- THIS ARTICLE
-
Abstract
- Full Text (PDF)
- Alert me when this article is cited
- Alert me if a correction is posted
- SERVICES
- Similar articles in this journal
- Similar articles in PubMed
- Alert me to new issues of the journal
- Download to citation manager
- Reprints & Permissions
- CITING ARTICLES
- Citing Articles via HighWire
- Citing Articles via Google Scholar
- GOOGLE SCHOLAR
- Articles by Weiler, K. S.
- Articles by Wakimoto, B. T.
- Search for Related Content
- PUBMED
- PubMed Citation
- Articles by Weiler, K. S.
- Articles by Wakimoto, B. T.
Chromosome Rearrangements Induce Both Variegated and Reduced, Uniform Expression of Heterochromatic Genes in a Development-Specific Manner
Karen S. Weilera and Barbara T. Wakimotoaa Department of Zoology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195
Corresponding author: Barbara T. Wakimoto, Department of Zoology, University of Washington, Kincaid Hall, Box 351800, Seattle, WA 98195-1800, wakimoto{at}u.washington.edu (E-mail).
Communicating editor: J. A. BIRCHLER
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
In Drosophila melanogaster, chromosome rearrangements that juxtapose euchromatin and heterochromatin can result in position effect variegation (PEV), the variable expression of heterochromatic and euchromatic genes in the vicinity of the novel breakpoint. We examined PEV of the heterochromatic light (lt) and concertina (cta) genes in order to investigate potential tissue or developmental differences in chromosome structure that might be informative for comparing the mechanisms of PEV of heterochromatic and euchromatic genes. We employed tissue pigmentation and in situ hybridization to RNA to assess expression of lt in individual cells of multiple tissues during development. Variegation of lt was induced in the adult eye, larval salivary glands and larval Malpighian tubules for each of three different chromosome rearrangements. The relative severity of the effect in these tissues was not tissue-specific but rather was characteristic of each rearrangement. Surprisingly, larval imaginal discs did not exhibit variegated lt expression. Instead, a uniform reduction of the lt transcript was observed, which correlated in magnitude with the degree of variegation. The same results were obtained for cta expression. These two distinct effects of rearrangements on heterochromatic gene expression correlated with the developmental stage of the tissue. These results have implications for models of heterochromatin formation and the nuclear organization of chromosomes during development and differentiation.
THE parameters that govern normal gene expression extend beyond a gene to its chromosomal and nuclear contexts. The discovery by ![]()
The underlying causes and resulting phenotypes of position effects are quite varied. Position effects in multicellular eukaryotes typically fall into two broad categories. The examples most simple to explain are those in which the regulatory elements of a resident gene interfere, in either a negative or a positive fashion, with those of a translocated gene or a transgene, resulting in temporal and/or tissue-specific changes in its expression pattern (reviewed by ![]()
![]()
![]()
The study of position effects induced by chromosome rearrangements in Drosophila led to the establishment of PEV as a model system for studying how gene expression is influenced by higher order chromatin structure (reviewed by ![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Analyses of heterochromatic genes have suggested that PEV is, in addition, a model system for the study of the role of nuclear organization in gene expression. The study of light (lt)-variegating rearrangements (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Much has been learned about chromatin-induced position effects upon gene expression through work on silencing in yeast (reviewed by ![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Studies of lt variegation provide several advantages for investigating the dynamics of heterochromatin formation during development and in different tissues. First, the activation of lt transcription by heterochromatin reflects a normal function of heterochromatin, as opposed to its ability to repress euchromatic genes. Second, variegated expression of lt appears to reflect chromosome organization, thus yielding insight into nuclear architecture. Third, the lt gene is widely expressed throughout development (![]()
This article describes an analysis of the effects of three chromosome rearrangements on lt expression in multiple tissues. We show that the relative strengths of the effects of the rearrangements on lt expression are consistent for a given lt-variegating allele in all tissues examined. Remarkably, we find that a rearrangement can either induce variegated expression or cause reduced nonvariegated expression. We have confirmed this result for a second heterochromatic gene, concertina (cta), suggesting that this may be a general property of PEV of heterochromatic genes. We attribute the differing effects of the chromosome rearrangements to the developmental stage of the tissue, and suggest that variegation of heterochromatic genes is restricted to differentiated cell types.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
Drosophila stocks and culture conditions:
Stocks were maintained at 25° on standard cornmeal-molasses-agar medium. All of the mutations described in this study are listed within Flybase (http://flybase.indiana.bio.edu/).
