The time to measure positional information: maternal Hunchback is required for the synchrony of the Bicoid transcriptional response at the onset of zygotic transcription

It is widely accepted that morphogenetic gradients determine cell identity by concentration-dependent activation of target genes. How precise is each step in the gene expression process that acts downstream of morphogens, however, remains unclear. The Bicoid morphogen is a transcription factor directly activating its target genes and provides thus a simple system to address this issue in a quantitative manner. Recent studies indicate that the Bicoid gradient is precisely established in Drosophila embryos after eight nuclear divisions (cycle 9) and that target protein expression is specified five divisions later (cycle 14), with a precision that corresponds to a relative difference of Bicoid concentration of 10%. To understand how such precision was achieved, we directly analyzed nascent transcripts of the hunchback target gene at their site of synthesis. Most anterior nuclei in cycle 11 interphasic embryos exhibit efficient biallelic transcription of hunchback and this synchronous expression is specified within a 10% difference of Bicoid concentration. The fast diffusion of Bcd-EGFP (7.7 μm2/s) that we captured by fluorescent correlation spectroscopy in the nucleus is consistent with this robust expression at cycle 11. However, given the interruption of transcription during mitosis, it remains too slow to be consistent with precise de novo reading of Bicoid concentration at each interphase, suggesting the existence of a memorization process that recalls this information from earlier cycles. The two anterior maternal morphogens, Bicoid and Hunchback, contribute differently to this early response: whereas Bicoid provides dose-dependent positional information along the axis, maternal Hunchback is required for the synchrony of the response and is therefore likely to be involved in this memorization process.

[1]  H. Berg,et al.  Physics of chemoreception. , 1977, Biophysical journal.

[2]  B. Alberts,et al.  Studies of nuclear and cytoplasmic behaviour during the five mitotic cycles that precede gastrulation in Drosophila embryogenesis. , 1983, Journal of cell science.

[3]  C. Nüsslein-Volhard,et al.  The bicoid protein determines position in the Drosophila embryo in a concentration-dependent manner , 1988, Cell.

[4]  C. Nüsslein-Volhard,et al.  A gradient of bicoid protein in Drosophila embryos , 1988, Cell.

[5]  P. O’Farrell,et al.  Progression of the cell cycle through mitosis leads to abortion of nascent transcripts , 1991, Cell.

[6]  D. Agard,et al.  The onset of homologous chromosome pairing during Drosophila melanogaster embryogenesis , 1993, The Journal of cell biology.

[7]  M. Bate,et al.  The development of Drosophila melanogaster , 1993 .

[8]  D. Tautz,et al.  Differential regulation of target genes by different alleles of the segmentation gene hunchback in Drosophila. , 1994, Genetics.

[9]  Claude Desplan,et al.  Synergy between the hunchback and bicoid morphogens is required for anterior patterning in Drosophila , 1994, Cell.

[10]  G. Schubiger,et al.  Activation of transcription in Drosophila embryos is a gradual process mediated by the nucleocytoplasmic ratio. , 1996, Genes & development.

[11]  Y. Bellaïche,et al.  Neither the homeodomain nor the activation domain of Bicoid is specifically required for its down-regulation by the Torso receptor tyrosine kinase cascade. , 1996, Development.

[12]  D. Forbes,et al.  Mitotic repression of the transcriptional machinery. , 1997, Trends in biochemical sciences.

[13]  O. Sibon,et al.  DNA-replication checkpoint control at the Drosophila midblastula transition , 1997, Nature.

[14]  W. Webb,et al.  Dynamics of fluorescence fluctuations in green fluorescent protein observed by fluorescence correlation spectroscopy. , 1998, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[15]  R. Saint,et al.  A His2AvDGFP fusion gene complements a lethal His2AvD mutant allele and provides an in vivo marker for Drosophila chromosome behavior. , 1999, DNA and cell biology.

[16]  Ilan Davis,et al.  Transcribed genes are localized according to chromosomal position within polarized Drosophila embryonic nuclei , 1999, Current Biology.

[17]  P. Schwille,et al.  Accessing Molecular Dynamics in Cells by Fluorescence Correlation Spectroscopy , 2001, Biological chemistry.

[18]  William McGinnis,et al.  Multiplex Detection of RNA Expression in Drosophila Embryos , 2004, Science.

[19]  Daniel S. Banks,et al.  Anomalous diffusion of proteins due to molecular crowding. , 2005, Biophysical journal.

[20]  John Reinitz,et al.  Bicoid cooperative DNA binding is critical for embryonic patterning in Drosophila. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[21]  N. Dostatni,et al.  Bicoid Determines Sharp and Precise Target Gene Expression in the Drosophila Embryo , 2005, Current Biology.

[22]  W. Bialek,et al.  Physical limits to biochemical signaling. , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[23]  Rustem F. Ismagilov,et al.  Dynamics of Drosophila embryonic patterning network perturbed in space and time using microfluidics , 2005, Nature.

[24]  James G McNally,et al.  FRAP analysis of binding: proper and fitting. , 2005, Trends in cell biology.

[25]  Ido Golding,et al.  Eukaryotic Transcription: What Does It Mean for a Gene to Be ‘on’? , 2006, Current Biology.

[26]  James Briscoe,et al.  The interpretation of morphogen gradients , 2006, Development.

[27]  S. Bergmann,et al.  Pre-Steady-State Decoding of the Bicoid Morphogen Gradient , 2007, PLoS biology.

[28]  W. Bialek,et al.  Probing the Limits to Positional Information , 2007, Cell.

[29]  W. Bialek,et al.  Stability and Nuclear Dynamics of the Bicoid Morphogen Gradient , 2007, Cell.

[30]  Rustem F. Ismagilov,et al.  A Precise Bicoid Gradient Is Nonessential during Cycles 11–13 for Precise Patterning in the Drosophila Blastoderm , 2008, PloS one.

[31]  Nathan L. Vanderford,et al.  The TBP–PP2A mitotic complex bookmarks genes by preventing condensin action , 2008, Nature Cell Biology.

[32]  Thomas Gregor,et al.  Shape and function of the Bicoid morphogen gradient in dipteran species with different sized embryos. , 2008, Developmental biology.

[33]  Marta Ibañes,et al.  Theoretical and experimental approaches to understand morphogen gradients , 2008, Molecular systems biology.

[34]  Dipanjan Bhattacharya,et al.  Spatio-temporal plasticity in chromatin organization in mouse cell differentiation and during Drosophila embryogenesis. , 2009, Biophysical journal.

[35]  A. Tsirigos,et al.  Anterior-posterior positional information in the absence of a strong Bicoid gradient , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[36]  Alistair N Boettiger,et al.  Synchronous and Stochastic Patterns of Gene Activation in the Drosophila Embryo , 2009, Science.

[37]  Ho-Ryun Chung,et al.  Antagonistic action of Bicoid and the repressor Capicua determines the spatial limits of Drosophila head gene expression domains , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[38]  David H. Sharp,et al.  Canalization of Gene Expression in the Drosophila Blastoderm by Gap Gene Cross Regulation , 2009, PLoS biology.

[39]  Nathalie Dostatni,et al.  High mobility of bicoid captured by fluorescence correlation spectroscopy: implication for the rapid establishment of its gradient. , 2010, Biophysical journal.

[40]  Nathalie Dostatni,et al.  The Bicoid Morphogen System , 2010, Current Biology.

[41]  Iris Müller,et al.  Methylation of H3K4 Is Required for Inheritance of Active Transcriptional States , 2010, Current Biology.