Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Molecular and Cellular Biology, September 2000, p. 6935-6944, Vol. 20, No. 18
Howard Hughes Medical Institute, NSF Center
for Biological Timing, Department of Biology, Brandeis University,
Waltham, Massachusetts 02454,1 and
Department of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital,
Boston, Massachusetts 021152
Received 31 January 2000/Returned for modification 13 March
2000/Accepted 8 June 2000
We report the identification and characterization of a new
Drosophila clock-regulated gene, takeout
(to). to is a member of a novel gene family and
is implicated in circadian control of feeding behavior. Its gene
expression is down-regulated in all of the clock mutants tested. In
wild-type flies, to mRNA exhibits daily cycling expression
but with a novel phase, delayed relative to those of the
better-characterized clock mRNAs, period and
timeless. The E-box-containing sequence in the
to promoter shows impressive similarities with those of
period and timeless. However, our results suggest that the E box is not involved in the amplitude and phase of
the transcriptional cycling of to. The circadian delayed
transcriptional phase is therefore most likely the result of indirect
regulation through unknown transcription factors.
Circadian (~24-h) behavioral and
physiological rhythms are manifest in virtually all organisms. Our
understanding of the underlying molecular rhythms comes largely from
genetic investigations of five different classes of organisms: plants
(28), photosynthetic bacteria (17),
Neurospora (8), Drosophila
(32), and mice (44, 47). Recent progress has
reinforced the negative feedback regulation of transcription,
originally proposed for Drosophila (14, 14a, 15a,
50), as a central theme of circadian rhythms in these organisms
(9). In particular, Drosophila clocks display conservation with mammalian clocks. At the sequence level, many Drosophila clock components have one or more mammalian
homologs, which are suggested to play similar roles in mammalian
rhythms. This further validates Drosophila as an animal
model system for the study of circadian rhythms.
The first Drosophila clock component identified was the
period (per) gene (3, 20, 31).
Biochemical and genetic data suggested a transcriptional autoregulatory
feedback loop involving PER (14, 14a, 15a, 50). The second
essential pacemaker component, timeless (tim),
was subsequently identified, and both per and tim
reciprocally autoregulate at the transcriptional level (29, 39). TIM dimerizes with PER (10, 24, 51), and the
interaction is suggested to be important for the posttranscriptional
regulation and nuclear entry of both proteins (35, 48).
Although their precise biochemical functions are not certain, PER and
TIM probably function directly in the negative regulation of
transcription (7, 22). In contrast, the biochemical
functions of the recently identified clock genes Clock
(Clk) and cycle (cyc) are apparent from their primary sequences (1, 7, 34). Both CLK and CYC
belong to the basic helix-loop-helix (bHLH)-PAS (Per-Arnt-Sim) transcription factor family, members of which are involved in a wide
range of other life processes. For example, the mammalian ARNT-AHR
heterodimer is involved in xenobiotic resistance (37), and
the Drosophila SIM-TANGO heterodimer is involved in
embryonic development of the central nervous system midline cells
(41).
In the Drosophila mutants Clkjrk and
cyc01 (1, 34), the rate of
transcription of the two major clock components, per and
tim, is very low. Both mammalian and Drosophila
CLK and CYC were found to bind the Drosophila per 21-bp
E-box-containing sequence in yeast one-hybrid assays (7,
11). Binding was also shown by DNA mobility shift assays
(23). CLK-CYC was also found to activate transcription from
promoters containing four copies of the 18-bp E-box-containing sequence
from both the per and tim promoters in
Drosophila cell culture, and the activation was dramatically reduced by an E-box central 2-bp mutation (7).
Recent studies have suggested that the CLK-CYC heterodimer may directly
regulate circadian output genes as well as central clock genes. The
neuropeptide arginine vasopressin is synthesized and released in a
circadian manner from suprachiasmatic nucleus neurons. It is involved
in peripheral salt and water balance (38) and also has some
distinct effects within the central nervous system (16). The
vasopressin peptide rhythm was found to be transcriptionally regulated
(6). More recently, the vasopressin mRNA rhythm was shown to
be abolished in Clock/Clock mice (18). An
E-box-containing sequence in its promoter was found to be necessary for
the CLK-BMAL1-mediated transcriptional activation in cell culture,
suggesting that CLK-BMAL1 may directly regulate vasopressin transcription (18). Another output gene, dbp,
which encodes a basic-leucine zipper transcription factor
(25), is down-regulated in Clock/Clock mice, and
CLK is found in a protein complex that binds to an E box within the
dbp first intron (31a). There is therefore strong
evidence that the CLK-BMAL1-E-box complex is relevant to output gene
as well as clock gene transcription (11, 18). This indicates
that CLK-BMAL1 acts directly on this E box.