Larvae for the Malpighian tubule assays and RNA in situ analyses were cultured at 25° under identical conditions of low crowding for each experiment. In order to eliminate potential sex differences only female larvae were used for the assays. For the lt and cta expression studies, larvae were derived from Df(2L)ltX10 Bc/SM1, lt16 females, to effectively eliminate any maternal contribution to Malpighian tubule pigmentation. The paternal parent was Canton S, for the positive control cross, or carried the TSTL14, Tb balancer and either a lt-variegating allele or the lt deficiency, Df(2L)ltX120. The lt/Df(2L)ltX10 larval progeny were identified as Bc and Tb+ individuals.
Assays of Malpighian tubule pigmentation:
Wandering third instar female larvae of the appropriate genotype were collected as described above. The Malpighian tubules were dissected in 0.7% NaCl, and stained in 0.1 µg/ml DAPI, 0.7% NaCl on a multiwell slide. For each larva, thirty contiguous cells from each posterior arm of the tubules were scored for the presence of pigment granules using UV illumination and x100 magnification. Data for each genotype were accumulated from two to three experiments. Statistical analysis was performed using Statview 4.5 (Abacus Concepts, Inc., Berkeley, CA).
In situ hybridization to whole mount third instar larval tissues:
For a typical experiment, at least 15 wandering third instar female larvae of each genotype were processed. The anterior halves of the larvae were isolated and inverted in cold phosphate-buffered saline + 0.1% Tween-20 (PBT), in <30 min per sample. Each sample was immediately fixed in fresh 4% formaldehyde (EM grade; Electron Microscopy Sciences, Fort Washington, PA), 0.1% deoxycholate in PBT, for 20 min at room temperature, and then washed three times for 5 min each in PBT. The remaining pretreatments and hybridization procedure were a modification of the protocol of ![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Color detection of hybridized probe was performed by incubating the samples with alkaline phosphatase-conjugated anti-digoxigenin antibody (Boehringer Mannheim), which had been preadsorbed against unhybridized tissues, at 1:2000 dilution in PBT overnight at 4°. Following four 20-min washes in PBT, the tissues were rinsed twice for 5 min in freshly prepared staining buffer (100 mM NaCl, 50 mM MgCl2, 100 mM Tris pH 9.5, 0.1% Tween-20, 0.1% levamisole) and then incubated in staining buffer supplemented with 4.5 µl/ml NBT and 3.5 µl/ml BCIP (Boehringer Mannheim) until the desired level of staining was achieved. The tissues were then stained for 10 min in 0.1 µg/ml DAPI, and mounted in 50% glycerol. The patterns of staining were visualized using a Nikon (Garden City, NY) Microphot microscope equipped with DIC optics.
Fluorescence detection of hybridized probe was performed as above except that the anti-digoxigenin antibody (at 1:500; Boehringer Mannheim) was unconjugated, the samples were washed in PBT four times for 30 min, incubated 4 hr in fluorescein-conjugated anti-sheep antibody (1:100; Jackson ImmunoResearch Labs., Inc., West Grove, PA) at room temperature, and washed again in PBT four times for 30 min. The tissues were mounted in 80% glycerol and examined using a x60 (1.4 NA) objective on a Bio-Rad (Richmond, CA) MRC-600 confocal imaging system.
