canonical and the PCP pathways, have been reported throughout the animal kingdom to be functionally well conserved (Cadigan and Nusse, 1997; Croce and McClay, 2006; Klein and Mlodzik, 2005; Mlodzik, 2002). Wnt ligands, Frizzled receptors and many other main components of these signaling pathways have been characterized from cnidarians to vertebrates, indicating that in all metazoan lineages the pathways play similar roles. The canonical pathway is heavily used in metazoans to establish axial asymmetries and drive endoderm formation during embryogenesis (Croce and McClay, 2006; Holland, 2002; Imai et al., 2000; Schier and Talbot, 2005; Wikramanayake et al., 2004; Zorn et al., 1999). In the same way, the PCP pathway in vertebrates, urochordates, protostomes and as recently shown in echinoderms, controls convergent extension movements involved in many morphogenetic events including gastrulation (Croce et al., 2006; Heisenberg et al., 2000; Kilian et al., 2003; Sasakura and Makabe, 2001; Shulman et al., 1998; Wallingford et al., 2002). Thus, to have a similar, widespread impact on the development of organisms as different as cnidarians, echinoderms, and vertebrates, the proteins responsible for the transduction of the signals, their relationships to one another, and the gene targets they control should be well conserved. In agreement with that prediction, among the signaling components that compose the Wnt pathways from the extracellular compartment to the nucleus, more than 85% are conserved at least between sea urchin and human (Fig.6
The activators of Wnt signaling Deciphering the S. purpuratus genome led to identification of eleven Wnt ligands, each belonging to a different Wnt subfamily (Figs.1 Whereas an exhaustive literature about the evolutionary history of Wnts is available, this is not the case for the Frizzled receptors for which also fewer functional analyses have been conducted. Our study presents the first evolutionary analysis of Frizzled receptors including Frizzled data from cnidarians to humans. This analysis indicates that the Eumetazoan common ancestor most likely possessed four distinct Frizzled receptors (orthologs to the Fz1/2/7, Fz4, Fz5/8, and Fz9/10) whereas the other Frizzled subfamily Fz3/6 appears to have emerged later after the divergence of the Chordata from the common deuterostome ancestor. The Wnt/Frizzled interactions represent one of the most complex relationships between extracellular ligands and receptors, and the specificity of these interactions remains unclear. As in humans, ascidians, or flies, sea urchins have at least twice as many Wnts as Frizzleds, indicating that each receptor must have more than one ligand or that the mechanism underlying signal specificity is not yet well understood. Studies performed mostly in cell culture and in vertebrates have shown that several Wnts can interact with a given Frizzled (e.g. Wang et al., 2005; Wu and Nusse, 2002), but whether this promiscuity of ligand-receptor interaction occurs in vivo has not been resolved. In the sea urchin each of Wnt or Frizzled subfamily is represented by a single ortholog, offering an opportunity that may simplify analyses of Wnt-receptor specificity. This analysis has additional importance since nine of the eleven Wnts identified are simultaneously expressed at the gastrula stage, making it imperative to sort specificity of the responses. An obvious way to control Wnt/Frizzled interactions could be to regulate the temporal and spatial distribution of the components. However, with nine Wnts expressed in the gastrula stage embryo, careful analysis of the Frizzled receptors is crucial. In agreement, in situ analysis, performed in the cnidarian Nemanostella vectensis for all Wnt ligands, revealed that some are expressed at the same time and in the same tissue during embryogenesis (Kusserow et al., 2005). Alternatively, this ligand-receptor specificity may be controlled by the extracellular regulators and/or by Frizzled co-receptors. Unfortunately, to date little is known about the expression or the roles of these molecules in echinoderms and urochordates. Signaling components and target genes of the Wnt pathways Throughout the animal kingdom roughly one hundred Wnt signal transduction components and one hundred target genes have been identified (Tables S3 and S4). Using these molecules, orthologs of more than 88% of the Wnt pathways components and 57% of the target genes were identified with confidence in the S. purpuratus genome (Fig.6 The number of identified signal transduction genes in the canonical Wnt pathway has recently been elevated beyond that reported here by an RNAi study in Drosophila. This study identified 238 potential regulators that include most of the known core canonical pathway members plus many others (DasGupta et al., 2005). Reciprocal-best-blast analyses have already shown that 50% of these genes have human orthologs. However these data were not included in our table. The number of signal transduction components and target genes related to the Wnt pathways are therefore likely to be expanded in the future, in sea urchins as in other organisms, by novel systematic investigations performed as the one conducted by DasGupta and collaborators. In summary, the study presented here provides an exhaustive overview of the signaling components and target genes of the crucial developmental Wnt pathways in the sea urchin genome. The comprehensive analysis covers a large number of genes and should provide a resource for further detailed investigations of the function of individual Wnt pathway genes or for evaluating the evolutionary history of these gene families.