In this paper, we report the identification, characterization, and
transcriptional regulation of a novel clock-regulated output gene,
takeout (to). to was identified
through a subtractive hybridization that enriched genes differentially
expressed in cyc01 and wild-type flies.
to mRNA levels are undetectable in
cyc01 and Clkjrk mutant
flies, and to transcription cycles with a delayed phase compared to that of per and tim. Functional
analysis (36) shows that TO is involved in an output pathway
which conveys temporal and food status information to feeding-relevant
metabolisms and activities. Our data here suggest that a prominent E
box in the to promoter is not involved in its temporal
transcriptional regulation. Therefore, there is most likely an indirect
regulation by CLK and CYC which gives rise to the delayed to
transcriptional phase relative to per and tim.
Fly strains.
The strain of wild-type flies used was
Canton-S.
cyc01;ry506,per01,yw;tim01,per01;tim01;ry506,
and yw;Clkjrk flies were used for
analysis. Genomic DNA of the flies was tested with PCR for the presence
of to.
Constructs and transgenic flies.
The lacZ
constructs were generated by inserting SalI/SalI
or XhoI/XhoI promoter fragments (Fig.
1A) into the XhoI-cut
pBglII-lacZ reporter vector (11). The
to21-lacZ XhoI/XhoI insert sequence is
CCGCTCGAGGCAGCTCACGTGATGGAACTCGAGCGG, and the
to21e-lacZ sequence is
CCGCTCGAGGCAGCTCAgcTGATGGAACTCGAGCGG (lowercase letters indicate mutation changes). Likewise, the per21-lacZ
XhoI/XhoI insert sequence is
CCGCTCGAGCCGCCGCTCACGTGGCGAACTCTCGAG, and the
per21e-lacZ sequence is
CCGCTCGAGCCGCCGCTCAgcTGGCGAACTCTCGAG. to80x3-lacZ
was generated by synthesizing the 80 bp around the E box with
SalI on one side and XhoI on the other. Since
SalI and XhoI have compatible ends, multimers of
the 80 bp were generated by cutting, washing, ligating, and then
cutting with both restriction enzymes. Trimers were selected after
running on an agarose gel and then ligated to the XhoI-cut pBglII-lacZ reporter vector. The per 69x3-lacZ
construct was made likewise.
0270-7306/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
takeout, a Novel Drosophila
Gene under Circadian Clock Transcriptional Regulation

![]()
ABSTRACT
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
![]()
INTRODUCTION
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
![]()
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References

View larger version (34K):
[in a new window]
FIG. 1.
lacZ reporter yeast constructs (A) and
luciferase reporter constructs and flies (B). Phs, heat
shock promoter.
2-3]/+.
PCR-based cDNA subtraction and screening.
Wild-type and
cyc01 mutant flies of the same age were
entrained at 25°C in a 12-h light-12-h dark (LD) cycle for 2 days
before being collected at zeitgeber time 15. (ZT15; zeitgeber time is the time in hours in a 12-h light-2-h dark cycle, where ZT0 is lights
on and ZT12 is lights off). Frozen heads were isolated, and total
RNA was extracted using TRIzol reagent (GibcoBRL).
Poly(A)+ RNA was prepared using the PolyATract mRNA
isolation system (Promega). cDNAs were prepared from 2 µg of the
poly(A)+ mRNA from each sample and were hybridized
according to the Clontech protocol. Conditions of the PCR selection
were optimized by monitoring the subtraction efficiency by measuring
the level of controls: tim, which is rare and differentially
expressed in the two subtraction samples; and rhodopsin,
which is abundant and equally expressed. The level of the controls in
the subtracted and unsubtracted PCR products was measured by slot blot
hybridization. Subtracted PCR products were then cloned into
NotI-digested pBluescript II KS+ and used to transform
Escherichia coli DH5
(UltraMAX DH5
-FT competent cells;
GibcoBRL). Transformation efficiency of 2 × 107
CFU/µg was obtained. Clones were randomly picked, and their plasmid inserts were amplified by PCR. The PCR products were transferred to
HyBond-N+ membranes using a dot blot minifold (Schleicher & Schuell,
Inc.). The membranes were hybridized to 32P- or
fluorescein-labeled subtracted and unsubtracted PCR products. Clones
that showed substantial differential expression in the two populations
of probes were further examined on Northern blots.
RNA extraction and analyses.
For Northern blots, total and
poly(A)+ RNAs were prepared as described above.
One-microgram samples of poly(A)+ mRNA were loaded on
formaldehyde gels and then transferred onto nylon membranes.