Assays of transcription in salivary glands:
Salivary gland nuclei were visualized using DAPI staining and UV illumination. Each nucleus in the distal three-fourths of each gland was scored for the presence or absence of a focus of probe hybridization, using DIC optics. An average of 74 nuclei were scored per gland. The data for each ltvar/Df genotype derive from two experiments, and for lt+/Df from six, with 10 to 20 glands assayed per experiment. Statistical analysis was performed using Statview 4.5 (Abacus Concepts).
| RESULTS |
|---|
The effects of light gene variegation on tissue pigmentation:
The lt gene is essential for viability and required for the normal pigmentation of several tissues including the adult eyes and larval Malpighian tubules. More than 50 chromosome rearrangements that cause variegated expression of the lt gene in ommatidia have been isolated (![]()
![]()
|
|
To compare the effects of the three lt-variegating rearrangements (collectively denoted ltvar) on viability and eye pigmentation to their effects on lt expression in the larval Malpighian tubules, we utilized the presence of pigment granules in individual tubule cells as an indicator of gene activity. The Malpighian tubules of female third instar larvae bearing a deficiency of the lt gene and an lt-variegating rearrangement were dissected and assayed as described in MATERIALS AND METHODS. In lt+/Df(2L)ltX10 (abbreviated lt+/Df) larvae bearing the lt+ gene situated on an unrearranged chromosome, 100% of the cells were pigmented. Individuals bearing two lt deficiency chromosomes, Df(2L)ltX120/Df survive until pupariation, making it possible to assay pigmentation in larvae deleted for the lt gene. The Malpighian tubules of these larvae were completely unpigmented. In contrast, the Malpighian tubules of larvae having a single lt-variegating allele were a mosaic of pigmented and unpigmented cells. A tabulation of the frequencies of pigmented cells in ltG10/Df, ltX2/Df and ltX13/Df larvae is shown in Figure 2. The frequency of pigmented cells varied between individuals of the same genotype, as is characteristic of PEV. Malpighian tubules from ltG10/Df larvae had very few or no pigmented cells per larva, indicating very severe variegation. The ltX2/Df Malpighian tubules showed much greater pigmentation and a broad range in pigmentation frequency. The ltX13/Df Malpighian tubules exhibited the weakest variegation, and showed less variability between larvae than the ltX2/Df tubules. These results paralleled the effects of each rearrangement on viability (Table 1) and eye pigmentation (Figure 1): ltG10 greatly reduces viability and eye pigmentation; ltX2 causes a moderate reduction in viability and moderate eye variegation that is quite variable between individuals; and ltX13 does not reduce viability and has a weak effect on eye pigmentation.
|
Expression of the light gene in wild-type third instar larval tissues, as detected by RNA in situ hybridization:
In order to assess the expression of the lt-variegating alleles in additional, unpigmented tissues, RNA in situ hybridization assays were undertaken. We first determined the extent and pattern of lt expression in tissues of wild-type third instar larvae. Single-stranded sense and anti-sense RNA probes were synthesized from the lt cDNA clone and hybridized to whole mount tissues. In agreement with the results of previous Northern analyses (![]()
![]()
![]()
|
Salivary glands exhibit a mosaic light expression pattern, as a result of ltvar rearrangements:
Having established the wild-type expression pattern of the lt gene, we then determined the effects of the ltvar rearrangements on lt expression in multiple unpigmented cell types. For these ltvar assays, the genotype of the larvae assayed was ltvar/Df so that only expression from the gene on the rearranged chromosome was monitored. A single focus of lt probe hybridization was observed within all nuclei of most lt+/Df salivary glands (see Figure 3C and Figure 4A; data in Figure 5). In contrast, the glands derived from larvae bearing a lt-variegating allele were a mosaic of cells having the nuclear staining and cells devoid of the nuclear staining (e.g., ltG10/Df in Figure 4B). We assessed the severity of variegation in this tissue for each lt-variegating allele by quantitating the fraction of cells expressing the lt gene. The percentage of expressing nuclei in individual salivary glands from lt+/Df, ltG10/Df, ltX2/Df and ltX13/Df larvae is illustrated in Figure 5. The effect of each rearrangement on lt expression in the salivary glands correlated in magnitude with its effect on lt expression in other tissues (compare with Figure 1 and Figure 2). Only a few salivary gland cells from ltG10/Df larvae expressed the lt gene. Salivary glands from ltX2/Df and ltX13/Df larvae showed a much higher frequency of staining nuclei than ltG10/Df larvae, but were not statistically different from each other. As in the eye and Malpighian tubules, there was a large degree of variability between ltX2/Df individuals in the frequency of salivary gland cells showing lt expression.
