A Balance of Positive and Negative Regulators Determines the Pace Of
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
1 2 3 A balance of positive and negative regulators determines the 4 pace of the segmentation clock. 5 6 Guy Wiedermann1, Robert Bone1, Joana Clara Silva, Mia Bjorklund, Philip Murray2$, 7 J. Kim Dale$* 8 9 Division of Cell and Developmental Biology, College of Life Sciences, University of Dundee, Dow 10 Street, Dundee DD1 5EH, UK. 11 2Division of Mathematics, University of Dundee, Dow Street, Dundee DD1 5EH, UK 12 13 14 1These two authors contributed equally to this work 15 $Joint senior authors 16 17 Running Title: Increasing NICD stability slows the segmentation clock 18 19 *Corresponding author: j.k.dale @dundee.ac.uk 20 Tel : +44 01382 386290 21 Fax: +44 01382 385386 22 1 23 Abstract 24 Somitogenesis is regulated by a molecular oscillator which drives dynamic gene expression 25 within the PSM with a periodicity tightly coupled to somite formation. Previous mathematical 26 models that invoke the mechanism of delayed negative feedback predict the oscillation period 27 depends on the sum of delays in negative-feedback loops and the inhibitor half-lives. We 28 develop a model to explore the possibility positive feedback also plays a role. The model 29 predicts increasing the half-life of the positive regulator, Notch intracellular domain (NICD), can 30 lead to elevated NICD levels and an increase in the oscillation period. To test this, we 31 investigate a phenotype induced by various small molecule inhibitors in which the clock is 32 slowed. We observe elevated levels and prolonged half-life of NICD. Reducing NICD production 33 rescues these effects. These data provide the first indication tight control of the turnover of 34 positive as well as negative regulators of the clock determines its periodicity. 35 36 Key Words: Notch, embryo, chick, segmentation clock, oscillation, somite, negative feedback, 37 positive feedback, nonlinear dynamics 38 2 39 Introduction 40 The formation of the vertebrate skeleton and associated musculature relies on the ordered and 41 timely segmentation of mesodermal tissue during early embryonic development. Segmentation is 42 progressive and occurs in an anterior to posterior direction as the body axis elongates (reviewed 43 in Oates et.al. 2012). Mesodermal segments, or somites, ‘pinch off’ at the rostral limit of the two 44 rods of pre-somitic mesoderm (PSM) that lie on either side of the caudal neural tube, with a 45 distinct, species-specific periodicity; every 90 minutes in the chicken and every 120 minutes in the 46 mouse. This periodicity is regulated by a molecular oscillator, known as the segmentation clock, 47 which is defined by cyclic gene expression within PSM cells that has a periodicity which regulates 48 that of somite formation. These “clock” genes belong to the Notch, WNT and FGF signalling 49 pathways and are expressed in a cyclical pattern in the PSM of a wide variety of vertebrate 50 species (Krol et.al.., 2011; reviewed in Dequéant & Pourquié, 2008; Gibb et.al.. 2010; Maroto 51 et.al.., 2012). On a single cell level in the vertebrate PSM, this oscillatory gene expression is 52 believed to be established through negative feedback loops of unstable clock gene products. 53 54 Previous mathematical models of the somitogenesis clock that invoke the mechanism of delayed 55 negative feedback predict that the period can be approximated as a sum of the delays involved in 56 transcription, splicing, translation and transport and the half-lives of inhibitors of clock gene 57 expression (Lewis, 2003; Monk 2003; Ay et.al.., 2013; Hanisch et.al.., 2013). Subsequent studies 58 have confirmed that the period can be altered by genetically modifying the delays in transcription 59 of clock genes encoding negative regulators or by removing key inhibitory regulators of this 60 network (e.g. Hes7, Her6, Her7, Nrarp) (Harima, Y., et.al.. 2013; Takashima et.al.., 2011; Oates 61 et.al.., 2012; Hoyle, N.P., and Ish-Horowicz D. 2013; Schröter and Oates, 2010; Kim et.al.., 2011; 62 Herrgen et.al.., 2010). Moreover, it has been shown that tight regulation of clock gene mRNA 63 turnover and degradation is gene specific and regulated at the level of the 3’UTR (Nitanda Y 64 et.al.., 2014; Hilgers V et.al. 2005). In contrast, there has been relatively little experimental work 65 demonstrating the predicted role of protein stability of inhibitory clock gene products in 66 regulating the periodicity of clock gene oscillations (Hirata 2004). 67 68 It is notable that models that invoke delayed negative feedback as the mechanism underlying the 69 somitogenesis clock were developed primarily from zebrafish data, where the clock period is 70 relatively short and there are significantly fewer oscillating components (Krol et.al.., 2011). 