32P-labeled probes were prepared by random priming of
gel-purified fragments using Prime-It II (Stratagene). Prehybridization
(~1 h) and hybridization (~16 h) were performed at 65°C in 10 ml
of Church buffer (0.5 M NaHPO4 [pH 7.2], 7% sodium
dodecyl sulfate, 1% bovine serum albumin, 1 mM EDTA). The membranes
were washed in washing buffer (0.2× SSC [1× SSC is 0.15 M NaCl plus
0.015 M sodium citrate] 0.1% SDS) twice briefly at room temperature and then twice at 60°C for 20 min before being exposed to film either
at room temperature or at
80°C with an intensifying screen, depending on the strength of the signals. RNase protection assays were
performed as described by Marrus et al. (27). The RNA probe protects nucleotide (nt) 529 to 839 of the cDNA region.
mRNA in situ hybridization. Flies were entrained to LD cycles. Frozen sections (10 µm) of adult heads and bodies were cut, and in situ hybridization was performed as described by Hasan (14b). Digoxigenin-labeled riboprobes were prepared from the full-length to and per cDNAs and were hydrolyzed prior to use. All hybridization and washes were performed at 65°C.
Genomic and cDNA library screening.
A Drosophila
genomic library in EMBL3 was generously provided by Ron Blackman. Two
Drosophila adult head cDNA libraries were screened. Seven
clones were sequenced, and a full-length sequence of 1,064 nt was
obtained. While this report was under review, the Drosophila
genome sequence was assembled and annotated. The to genomic
sequence is confirmed by genomic scaffold accession number AE003751,
the CG11853 gene. The
ZAPII cDNA library generated with half
oligo(dT) and half random primers was generously provided by Thomas
Schwarz; the directionally cloned
EXLX(
) cDNA library generated
with oligo(dT) primers alone was generously provided by Bruce Hamilton
(30). Molecular techniques were performed using standard
protocols (2).
Nuclear run-on assay. Nuclear run-on assays were performed as described by So and Rosbash (40). PCR products covering the full-length genomic region (~1.4 kb) were used as probe.
Yeast one-hybrid assay. The yeast one-hybrid assay was performed as described elsewhere (7), using the constructs described above and in Fig. 1A.
Luminescence monitoring and analysis. Luminescence monitoring was performed as described elsewhere (5). The readings were taken every 30 min, and data were analyzed according to the I-and-A software documentation (30a). The food was prepared with 1% Bacto Agar, 5% sucrose, and 15 mM luciferin.
| |
RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
to is a novel clock-regulated gene. To identify novel genes involved in circadian rhythms, we performed a PCR-based cDNA subtraction and screening (Clontech; see Materials and Methods) whereby poly(A)+ RNA from heads of cycle null mutant (cyc01) flies was subtracted from wild-type RNA. We speculated that genes regulated by this transcription factor are inessential and that some of them are related to circadian behavior. Therefore, the aim was to find genes under circadian regulation by identifying genes differentially expressed in wild-type and cyc01 mutant flies. After screening 108 subtracted clones, we identified three different novel genes that are down-regulated in cyc01 flies. Here we present the cloning, characterization, and transcriptional regulation of one of them, to.
to mRNA expression is down-regulated in cyc01 flies and in all other circadian mutants tested (Fig. 2A). Its level is undetectable in cyc01 and Clkjrk mutants, as measured by RNase protection and Northern blotting. In contrast, there is detectable to mRNA in all other genotypes tested, though it is substantially lower than that in wild-type flies. As there is little or no functional CLK-CYC heterodimer in the cyc01 and Clkjrk backgrounds, the simplest way to explain this observation is that to is directly regulated by CLK and CYC. The higher to transcription in per01, tim01, and per01 tim01 double-mutant flies is presumably due to residual functional CLK-CYC heterodimer in these backgrounds (22; L. Sarov-Blat, unpublished data). per01 flies reproducibly showed a higher level of to expression than tim01, indicating that PER and TIM may differentially regulate to expression. However, the mechanism underlying this difference is still unknown. When mRNA levels at different time points were measured, to did not show a significant cycling pattern in the clock mutants tested (data not shown).
|
to mRNA levels cycle with a novel phase in the head. In wild-type flies, to mRNA levels exhibit a daily fluctuation in both cycling LD and constant dark conditions (Fig. 2B to D). The cycling in free-running conditions indicates that this property is a function of the endogenous clock rather than light driven. The amplitude (peak-to-trough ratio) of cycling is about 5, significantly smaller than those of per (~10) and tim (>10) mRNA expression. Interestingly, from several Northern blot analyses and RNase protection assays, the mRNA levels peak at about ZT17 to ZT20, a 2- to 5-h phase delay with respect to the per and tim cycling profiles.