|
|
Imaginal discs exhibit reduced, nonvariegated expression of the light gene, as a result of ltvar rearrangements:
As stated above, in situ hybridization to lt mRNA yielded a uniform staining pattern for lt+/Df imaginal discs. When imaginal discs from larvae bearing any one of the three ltvar rearrangements were assayed, the staining pattern was less intense but still uniform. Tissues derived from at least four experiments were examined for each ltvar/Df genotype, and for three experiments all three ltvar/Df genotypes (and controls) were processed simultaneously and identically. Typical results from a single experiment in which individuals of all three ltvar/Df genotypes were processed identically are illustrated in Figure 6 for leg imaginal discs and Figure 7 for eye-antennal imaginal discs. The staining obtained for ltX13/Df imaginal discs (Figure 6B and Figure 7B) was strong but generally less intense than lt+/Df imaginal discs (Figure 6A and Figure 7A). The level of imaginal disc staining of ltX2/Df larvae (Figure 6C and Figure 7C) was intermediate between that of lt+/Df larvae and Df(2L)ltX120/Df larvae (Figure 6E and Figure 7E). The imaginal discs of ltG10/Df larvae (Figure 6D and Figure 7D) showed an extremely low level of staining, which was generally equivalent to or only slightly darker than that of Df(2L)ltX120/Df imaginal discs. Therefore, the chromosome rearrangements affected lt expression by reducing it to a level characteristic of each allele, but did not induce mosaicism of expression in these imaginal tissues. Uniform staining was observed upon examination of tissues at up to 400-fold magnification. We confirmed that cell-to-cell differences in gene expression could be detected using our in situ hybridization protocol by assaying imaginal discs for the string transcript, which is present in single cells scattered throughout the discs because of differences in stage of the cell cycle (data not shown; ![]()
|
|
It remained a formal possibility that the imaginal discs were composed of lt-expressing and lt-nonexpressing cells, but that the distinctions between cells were masked by convolutions of the tissue and/or associated hemocytes (which include the melanotic crystal cells; see Figure 7). Therefore, we performed in situ hybridization to lt mRNA in imaginal discs using fluorescence detection and confocal microscopy. We focused our analysis upon the portion of the eye-antennal disc that gives rise to the ommatidia, since lt variegation occurs in the adult eye. We examined 0.1-µm optical sections spanning the full thickness of the tissue for nine ltX2/Df eye-antennal discs and three ltX13/Df eye-antennal discs, but variegation was never observed. Rather, the staining was cytoplasmic and uniform across the disc, and was not observed within the nuclei. However, a comparison of the intensity of staining of ltX2/Df and Df(2L)ltX120/Df tissues processed simultaneously showed that ltX2/Df eye-antennal discs were more brightly stained (data not shown). As the ltX2/lt1 adult eye phenotype frequently shows large patches of dark pigmentation (Figure 1D), a comparable pattern of variegation at the RNA level should have been readily apparent but was not detected. A representative section from an ltX2/Df eye-antennal disc is shown in Figure 8. These results confirmed the results obtained using colorimetric detection of lt mRNA, in showing that lt RNA levels were uniform in the eye-antennal imaginal discs of lt-variegating strains.