71 Moreover, in zebrafish there is experimental evidence that Notch plays a key role in the 72 synchronisation of neighbouring oscillators (Delaune et.al.., 2012) but that it is not necessary for 3 73 oscillations themselves (Ozbudak and Lewis, 2008). In contrast, Notch signalling in mouse and 74 chick is thought to be essential for oscillations (Ferjentsik et.al.., 2009). One crucial factor in that 75 regard is the intracellular domain of the Notch1 receptor, (NICD), which is cleaved following 76 ligand activation, translocates to the nucleus and activates Notch target clock gene expression. 77 NICD itself is unstable and, at least in mouse, NICD production appears as pulsatile, spatio- 78 temporal waves that traverse the rostro-caudal axis of the PSM in the manner of a clock gene 79 (Huppert et.al.., 2005). Importantly, pulsatile Notch1 protein expression was recently shown to be 80 dependent on Notch signalling in the PSM of both chick and mouse (Bone et.al.., 2014); this raises 81 the possibility that, in mouse and chick at least, positive feedback, mediated by Notch and NICD, 82 plays a role in the clock mechanism. 83 84 In this study we develop a mathematical model of the clock that describes both repression and 85 NICD-mediated activation of clock gene transcription. The model predicts that increasing the half- 86 life of NICD results in elevated levels of NICD and a longer clock period. Notably, these effects are 87 not observed in the model upon increasing the half-life of the repressing clock protein. To test 88 this prediction, we use a pharmacological approach that robustly delays clock gene oscillations 89 across the chick and mouse PSM. Under these conditions, using a custom made antibody that 90 recognises endogenous chick NICD, we show that, concomitant to delaying the pace of 91 oscillations, these inhibitors increase levels of NICD and increase the half-life of NICD. In 92 agreement with model predictions, we rescue the phase patterns of clock gene expression by 93 offsetting increased NICD stability through reducing NICD production. These data therefore 94 suggest that increasing the half-life of cNICD and thus increasing its turnover time increases the 95 period of the somitogenesis clock. 96 97 4 98 Materials and Methods 99 Experimental Procedures 100 Chick culture 101 Fertilized chick (Gallus gallus) embryos from Winter Farm, Cambridge, UK, were incubated for 102 approximately 40 hours at 38°C 5% CO2 to yield embryos between Hamburger Hamilton (HH) 103 stages 10-12 as judged by somite number and morphology (Hamburger and Hamilton, 1992). 104 Explants were prepared as previously described (Palmeirim et.al.., 1997). In brief, for the half- 105 embryo assay: the caudal end of the chicken embryo is isolated to contain the most caudal somite 106 pairs and the tail tissues. The isolated tail is then bisected down the midline along the neural tube 107 to produce two identical left and right half-PSM explants which allows an internal control from 108 the same embryo with which to compare the oscillation phase of cLfng expression by in situ 109 hybridisation, following culturing of the two halves in various culture conditions. The following 110 small molecule inhibitors were typically used at the given concentrations and dissolved in 111 Dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) unless otherwise stated: 150 nM LY411575 unless otherwise stated 112 (generated in house, University of Dundee; Ferjentsik Z et.al., 2009; Bone et. al., 2014), 1 μM 113 MLN4924 (generated in house, University of Dundee); 20 μM Cycloheximide (Tocris Bioscience; 114 dissolved in ethanol); 100 μM XAV939 (Tocris Bioscience); 25-50 μM Cyclopamine (Calbiochem); 115 10 μM Roscovitine (Calbiochem); 10 μM 5,6-Dichloro-1-beta-D-ribofuranosylbenzimidazole (DRB) 116 (Sigma); 1 μM PHA-767491 (kind gift from Nathanael Gray, HARVARD.EDU). Titration assays were 117 performed to establish the lowest concentration that abolishes expression of control target 118 genes. For Fix and culture: both half-PSM explants were treated with inhibitor but while one was 119 removed from culture after 3 hours (‘fix’), the other side was cultured for an additional 45 120 minutes (‘culture’) which corresponds to half of the usual 90 minute cycle for a complete 121 oscillation of cLfng in the chicken PSM. Variations include culturing the “culture” side for “90” or 122 “120” minutes to determine the length of an oscillation. For the Western blot analysis half-PSMs 123 from 9 embryos were cultured in DMSO control vehicle and the corresponding 9 half-PSMs 124 cultured in the presence of a small molecule inhibitor. Following 3 hours of culture, both pools 125 were treated with 20 μM Cycloheximide for an additional 30 minutes before protein lysates were 126 prepared simultaneously. For the half-life assay: half-PSMs from 9 embryos were pooled and both 127 pools were cultured in each of the reagents for 3 hours and following 30 minute exposure to 128 cycloheximide, the decay of cNICD protein was monitored in the presence of these inhibitors by 129 lysing PSM explants at different time points.