Since to expression is down-regulated in the clock mutants, it was of interest to learn if the regulation is directly via CLK and CYC. To determine the localization of to expression, mRNA in situ hybridization to fly head sections was performed. For comparison, clock-expressing cells in the brain were also visualized by assaying tim expression as well as Clk and cyc expression. The in situ results showed very similar expression patterns at each gene's high time points (Fig. 3A). All four genes are expressed throughout the brain cortex, especially in the region between the optic lobe and the central complex, where the lateral neurons are located. They are also expressed in photoreceptor cells, although the to photoreceptor signal is generally lower than that in the brain cortex. However, to was not observed in other tim-expressing cells such as the glial cells in the optic lobe, the central body in the central complex, and the proboscis (data not shown). In general, the tim expression pattern is very similar to that of Clk and cyc. In bodies, the to expression pattern is a subset of the tim expression pattern (36). The data here suggest that to is expressed in a significant subset of clock-expressing cells in the head (see Discussion). However, due to the low resolution of mRNA in situ hybridization, we cannot rule out the possibility that to is expressed in cells adjacent to clock cells.
|
to is a member of a novel family. The full-length sequence of the 1,064-nt to gene was obtained through screening of two Drosophila adult head cDNA libraries (see Materials and Methods). The sequence was later confirmed with the expressed sequence tag (EST) clones derived from an adult Drosophila head cDNA library (BDGP/HHMI Drosophila EST project; accession numbers AI403166 for the 5' sequence and AI107005 for the 3' sequence). A BLAST search against the nonredundant database using the open reading frame indicates that to is a novel gene. It has sequence similarity with a Drosophila gene called 0.9kb (26) (see Discussion) and a group of EST clones from insects (Fig. 3B). They form a novel protein family with approximately 250 amino acid residues. Sequence similarity extends throughout the entire protein, with two stretches of highly conserved regions defined as motifs 1 and 2. These regions were used during database searching as criteria for defining family members. Family members have been found only in insects, and sequence analysis suggests a ligand-binding function (see Discussion).
to mRNA cycling is transcriptionally regulated.
To
determine the level of regulation of to mRNA cycling, the in
vivo transcription rate was measured by a nuclear run-on assay. The
results show that the to transcription rate exhibits a daily fluctuation (Fig. 4A and B). The peak of
transcription is about 3 to 4 h in advance of the mRNA peak (Fig.
2B to D), as expected for a gene regulated at the level of
transcription (40). Consistent with the mRNA comparisons,
the transcription profile of to is delayed by about 3 to
4 h with respect to the well-characterized per and
tim profiles (40). This is most apparent by
comparing the rising phase of transcription: per and
tim transcription starts to rise at about ZT5
(40), whereas to transcription starts at about
ZT9.
|
to promoter sequence contains an E box similar to those
of the per and tim promoters.
The
to promoter sequence revealed a remarkable sequence identity
with the E-box region of the per and tim
promoters (Fig. 5A). In particular, there
is a 9-bp sequence identity around this E-box sequence. The other E-box
sequences known in circadian genes usually share the 6-bp core sequence
or the core sequence with an additional A (CACGTGA),
which has shown to be strongly preferred by the mammalian
BMAL1-MOP4 bHLH-PAS transcription factor heterodimer (15).
In fact, the to and per promoters share 13 out of
the 18 bp shown to be sufficient to drive transcriptional activation in
S2 cells (7). This is also consistent with the fact that to mRNA is undetectable in cyc01 and
Clkjrk mutants (Fig. 2A), suggesting that
CLK-CYC regulates to transcription directly. This would be
similar to per and tim transcriptional regulation, despite the phase difference.
|
|
|
The E box is not necessary for to transcription in S2
cells.
To provide yet another test of the to E box, we
transformed S2 cells with a luciferase reporter gene driven by the
3.0-kb to promoter (to-luc). Luminescence was
measured in the presence or absence of cotransfected CLK. There was a
3-fold induction of expression of to-luc by the
Clk construct, much less than the 60- and 94-fold induction
from the per and tim promoter fragments, respectively (Fig. 8A). Furthermore, an
E-box deletion from the 3.0-kb to promoter did not diminish
the level of transcriptional activation, unlike the E-box deletions
from the per and tim promoters (data not shown).
The results indicate that the to E box may not contribute to
clock-regulated to transcription, suggesting that to transcription requires factors other than CLK and CYC.
|
The E box is not necessary for to transcription in
vivo.