|
The absence of mosaic expression in imaginal discs is observed for another variegating heterochromatic gene:
To determine if the reduced nonvariegated mRNA staining pattern was unique to variegating alleles of the lt gene or was characteristic of other variegating heterochromatic genes, we assayed expression of the cta gene. The cta gene encodes a subunit of a G protein complex, and was identified as a maternal effect gene because it is required in female Drosophila for the normal development of their embryos (![]()
![]()
![]()
|
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
This study explores tissue-specific and developmental changes in chromosome structure using PEV of the heterochromatic lt and cta genes as tools. The aims of this study were to determine if heterochromatic gene expression is variegated in all larval tissues and if rearrangements may show tissue-specific differences in the ability to induce variegation. Our analyses revealed that each of three chromosome rearrangements reduced lt expression in all tissues examined. Interestingly, the relative severity of variegation in the adult eye, the larval Malpighian tubules, and the larval salivary glands was consistent in these tissues for the three lt-variegating alleles and reflected their effects on viability. These results suggest that variegation-inducing rearrangements do not have tissue-specific effects on gene expression. However, we did discover a developmental specificity to lt variegation. For example, the imaginal eye-antennal disc showed a uniform, reduced level of lt mRNA at the third larval instar although the adult eye exhibited variegated, sometimes patchy, lt expression. This nonvariegated mRNA staining pattern was observed in all imaginal discs for all three lt-variegating alleles. Moreover, the level of lt mRNA detected in these discs was consistent with the severity of lt variegation observed in variegated tissues. A second heterochromatic gene exhibiting PEV, the cta gene, was similarly found to have a variegated pattern of expression in the salivary glands but reduced, nonvariegated mRNA levels in the imaginal discs.
Our observation that rearrangements can cause both a uniform reduction and a variegated pattern of expression for a single gene was unexpected. Previous phenotypic observations have been consistent with the classification of chromosome rearrangements into two categories by ![]()
Analyses of the effects of chromosome rearrangements on gene expression using in situ hybridization to RNA:
We have used RNA in situ hybridization to examine lt expression in nonpigmented tissues. This approach monitors expression at the cellular level and has the added advantage of more accurately reflecting the transcriptional state of a gene compared to methods measuring its protein product or ultimate phenotype. Several factors can influence the concentration of specific cellular mRNAs, including the frequency of transcription initiation, the efficiency of RNA processing steps, and mRNA stability. While certain mutations and conditions can modulate these steps, the effects of variegation-inducing chromosome rearrangements are believed to be mediated through altered chromatin structure. We therefore think it most likely that we have assayed changes in transcription initiation or transcript elongation. For simplicity, the models presented below refer to transcription initiation, although they apply as well to synthesis of a full-length transcript.
We conclude from the nonvariegated imaginal disc staining pattern observed for ltvar/Df larvae that all imaginal cells transcribed the lt gene, but at a lower level than that of cells bearing the nonrearranged allele. An alternate possibility, which we do not favor, is that variegated expression of lt occurred in imaginal cells, but the lt mRNA was sufficiently stable to mask the variegation pattern. If so, every imaginal cell was either currently expressing lt or had inherited lt mRNA due to expression in a previous generation. The uniformity of staining makes this possibility unlikely because it would require that the combined amount of lt message was similar regardless of when and how long lt transcription was "on" versus "off" in each cell's lineage. At the least, we would expect to have observed the effect of the exponential dilution of lt RNA resulting from cell division in a lineage in which lt is turned "off." Our staining methods were sufficiently sensitive to reveal a twofold difference in lt mRNA level (e.g., compare lt+/lt+ and lt+/Df imaginal discs in Figure 3A and Figure B), as would occur in the first generation following repression of lt. Smaller differences in lt RNA levels in the range between no lt expression and one copy lt+ expression were also detectable (Figure 6, BD and 7, BD). Thus the absence of cell-to-cell variations in staining strongly suggests that transcription of the lt gene itself was not variegated. Moreover, it is difficult to conceive how altering the frequency of expressing cells could have given rise to different, but consistent, uniform mRNA levels for the three ltvar alleles. Thus, the possibility of variegated expression in the imaginal discs appears incompatible with our results.
