Biomedical subjects

Maxim V Frolov

Publications and source records attributed to Maxim V Frolov.

8 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Specific role of the SR protein splicing factor B52 in cell cycle control in Drosophila.

E2F and retinoblastoma tumor suppressor protein pRB are important regulators of cell proliferation; however, the regulation of these proteins in vivo is not well understood. In Drosophila there are two E2F genes, an activator, de2f1, and a repressor, de2f2. The loss of de2f1 gives rise to the G(1)/S block accompanied by the repression of E2F-dependent transcription. These defects can be suppressed by mutation of de2f2. In this work, we show that the de2f1 mutant phenotype is rescued by the loss of the pre-mRNA splicing factor SR protein B52. Mutations in B52 restore S phase in clones of de2f1 mutant cells and phenocopy the loss of the de2f2 function. B52 acts upstream of de2f2 and plays a specific role in regulation of de2f2 pre-mRNA splicing. In B52-deficient cells, the level of dE2F2 protein is severely reduced and the expression of dE2F2-dependent genes is deregulated. Reexpression of the intronless copy of dE2F2 in B52-deficient cells restores the dE2F2-mediated repression. These results uncover a previously unrecognized role of the splicing factor in maintaining the G(1)/S block in vivo by specific regulation of the dE2F2 repressor function.

Animals↗

PubMed2005

Retinoblastoma family 2 is required in vivo for the tissue-specific repression of dE2F2 target genes.

In higher eukaryotes, the Retinoblastoma and E2F families of proteins control the transcription of a large number of target genes. Here, we have mutated the second Drosophila Retinoblastoma family gene (Rbf2), and contrasted the in vivo molecular functions of RBF2 with dE2F2, the only E2F partner of RBF2. Previous studies failed to uncover a unique role for RBF2 in E2F regulation. Here we find that RBF2 functions in concert with dE2F2 in vivo to repress the expression of differentiation markers in ovaries and embryos where RBF2 is highly expressed. We have compared the profiles of transcripts that are mis-expressed in ovaries, embryos and S2 cells where RBF2 function has been ablated and find that RBF2 and dE2F2 control strikingly different transcriptional programs in each situation. In vivo promoter occupancy studies point to the redistribution of dE2F/RBF complexes to different promoters in different cell types as one mechanism governing the tissue-specific regulation of dE2F/RBF target genes. These results demonstrate that RBF2 has a unique function in repressing E2F-regulated differentiation markers and that dE2F2 and RBF2 are required to regulate different sets of target genes in different tissues.

Alleles↗

PubMed2005

Drosophila E2F1 has context-specific pro- and antiapoptotic properties during development.

E2F transcription factors are generally believed to be positive regulators of apoptosis. In this study, we show that dE2F1 and dDP are important for the normal pattern of DNA damage-induced apoptosis in Drosophila wing discs. Unexpectedly, the role that E2F plays varies depending on the position of the cells within the disc. In irradiated wild-type discs, intervein cells show a high level of DNA damage-induced apoptosis, while cells within the D/V boundary are protected. In irradiated discs lacking E2F regulation, intervein cells are largely protected, but apoptotic cells are found at the D/V boundary. The protective effect of E2F at the D/V boundary is due to a spatially restricted role in the repression of hid. These loss-of-function experiments demonstrate that E2F cannot be classified simply as a pro- or antiapoptotic factor. Instead, the overall role of E2F in the damage response varies greatly and depends on the cellular context.

Animals↗

PubMed2005

dDP is needed for normal cell proliferation.

To gain insight into the essential functions of E2F, we have examined the phenotypes caused by complete inactivation of E2F and DP family members in Drosophila. Our results show that dDP requires dE2F1 and dE2F2 for DNA-binding activity in vitro and in vivo. In tissue culture cells and in mutant animals, the levels of dE2F and dDP proteins are strongly interdependent. In the absence of dDP, the levels of dE2F1 and dE2F2 decline dramatically, and vice versa. Accordingly, the cell cycle and transcriptional phenotypes caused by targeting dDP mimic the effects of targeting both dE2F1 and dE2F2 and are indistinguishable from the effects of inactivating all three proteins. Although trans-heterozygous dDP mutant animals develop to late pupal stages, the analysis of somatic mutant clones shows that dDP mutant cells are at a severe proliferative disadvantage when compared directly with wild-type neighbors. Strikingly, the timing of S-phase entry or exit is not delayed in dDP mutant clones, nor is the accumulation of cyclin A or cyclin B. However, the maximal level of bromodeoxyuridine incorporation is reduced in dDP mutant clones, and RNA interference experiments show that dDP-depleted cells are prone to stall in S phase. In addition, dDP mutant clones contain reduced numbers of mitotic cells, indicating that dDP mutant cells have a defect in G2/M-phase progression. Thus, dDP is not essential for developmental control of the G1-to-S transition, but it is required for normal cell proliferation, for optimal DNA synthesis, and for efficient G2/M progression.