To test the in vivo role of the E box in to
transcriptional cycling, transgenic flies carrying to-luc
were compared with a 21-bp deletion version that removes the E box
(to
E-luc) [Fig. 1B]. Consistent with the S2 cell data
(Fig. 8A), to
E-luc flies also showed cycling of
luminescence with amplitude and phase comparable to that of
to-luc (Fig. 8B). This indicates that the E box is not
required and that additional elements outside this 21-bp region are
sufficient for cycling expression.
| |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The amino acid sequence of the TO protein indicates that to is a member of a novel gene family, found only in insects. Although the search shown here failed to reveal any family members with a known biochemical function, a less restricted search identified more distant insect relatives (36). These include two hydrophobic ligand-binding proteins: hemolymph juvenile hormone-binding protein (45) and JP29 (49) from moths. The two ligand-binding proteins share homology throughout the complete sequence with the TO family (36). However, they lack the two motifs that define the family (Fig. 3B), implying that they form a superfamily with TO. The shared biochemical function of the superfamily is presumably to bind a hydrophobic ligand. However, the different family members may bind different ligands.
The to ligand is unknown, but our recent data suggest that it may contribute to feeding-related functions. This is based on the to expression pattern in a few relevant body tissues. A to mutant strain also shows an unusual behavioral response and dies rapidly when subjected to starvation conditions. Finally, to mRNA levels increase in response to starvation, indicating that to expression is regulated by food availability as well as by the circadian pacemaker (36).
The only other family member with some relationship to circadian rhythms is the 0.9kb gene, initially identified as a gene adjacent to the per locus (3, 31). 0.9kb mRNA levels rise shortly before eclosion and decrease within a few hours after eclosion (26). As flies eclose under circadian clock control, the transcript is indirectly under circadian regulation but with only a single burst of expression at the beginning of the adult stage (26). This prior relationship with circadian rhythms therefore may be fortuitous. Preliminary assays on two other Drosophila EST clones in the to family also showed no obvious daily cycling expression by Northern blot analysis (data not shown). Therefore, the to family members may be regulated differently as well as bind different ligands and contribute to different physiological processes.
to cycling is due in large part to transcriptional
regulation, as previously described for per and
tim. However, the cycling apparently does not require a
prominent cis-acting E box, unlike the transcription of
per and tim. It is surprising that the
to 80-bp and per 69-bp E-box-containing
sequences, which have such striking nucleotide identities, are
recognized so differently: the per 69-bp sequence is
sufficient to drive robust transcriptional cycling, whereas the
to counterpart is not (Fig. 5A). The to 80-bp fragment may be missing a separate sequence element required for CLK-CYC binding and activity, it may contain adjacent sequences that
are inhibitory to strong binding and activity, or it may be missing an
elusive E-box feature. The last possibility is consistent with
indications that the core E-box sequence is necessary but not
sufficient for potent binding of the mammalian CLK-containing heterodimer (15). The absence of a separate sequence element is consistent with experiments indicating that a single per
18-bp E-box sequence is not sufficient for cycling reporter gene
expression in flies (P. Hardin, personal communication). We cannot
exclude the possibility that the to 80-bp region contributes
more directly to spatial or developmental regulation, as the
per 69-bp region alone has shown to be sufficient to mediate
proper developmental and spatial expression (13). But the
weak CLK-CYC binding and activity suggests that the to E box
is not a bona fide, relevant sequence important for to
regulation. Moreover, to
E-luc cycling is identical to
to cycling.
There is the complication that a very modest cycling amplitude from the to 80-bp fragment is observed. This might reflect a cryptic, cycling (non-E-box) element within this 80 bp. The poor activity from the per 18-bp fragment may also reflect the lack of this element. Although there are some additional sequence similarities between the to 80-bp and per 69-bp fragments, we have been unable to define any contribution from non-E-box elements to the circadian transcriptional oscillations of to (data not shown). This points to a simple conclusion: the weak cycling amplitude from the to 80-bp element is irrelevant, making little or no contribution to circadian transcription. This hypothesis implies that the key cis-acting circadian elements lie elsewhere within the 3.0-kb promoter fragment, a conclusion consistent with our experiments (Fig. 8B). These elements may even include another, more relevant E box. However, a sequence comparison of the entire 3.0-kb to promoter (outside the 80 bp) with the per 69 bp also does not show any striking identities, including the lack of any additional E-box elements within the entire to genomic region (data not shown). These considerations suggest that to transcription is regulated by sequence elements different from those that govern per and tim transcription and only indirectly by CLK and CYC.
In the Drosophila system, the most dramatic phase differences are between the RNA profiles of Clk mRNA and cryptochrome mRNA on the one hand and those of per and tim on the other (2a, 43). Although it is not certain how this antiphase regulation takes place, it has been suggested that there is significant similarity with the canonical clock gene model but that PER and TIM might be positive regulators of Clk mRNA cycling (23). As they are negative regulators of their own transcription, this would explain the antiphase relationship. The much more modest phase delay of to transcription has not been previously reported for any clock gene or clock output gene. Our negative E-box results suggest a different explanation for the few-hour phase difference between per transcription and to transcription than for the antiphase genes, namely, that CLK-CYC regulation is entirely indirect and that there is another transcription factor or perhaps even more complicated regulatory features interposed between CLK and CYC on the one hand and the to promoter on the other.