Models for nonvariegated heterochromatic gene expression in imaginal discs:
A decrease in lt cytoplasmic RNA levels could reflect either (1) a shorter period of a normal rate of transcription during the cell cycle, or (2) a decrease in rate with the duration unaffected. A position effect of the first type was observed for two human ß-globin transgenic mouse lines, by ![]()
![]()
![]()
A second model is based on the idea of a decreased rate of transcription, to explain the reduction of lt and cta transcripts in imaginal tissues. It predicts that initiation or elongation of transcription is impeded as a result of disruption of normal heterochromatin formation in the vicinity of these heterochromatic genes. The consequence of chromosome rearrangements with breakpoints in the heterochromatin proximal to the lt gene and in the distal euchromatin, is the isolation of a subregion of heterochromatin including lt and other heterochromatic genes. This isolation reduces the variety and quantity of heterochromatin in the vicinity of the lt gene, and in this way might restrict its ability to associate with particular heterochromatic proteins. For example, the affinity of a heterochromatic region for particular proteins and/or its propensity to assume specific chromatin conformations may be proportional to the quantity of certain repetitive sequence elements. Subdividing the total amount of any one repetitive element could have a dramatic effect on the efficacy of that region to attract a protein and/or take on a particular chromatin structure. If this rearrangement-induced heterochromatin protein deficiency includes one or more heterochromatic proteins that are required indirectly as local chromatin morphogens or directly as transcription factors for lt transcription, then expression would be expected to be reduced. We favor this second model because it shares much in common, mechanistically, with the compartment model proposed to explain the variegated expression of heterochromatic genes (see below).
What determines whether a chromosome rearrangement causes variegated or reduced, uniform heterochromatic gene expression?
We attribute the disparate effects of the lt variegation-inducing chromosome rearrangements, i.e., mosaic expression in the adult eye, and larval Malpighian tubules and salivary glands, but nonvariegated reduced expression in imaginal tissues, to the differing developmental states of these cells. A diagram illustrating this model is shown in Figure 10. The imaginal disc cells are undifferentiated and are cycling or newly postmitotic. We propose that the heterochromatic factors required for lt transcription are abundant within these undifferentiated nuclei. However, the impaired ability of the displaced heterochromatic region to attract the appropriate quantity and variety of heterochromatic proteins (as proposed above) results in reduced lt transcription. In the differentiated nucleus, the displaced subregion of heterochromatin is likewise compromised in its ability to attract heterochromatic proteins. However, we suggest that a restriction in the abundance of these factors (perhaps related to the cessation of mitotic chromosome condensation) and the establishment of chromosomal interactions accompany differentiation and result in cell-to-cell differences in expression state. In the nuclear context of limiting concentrations of heterochromatin proteins, the relative ability of the isolated heterochromatic region to compete with pericentric heterochromatin for these components might often be insufficient to support any transcription. However, in a subset of the cell population physical interactions between the displaced heterochromatic region and pericentric heterochromatin could ameliorate this situation and allow for full expression (the compartment model; ![]()
|
The correlation between the reduction of lt transcription in the imaginal discs and the severity of variegation in the eye, salivary gland, and Malpighian tubules for the ltG10, ltX2, and ltX13 alleles suggests a common factor influencing both phenotypes. According to our model, this correlation reflects the importance of the quantity of the displaced subregion of heterochromatin to heterochromatic gene expression throughout development. Cytological analyses of the lt-variegating rearrangements indicated that the lt gene-containing heterochromatic block was smaller for the ltG10 chromosome than for the ltX2 and ltX13 chromosomes (that were not distinguishable from each other cytologically), consistent with the more severe effect of ltG10 on gene expression (![]()
The model we propose to explain the developmental change in the effects of chromosome rearrangements on heterochromatic gene expression bears similarity to the transvection effects model of ![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
The relationship between position effect variegation of euchromatic and heterochromatic genes:
It should be informative to study the properties of variegating alleles of other genes in order to gain further insight into chromatin behavior during development. Expression analyses of variegating genes conducted at the cellular level in multiple tissues at different stages of development have been performed for only one euchromatic gene (![]()
![]()
The analyses of PEV of hsp70-lacZ, lt, and cta suggest that heterochromatin formation is more dynamic during development than would have been predicted based upon early studies. Our conclusion that variegation of the lt and cta genes is established during differentiation is consistent with the results of ![]()
Previous studies have shown that heterochromatic genes require a heterochromatic environment for their normal expression (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
We thank J. EISSENBERG, S. HENIKOFF, R. LEVIS, R. WRIGHT, and members of our laboratory for comments on the manuscript. We are grateful to G. SCHUBIGER for the use of his microscope and for suggestions, and to D. DUNCAN for providing an in situ hybridization protocol for larval tissues. This work was supported by National Science Foundation grant MCB9506916 to B.T.W. and American Cancer Society postdoctoral grant PF-3821 to K.S.W.