01 Click here to view.(33M, tif) Acknowledgments We thank the Baylor College of Medicine Human Genome Sequencing Center (BCM-HGSC) team who generated the S. purpuratus genome and coordinated the project. We also thank James Balhoff for his helpful contribution in the generation of the trees and Tsuyoshi Momose and Evelyn Houliston for their help on the cnidarians Frizzled sequences. This work was supported by AHA Postdoctoral Fellowship 0420074Z (C.A Byrum), by NIH grants GM61464 and HD14483 (DRM), by the National Science Foundation, the Ingeborg v. F. McKee Fund, and the George F. Straub Trust of the Hawaii Community Foundation (AHW), and by grants from the CNRS, the University Pierre et Marie Curie (ParisVI), the Association pour la Recherche sur le Cancer and Marine Genomics Europe (CG). Footnotes Supplementary material is accessible alongside the online version of the paper at doi:… References
|
PubMed related articles
Your browsing activity is empty. Activity recording is turned off. |
|||||||||||||||
Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol. 2004; 20():781-810.
[Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol. 2004]Genes Dev. 1997 Dec 15; 11(24):3286-305.
[Genes Dev. 1997]Oncol Rep. 2005 Dec; 14(6):1583-8.
[Oncol Rep. 2005]Dev Cell. 2003 Sep; 5(3):367-77.
[Dev Cell. 2003]Trends Genet. 1999 Jan; 15(1):1-3.
[Trends Genet. 1999]Nucleic Acids Res. 2005 Jan 1; 33(Database issue):D34-8.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 2005]Nucleic Acids Res. 2005 Jan 1; 33(Database issue):D447-53.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 2005]Nucleic Acids Res. 2004 Jan 1; 32(Database issue):D138-41.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 2004]Nucleic Acids Res. 2006 Jan 1; 34(Database issue):D495-9.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 2006]Nucleic Acids Res. 1997 Sep 1; 25(17):3389-402.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 1997]Nucleic Acids Res. 1997 Dec 15; 25(24):4876-82.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 1997]Mol Biol Evol. 1987 Jul; 4(4):406-25.
[Mol Biol Evol. 1987]Bioinformatics. 2005 Feb 15; 21(4):456-63.
[Bioinformatics. 2005]Science. 2001 Dec 14; 294(5550):2310-4.
[Science. 2001]Bioinformatics. 2003 Aug 12; 19(12):1572-4.
[Bioinformatics. 2003]EMBO J. 1985 Nov; 4(11):2905-9.
[EMBO J. 1985]Genome Biol. 2002; 3(1):REVIEWS3001.
[Genome Biol. 2002]Nature. 2005 Jan 13; 433(7022):156-60.
[Nature. 2005]Mol Biol Evol. 1998 Jul; 15(7):809-19.
[Mol Biol Evol. 1998]Genesis. 2004 Jul; 39(3):194-205.
[Genesis. 2004]Nature. 2005 Jan 13; 433(7022):156-60.
[Nature. 2005]Nature. 1996 Jul 18; 382(6588):225-30.
[Nature. 1996]Genome Biol. 2004; 5(7):234.
[Genome Biol. 2004]Gene. 2003 Oct 23; 317(1-2):165-85.
[Gene. 2003]Development. 2006 Feb; 133(3):547-57.
[Development. 2006]Nature. 1998 Jan 22; 391(6665):357-62.
[Nature. 1998]Curr Biol. 2000 Dec 14-28; 10(24):1611-4.
[Curr Biol. 2000]Nature. 2001 May 17; 411(6835):321-5.
[Nature. 2001]Nature. 2002 Jun 6; 417(6889):664-7.
[Nature. 2002]Curr Biol. 2001 Jun 26; 11(12):951-61.
[Curr Biol. 2001]J Cell Sci. 2003 Jul 1; 116(Pt 13):2627-34.
[J Cell Sci. 2003]Bioessays. 2002 Sep; 24(9):811-20.
[Bioessays. 2002]Dev Genes Evol. 2003 Jun; 213(5-6):264-72.
[Dev Genes Evol. 2003]Gene. 2003 Oct 23; 317(1-2):165-85.
[Gene. 2003]Mech Dev. 2002 Apr; 113(1):61-4.
[Mech Dev. 2002]Respir Res. 2006 Jan 26; 7():15.
[Respir Res. 2006]Genes Dev. 1997 Dec 15; 11(24):3286-305.
[Genes Dev. 1997]Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol. 2005; 21():155-76.
[Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol. 2005]Trends Genet. 2002 Nov; 18(11):564-71.
[Trends Genet. 2002]Dev Biol. 2002 Jan 15; 241(2):209-28.
[Dev Biol. 2002]Development. 2000 Jul; 127(14):3009-20.
[Development. 2000]Nature. 2005 Jan 13; 433(7022):156-60.
[Nature. 2005]Cell. 2005 Mar 25; 120(6):857-71.
[Cell. 2005]Mol Cell Biol. 2005 Jun; 25(12):5022-30.
[Mol Cell Biol. 2005]J Biol Chem. 2002 Nov 1; 277(44):41762-9.
[J Biol Chem. 2002]Nature. 2005 Jan 13; 433(7022):156-60.
[Nature. 2005]Science. 2005 May 6; 308(5723):826-33.
[Science. 2005]Dev Genes Evol. 2003 Jun; 213(5-6):264-72.
[Dev Genes Evol. 2003]Dev Biol. 2002 Jan 15; 241(2):209-28.
[Dev Biol. 2002]Gene. 2003 Oct 23; 317(1-2):165-85.
[Gene. 2003]J Exp Zool. 2000 Aug 15; 288(2):105-19.
[J Exp Zool. 2000]Oncol Rep. 2005 Apr; 13(4):771-5.
[Oncol Rep. 2005]