Most clock-related RNA cycling previously reported exhibits a phase similar to that of the canonical per and tim patterns (33, 46). This includes output genes that appear directly hard-wired to the clock machinery, i.e., that are directly regulated by the CLK-CYC heterodimer or its mammalian equivalent, indistinguishably from the two canonical clock genes. In mammals, these include vasopressin and the transcription factor gene dbp, which then regulates a secondary set of output genes (21, 25, 31b). In flies, the transcription factor gene Vrille is regulated by CLK-CYC and probably regulates important downstream output genes (4). The Vrille-encoded protein or another putative transcription factor (e.g., see reference 33) could regulate to transcription. The time needed to accumulate active transcription factor would account for the lag between clock gene transcription and to transcription. The identification of the key cis-acting regions responsible for to transcription should help support this model and identify this putative clock-regulated transcription factor.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
We thank all members of Rosbash laboratory for helpful discussions and critical readings of the manuscript.
This work was supported by grants from the NSF Center for Biological Timing and the National Institutes of Health. R.A. was supported by an HHMI Postdoctoral Research Fellowship for Physicians and a Burroughs Wellcome Career Award.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Howard Hughes Medical Institute, NSF Center for Biological Timing, Department of Biology, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA 02454. Phone: (781) 736-3161. Fax: (781) 736-3164. E-mail: rosbash{at}brandeis.edu.
Present address: Hoffmann-La Roche, Inc., Nutley, NJ 07110.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Allada, R., N. E. White, W. V. So, J. C. Hall, and M. Rosbash. 1998. A mutant Drosophila homolog of mammalian Clock disrupts circadian rhythms and transcription of period and timeless. Cell 93:791-804[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 2. | Ausubel, F. M., R. Brent, R. E. Kingston, D. D. Moore, J. G. Seidman, J. A. Smith, and K. Struhl (ed.). 1994. Current protocols in molecular biology. Greene Publishing Associates, Brooklyn, N.Y. |
| 2a. |
Bae, K.,
C. Lee,
D. Sidote,
K. Y. Chuang, and I. Edery.
1998.
Circadian regulation of a Drosophila homolog of the mammalian Clock gene: PER and TIM function as positive regulators.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
18:6142-6151 |
| 3. | Bargiello, T. A., F. R. Jackson, and M. W. Young. 1984. Restoration of circadian behavioural rhythms by gene transfer in Drosophila. Nature 312:752-754[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 4. | Blau, J., and M. W. Young. 1999. Cycling vrille expression is required for a functional Drosophila clock. Cell 99:661-671[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 5. | Brandes, C., J. D. Plautz, R. Stanewsky, C. F. Jamison, M. Straume, K. V. Wood, S. A. Kay, and J. C. Hall. 1996. Novel features of Drosophila period transcription revealed by real-time luciferase reporting. Neuron 16:687-692[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 6. | Carter, D. A., and D. Murphy. 1992. Nuclear mechanisms mediate rhythmic changes in vasopressin mRNA expression in the rat suprachiasmatic nucleus. Mol. Brain Res. 12:315-321[Medline]. |
| 7. |
Darlington, T. K.,
K. Wager-Smith,
M. F. Ceriani,
D. Staknis,
N. Gekakis,
T. D. L. Steeves,
C. J. Weitz,
J. S. Takahashi, and S. A. Kay.
1998.
Closing the circadian loop: CLOCK-induced transcription of its own inhibitors per and tim.
Science
280:1599-1603 |
| 8. | Dunlap, J. C. 1996. Genetics and molecular analysis of circadian rhythms. Annu. Rev. Genet. 30:579-601[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 9. | Dunlap, J. C. 1999. Molecular bases for circadian clocks. Cell 96:271-290[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 10. |
Gekakis, N.,
L. Saez,
A.-M. Delahaye-Brown,
M. P. Myers,
A. Sehgal,
M. W. Young, and C. J. Weitz.
1995.
Isolation of timeless by PER protein interactions: defective interaction between timeless protein and long-period mutant PERL.
Science
270:811-815 |
| 11. |
Gekakis, N.,
D. Staknis,
H. B. Nguyen,
C. F. Davis,
L. D. Wilsbacher,
D. P. King,
J. S. Takahashi, and C. J. Weitz.
1998.
Role of the CLOCK protein in the mammalian circadian mechanism.