Manuscript received January 3, 1998; Accepted for publication March 30, 1998.
| LITERATURE CITED |
|---|
APARICIO, O. M. and D. E. GOTTSCHLING, 1994 Overcoming telomeric silencing: a transactivator competes to establish gene expression in a cell cycle-dependent way. Genes Dev. 8(10):1133-1146
BAKER, W. K., 1963 Genetic control of pigment differentiation in somatic cells. Am. Zool. 3:57-69.
BECKER, H. J., 1961 Untersuchungen zur Wirkung des Heterochromatins auf die Genmanifestierung bei Drosophila melanogaster. Verh. Dtsch. Zool. Ges. 1960: 283291.
BOYD, L., E. O'TOOLE, and C. S. THUMMEL, 1991 Patterns of E74A RNA and protein expression at the onset of metamorphosis in Drosophila.. Development 112:981-995[Abstract].
CSINK, A. K. and S. HENIKOFF, 1996 Genetic modification of heterochromatic association and nuclear organization in Drosophila.. Nature 381:529-531[Medline].
DERNBURG, A. F., K. W. BROMAN, J. C. FUNG, W. F. MARSHALL, and J. PHILIPS et al., 1996 Perturbation of nuclear architecture by long-distance chromosome interactions. Cell 85:745-759[Medline].
DEVLIN, R. H., B. B. BINGHAM, and B. T. WAKIMOTO, 1990 The organization and expression of the light gene, a heterochromatic gene of D. melanogaster.. Genetics 125:129-140[Abstract].
DORN, R., S. HEYMANN, R. LINDIGKEIT, and G. REUTER, 1986 Suppressor mutations of position-effect variegation in Drosophila melanogaster affecting chromatin properties. Chromosoma 93:398-403.
EBERL, D., B. J. DUYF, and A. H. HILLIKER, 1993 The role of heterochromatin in the expression of a heterochromatic gene, the rolled gene of Drosophila melanogaster.. Genetics 134:277-292[Abstract].
EDGAR, B. A. and P. H. O'FARRELL, 1989 Genetic control of cell division patterns in the Drosophila embryo. Cell 57:177-187[Medline].
FANTI, L., M. BERLOCO, and S. PIMPINELLI, 1994 Carnitine suppression of position effect variegation in Drosophila melanogaster.. Mol. Gen. Genet. 244:588-594[Medline].
GOLIC, M. M. and K. G. GOLIC, 1996 A quantitative measure of the mitotic pairing of alleles in Drosophila melanogaster and the influence of structural heterozygosity. Genetics 143:385-400[Abstract].
GRIGLIATTI, T., 1991 Position-effect variegationan assay for nonhistone chromosomal proteins and chromatin assembly and modifying factors, pp. 588625 in Functional Organization of the Nucleus: A Laboratory Guide. Methods in Cell Biology, Vol. 35, edited by B. A. HAMKALO and S. C. R. ELGIN. Academic Press, San Diego.
HESSLER, A. Y., 1958 V-type position effects at the light locus in Drosophila melanogaster.. Genetics 43:395-403
HOWE, M., P. DIMITRI, M. BERLOCO, and B. T. WAKIMOTO, 1995 Cis-effects of heterochromatin on heterochromatic and euchromatic gene activity in Drosophila melanogaster.. Genetics 140:1033-1045[Abstract].
JANNING, W., 1970 Bestimmung des heterochromatisierungsstadiums beim white-positionseffekt mittels rontgeninduzierter mitotischer rekombination in der augenanlage von Drosophila melanogaster.. Mol. Gen. Genet. 107:128-149[Medline].