Animals↗

PubMed2004

Molecular mechanisms of E2F-dependent activation and pRB-mediated repression.

Alterations in transcription of genes regulated by members of the E2F family of transcription factors can be viewed as a measure of the ebb and flow in a constantly evolving battle between repressor and activator complexes. Various chromatin regulatory complexes have been linked to Rb/E2F proteins, and changes in histone modifications correlate with states of E2F-dependent transcription. E2F has traditionally been viewed in the context of cell-cycle control. However, several recent studies have revealed a new aspect of E2F function in which pRB/E2F-family proteins confer stable repression of transcription. Such repression is evident in both actively proliferating cells and in cells that have withdrawn from the cell cycle.

Acetyltransferases↗

PubMed2003

Cell cycle-dependent and cell cycle-independent control of transcription by the Drosophila E2F/RB pathway.

To determine which E2F/RB-family members are functionally important at E2F-dependent promoters, we used RNA interference (RNAi) to selectively remove each component of the dE2F/dDP/RBF pathway, and we examined the genome-wide changes in gene expression that occur when each element is missing. The results reveal a remarkable division of labor between family members. Classic E2F targets, encoding functions needed for cell cycle progression, are expressed in cycling cells and are primarily dependent on dE2F1and RBF1 for regulation. Unexpectedly, there is a second program of dE2F/RBF-dependent transcription, in which dE2F2/RBF1or dE2F2/RBF2 complexes repress gene expression in actively proliferating cells. These new E2F target genes encode differentiation factors that are transcribed in developmentally regulated and gender-specific patterns and not in a cell cycle-regulated manner. We propose that dE2F/RBF complexes should not be viewed simply as a cell cycle regulator of transcription. Instead, dE2F/RBF-mediated repression is exerted on genes that encode an assortment of cellular functions, and these effects are reversed on sets of functionally related genes in particular developmental contexts. As a result, dE2F/RBF regulation is used to link gene expression with cell cycle progression at some targets while simultaneously providing stable repression at others.

Adaptor Proteins, Vesicular Transport↗

PubMed2003

G1 cyclin-dependent kinases are insufficient to reverse dE2F2-mediated repression.

Here we show that the cell cycle defects of dE2F1-depleted cells depend on the cooperative effects of dE2F2 and DACAPO (DAP), an inhibitor of Cyclin E/cyclin-dependent kinase 2 (CycE/cdk2). The different properties of cells lacking dE2F1/dE2F2 and dE2F1/DAP lead to the surprising observation that dE2F2-mediated repression differs from retinoblastoma family protein 1 (RBF1) inhibition of dE2F1, and is resistant to both CycE/cdk2 and Cyclin D/cyclin-dependent kinase 4 (CycD/cdk4). This resistance occurs even though dE2F2/RBF1 complexes are disrupted by CycE/cdk2, and may explain why dE2F2 is so potent in the absence of de2f1. The implication of these results is that cells containing dE2F2 require dE2F1 to either prevent, or reverse, dE2F-mediated repression.

Alleles↗

PubMed2002

Distinct mechanisms of E2F regulation by Drosophila RBF1 and RBF2.

RBF1, a Drosophila pRB family homolog, is required for cell cycle arrest and the regulation of E2F-dependent transcription. Here, we describe the properties of RBF2, a second family member. RBF2 represses E2F transcription and is present at E2F-regulated promoters. Analysis of in vivo protein complexes reveals that RBF1 and RBF2 interact with different subsets of E2F proteins. dE2F1, a potent transcriptional activator, is regulated specifically by RBF1. In contrast, RBF2 binds exclusively to dE2F2, a form of E2F that functions as a transcriptional repressor. We find that RBF2-mediated repression requires dE2F2. More over, RBF2 and dE2F2 act synergistically to antagonize dE2F1-mediated activation, and they co-operate to block S phase progression in transgenic animals. The network of interactions between RBF1 or RBF2 and dE2F1 or dE2F2 reveals how the activities of these proteins are integrated. These results suggest that there is a remarkable degree of symmetry in the arrangement of E2F and RB family members in mammalian cells and in DROSOPHILA.

Amino Acid Sequence↗