Science
280:1564-1569 |
| 12. | Hao, H., D. L. Allen, and P. E. Hardin. 1997. A circadian enhancer mediates PER-dependent mRNA cycling in Drosophila melanogaster. Mol. Cell. Biol. 17:3687-3693[Abstract]. |
| 13. |
Hao, H.,
N. R. Glossop,
L. Lynos,
B. Morish,
Y. Cheng,
C. Helfrich-Forster, and P. E. Hardin.
1999.
The 69 bp circadian regulatory sequence (CRS) mediates per-like developmental, spatial, and circadian expression and behavioral rescue in Drosophila.
J. Neurosci.
19:987-994 |
| 14. | Hardin, P. E., J. C. Hall, and M. Rosbash. 1990. Feedback of the Drosophila period gene product on circadian cycling of its messenger RNA levels. Nature 343:536-540[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 14a. |
Hardin, P. E.,
J. C. Hall, and M. Rosbash.
1992.
Circadian oscillations in period gene mRNA levels are transcriptionally regulated.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
89:11711-11715 |
| 14b. |
Hasan, G.
1990.
Molecular cloning of an olfactory gene from Drosophila melanogaster.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
87:9037-9041 |
| 15. |
Hogenesch, J. B.,
Y.-Z. Gu,
S. Jain, and C. A. Bradfield.
1998.
The basic-helix-loop-helix-PAS orphan MOP3 forms transcriptionally active complexes with circadian and hypoxia factors.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
95:5474-5479 |
| 15a. | Huang, Z. J., I. Edery, and M. Rosbash. 1993. PAS is a dimerization domain common to Drosophila period and several transcription factors. Nature 364:259-262[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 16. | Ingram, C. D., R. K. Snowball, and R. Mihai. 1996. Circadian rhythms of neuronal activity in suprachiasmatic nucleus slices from the vasopressin-deficient Brattleboro rat. Neuroscience 75:635-641[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 17. |
Ishiura, M.,
S. Kutsuna,
S. Aoki,
H. Iwasaki,
C. R. Andersson,
A. Tanabe,
S. S. Golden,
C. H. Johnson, and T. Kondo.
1998.
Expression of a gene cluster kaiABC as a circadian feedback process in cyanobacteria.
Science
281:1519-1523 |
| 18. | Jin, X., L. P. Shearman, D. R. Weaver, M. J. Zylka, G. J. de Vries, and S. M. Reppert. 1999. A molecular mechanism regulating rhythmic output from the suprachiasmatic circadian clock. Cell 96:57-68[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 19. | Katzenberg, D., T. Young, L. Finn, L. Lin, D. P. King, J. S. Takahashi, and E. Mignot. 1998. A Clock polymorphism associated with human diurnal preference. Sleep 21:569-576[Medline]. |
| 20. |
Konopka, R. J., and S. Benzer.
1971.
Clock mutants of Drosophila melanogaster.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
68:2112-2116 |
| 21. | Lavery, D. J., L. Lopez-Molina, R. Margueron, F. Fleury-Olela, F. Conquet, U. Schibler, and C. Bonfils. 1999. Circadian expression of the steroid 15 alpha-hydroxylase (CYP2a4) and coumarin 7-hydroxylase (Cyp2a5) genes in mouse liver is regulated by the PAR leucine zipper transcription factor DBP. Mol. Biol. Cell 19:6488-6499. |
| 22. | Lee, C., K. Bae, and I. Edery. 1998. The Drosophila CLOCK protein undergoes daily rhythms in abundance, phosphorylation and interactions with the PER-TIM complex. Neuron 4:857-867. |
| 23. |
Lee, C.,
K. Bae, and I. Edery.
1999.
PER and TIM inhibit the DNA binding activity of a Drosophila CLOCK-CYC/dBMAL1 heterodimer without disrupting formation of the heterodimer: a basis for circadian transcription.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19:5316-5325 |
| 24. | Lee, C., V. Parikh, T. Itsukaichi, K. Bae, and I. Edery. 1996. Resetting the Drosophila clock by photic regulation of PER and a PER-TIM complex. Science 271:1740-1744[Abstract]. |
| 25. | Lopez-Molina, L., F. Conquet, M. Dubois-Dauphin, and U. Schibler. 1997. The DBP gene is expressed according to a circadian rhythm in the suprachiasmatic nucleus and influences circadian behavior. EMBO J. 16:6762-6771[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 26. |
Lorenz, L. J.,
J. C. Hall, and M. Rosbash.
1989.
Expression of a Drosophila mRNA is under circadian clock control during pupation.
Development
107:869-880 |
| 27. | Marrus, S. B., H. Zeng, and M. Rosbash. 1996. Effect of constant light and circadian entrainment of pers flies: evidence for light-mediated delay of the negative feedback loop in Drosophila. EMBO J. 15:6877-6886[Medline]. |
| 28. | Millar, A. J., and S. A. Kay. 1997. The genetics of phototransduction and circadian rhythms in Arabidopsis. Bioessays 19:209-214[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 29. |
Myers, M. P.,
K. Wager-Smith,
C. S. Wesley,
M. W. Young, and A. Sehgal.
1995.
