A changing morphogen gradient is interpreted by continuous transduction flow.

In vertebrate development, most signalling factors behave as morphogens, eliciting divergent cell fates according to their concentration. We ask how cells interpret morphogen concentration as it changes during the establishment of a gradient. Using dissociated blastula cells of Xenopus exposed to activin for only 10 minutes, we have followed the phosphorylation of tagged Smad2, the principal activin transducer, from a cytoplasmic pool to the nucleus in real time. We show that a changing concentration of extracellular activin is rapidly and continuously transduced to provide a corresponding nuclear concentration of Smad2, even though gene response may be delayed for several hours. Nuclear Smad2 concentration changes up as the extracellular concentration of activin increases. We conclude that cells interpret a changing extracellular concentration by maintaining a continuous flow of activated transducer from a large cytoplasmic pool to the nucleus where it is degraded. The volume of this flow determines the steady state concentration of Smad2 in the nucleus and this is used by cells to interpret extracellular morphogen concentration.

Morphogen gradient interpretation.

A morphogen gradient is an important concept in developmental biology, because it describes a mechanism by which the emission of a signal from one part of an embryo can determine the location, differentiation and fate of many surrounding cells. The value of this idea has been clear for over half a century, but only recently have experimental systems and methods of analysis progressed to the point where we begin to understand how a cell can sense and respond to tiny changes in minute concentrations of extracellular signalling factors.

Swift is a novel BRCT domain coactivator of Smad2 in transforming growth factor beta signaling.

Transforming growth factor beta (TGFbeta) signaling is transduced via Smad2-Smad4-DNA-binding protein complexes which bind to responsive elements in the promoters of target genes. However, the mechanism of how the complexes activate the target genes is unclear. Here we identify Xenopus Swift, a novel nuclear BRCT (BRCA1 C-terminal) domain protein that physically interacts with Smad2 via its BRCT domains. We examine the activity of Swift in relation to gene activation in Xenopus embryos. Swift mRNA has an expression pattern similar to that of Smad2. Swift has intrinsic transactivation activity and activates target gene transcription in a TGFbeta-Smad2-dependent manner. Inhibition of Swift activity results in the suppression of TGFbeta-induced gene transcription and defective mesendoderm development. Blocking Swift function affects neither bone morphogenic protein nor fibroblast growth factor signaling during early development. We conclude that Swift is a novel coactivator of Smad2 and that Swift has a critical role in embryonic TGFbeta-induced gene transcription. Our results suggest that Swift may be a general component of TGFbeta signaling.

The Xenopus eomesodermin promoter and its concentration-dependent response to activin.

Eomesodermin is an essential early gene in Xenopus mesoderm formation and shows a morphogen-like response to activin. Here we define the regions of the Eomesodermin promoter required for mesodermal expression and for concentration-dependent response to activin. We find an activin response element (ARE) located between -5.6 and -5.0 kb which contains two critical FAST2 binding sites. The ARE alone is necessary and sufficient for concentration-dependent response to activin. A 5.6 kb promoter recapitulates Eomes expression in normal mesoderm cells. A repressor element extinguishes Eomes expression in the endoderm. We relate our results to mesoderm patterning in early Xenopus development and to a mechanism of morphogen gradient response.

Transcriptional repression by the Epstein-Barr virus EBNA3A protein tethered to DNA does not require RBP-Jkappa.

The Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) proteins EBNA1, EBNA2, EBNA3A, EBNA3C, LMP1 and EBNA-LP are essential for the in vitro immortalization of primary B lymphocytes by EBV. EBNA2 is a transcriptional activator of viral and cellular genes. Both EBNA3A and EBNA3C have been shown to specifically inhibit EBNA2-activated transcription by direct interaction with RBP-Jkappa, a cellular DNA-binding factor known to recruit EBNA2 to EBNA2-responsive genes. This interaction interferes with the binding of RBP-Jkappa to DNA in vitro, and this is probably the mechanism by which EBNA3A and EBNA3C repress EBNA2-activated transcription in vivo. EBNA3A and EBNA3C also directly repress transcription when tethered to a promoter via the DNA-binding domain of the yeast Gal4 protein. As RBP-Jkappa has been previously shown to be a repressor in mammalian cells, this repression could be due to the recruitment of RBP-Jkappa by Gal4-EBNA3A and 3C. In this study, we have precisely mapped the domain of EBNA3A involved in the interaction with RBP-Jkappa and we have shown that interaction with RBP-Jkappa is not required for the Gal4-EBNA3A-mediated repression. Furthermore, we have characterized in EBNA3A a domain of 143 amino acids which is necessary and sufficient for EBNA3A-dependent repression.

RBP-J kappa repression activity is mediated by a co-repressor and antagonized by the Epstein-Barr virus transcription factor EBNA2.

The Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) protein EBNA2 is a transcriptional activator that can be targeted to its DNA responsive elements by direct interaction with the cellular protein RBP-J kappa. RBP-J kappa is a ubiquitous factor, highly conserved between man, mouse and Drosophila, whose function in mammalian cells is largely unknown. Here we provide evidence that RBP-J kappa is a transcriptional repressor and, more importantly, that RBP-J kappa repression is mediated by a co-repressor. The function of the co-repressor could be counterbalanced by making a fusion protein (RBP-VP16) between RBP-J kappa and the VP16 activation domain. This RBP-VP16-mediated activation could be strongly increased by an EBNA2 protein deprived of its activation domain, but not by an EBNA2 protein incapable of making physical contact with RBP-J kappa. Our results suggest that EBNA2 activates transcription by both interfering with the function of a co-repressor recruited by RBP-J kappa and providing an activation domain.