KIM, N., J. KIM, P. DONGKOOK, C. ROSEN, and D. DORSETT et al., 1996 Structure and expression of wild-type and suppressible alleles of the Drosophila purple gene. Genetics 142:1157-1168[Abstract].
LEWIS, E. B., 1950 The phenomenon of position effect. Adv. Genet. 3:73-115.
LU, B. Y., C. P. BISHOP, and J. C. EISSENBERG, 1996 Developmental timing and tissue specificity of heterochromatin-mediated silencing. EMBO J. 15:1323-1332[Medline].
MARTIN, D. I. K. and E. WHITELAW, 1996 The vagaries of variegating transgenes. BioEssays 18:919-923[Medline].
MARTINEZ-BALBAS, M. A., A. DEY, S. K. RABINDRAN, K. OZATO, and C. WU, 1995 Displacement of sequence-specific transcription factors from mitotic chromatin. Cell 83:29-38[Medline].
MILÁN, M., S. CAMPUZANO, and A. GARCÍA-BELLIDO, 1996 Cell cycling and patterned cell proliferation in the wing primordium of Drosophila. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 93:640-645
MILOT, E., J. STROUBOULIS, T. TRIMBORN, M. WIJGERDE, and E. DE BOER et al., 1996 Heterochromatin effects on the frequency and duration of LCR-mediated gene transcription. Cell 87:105-114[Medline].
MOORE, G. D., D. A. SINCLAIR, and T. A. GRIGLIATTI, 1983 Histone gene multiplicity and position effect variegation in Drosophila melanogaster.. Genetics 105:327-344
MOTTUS, R., R. REEVES, and T. A. GRIGLIATTI, 1980 Butyrate suppression of position-effect variegation in Drosophila melanogaster.. Mol. Gen. Genet. 178:465-469[Medline].
MULLER, H. J., 1930 Types of visible variations induced by X-rays in Drosophila. J. Genet. 22:299-335.
O'FARRELL, P. H., B. A. EDGAR, D. LAKICH, and C. F. LEHNER, 1989 Directing cell division during development. Science 246:635-640
PARKS, S. and E. WIESCHAUS, 1991 The Drosophila gastrulation gene concertina encodes a G
-like protein. Cell 64:447-458[Medline].
PILLUS, L., and M. GRUNSTEIN, 1995 Chromatin structure and epigenetic regulation in yeast, pp. 123146 in Chromatin Structure and Gene Expression, edited by S. C. R. ELGIN. IRL Press, New York.
REUTER, G., R. DORN, and H. J. HOFFMANN, 1982 Butyrate sensitive suppressor of position effect variegation mutants in Drosophila melanogaster.. Mol. Gen. Genet. 188:480-485[Medline].
REUTER, G. and P. SPIERER, 1992 Position effect variegation and chromatin proteins. BioEssays 14:605-612[Medline].
SLOBODYANYUK, S. Y. and O. L. SEROV, 1987 Stage and organ specificity of the degree of variegation of the 6-phosphogluconate dehydrogenase gene in Drosophila melanogaster.. Mol. Gen. Genet. 208:329-334.
TALBERT, P. B., C. D. S. LECIEL, and S. HENIKOFF, 1994 Modification of the Drosophila heterochromatic mutation brown-Dominant by linkage alterations. Genetics 136:559-571[Abstract].
TAUTZ, D. and C. PFEIFLE, 1989 A nonradioactive in situ hybridization method for the localization of specific RNAs in Drosophila embryos reveals translational control of the segmentation gene hunchback.. Chromosoma 98:81-85[Medline].
TOBLER, J. E., J. J. YIM, E. H. GRELL, and K. B. JACOBSON, 1979 Developmental changes of sepiatpterin synthase activity associated with a variegated purple gene in Drosophila melanogaster.. Biochem. Genet. 17:197-206[Medline].
WAKIMOTO, B. T. and M. G. HEARN, 1990 The effects of chromosome rearrangements on the expression of heterochromatic genes in Chromosome 2L of D. melanogaster.. Genetics 125:141-154[Abstrac