Positional cloning and sequence analysis of the Drosophila clock gene timeless.
Science
270:805-808 |
| 30. | Palazzolo, M. J., B. A. Hamilton, D. Ding, C. H. Martin, D. A. Mead, R. C. Mierendorf, K. V. Raghavan, E. M. Meyerowitz, and H. D. Lipshitz. 1990. Phage lambda cDNA cloning vectors for subtractive hybridization, fusion protein expression and Cre-loxP automatic plasmid subcloning. Gene 88:25-36[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 30a. | Plautz, J. D., and S. A. Kay. 1999. Synchronous real-time reporting of multiple cellular events. Methods Cell Biol. 58:283-291[Medline]. |
| 31. | Reddy, P., W. A. Zehring, D. A. Wheeler, V. Pirrotta, C. Hadfield, J. C. Hall, and M. Rosbash. 1984. Molecular analysis of the period locus in Drosophila melanogaster and identification of a transcript involved in biological rhythms. Cell 38:701-710[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 31a. | Ripperger, J. A., L. P. Shearman, S. M. Reppert, and U. Schibler. 2000. CLOCK, an essential pacemaker component, controls expression of the circadian transcription factor DBP. Genes Dev. 6:679-689. |
| 31b. | Reppert, S. M., W. J. Schwartz, and G. R. Uhl. 1987. Arginine vasopressin: a novel peptide rhythm in cerebrospinal fluid. Trends Neurosci. 10:76-80. |
| 32. | Rosbash, M., R. Allada, M. E. Dembinska, W. Q. Guo, M. Le, S. B. Marrus, Z. Qian, J. E. Rutila, J. Yaglom, and H. Zeng. 1996. A Drosophila circadian clock, p. 265-278. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y. |
| 33. | Rouyer, F., M. Rachidi, C. Pikielny, and M. Rosbash. 1997. A new clock gene regulated by the circadian clock in the Drosophila head. EMBO J. 16:3944-3954[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 34. | Rutila, J. E., V. Suri, M. Le, W. V. So, M. Rosbash, and J. C. Hall. 1998. CYCLE is a second bHLH-PAS protein essential for circadian transcription of Drosophila period and timeless. Cell 93:805-814[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 35. | Saez, L., and M. W. Young. 1996. Regulation of nuclear entry of the Drosophila clock proteins PERIOD and TIMELESS. Neuron 17:911-920[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 36. | Sarov-Blat, L., W. V. So, L. Liu, and M. Rosbash. 2000. The Drosophila takeout gene is a novel link between circadian rhythms and feeding behavior. Cell 101:647-656[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 37. |
Schmidt, J. V.,
G. H. T. Su,
J. K. Reddy,
M. C. Simon, and C. A. Bradfield.
1996.
Characterization of a murine Ahr null allele: involvement of the Ah receptor in hepatic growth and development.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
93:6731-6736 |
| 38. | Schrier, R. W. 1985. Vasopressin. Raven Press, New York, N.Y. |
| 39. |
Sehgal, A.,
A. Rothenfluh-Hilfiker,
M. Hunter-Ensor,
Y. Chen,
M. Myers, and M. W. Young.
1995.
Circadian oscillations and autoregulation of timeless RNA.
Science
270:808-810 |
| 40. | So, W. V., and M. Rosbash. 1997. Post-transcriptional regulation contributes to Drosophila clock gene mRNA cycling. EMBO J. 16:7146-7155[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 41. | Sonnenfeld, M., M. Ward, G. Nystrom, J. Mosher, S. Stahal, and S. Crews. 1997. The Drosophila tango gene encodes a bHLH-PAS protein that is orthologous to mammalian Arnt and controls CNS midline and tracheal development. Development 124:4571-4582[Abstract]. |
| 42. | Stanewsky, R., C. F. Jamison, J. D. Plautz, S. A. Kay, and J. C. Hall. 1997. Multiple circadian-regulated elements contribute to cycling period gene expression in Drosophila. EMBO J. 16:5006-5018[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 43. | Stanewsky, R., M. Kaneko, P. Emery, M. Beretta, K. Wager-Smith, S. A. Kay, M. Rosbash, and J. C. Hall. 1998. The cryb mutation identifies cryptochrome as a circadian photoreceptor in Drosophila. Cell 95:681-692[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 44. | Tei, H., H. Okamura, Y. Shigeyoshi, C. Fukuhara, R. Ozawa, M. Hirose, and Y. Sakaki. 1997. Circadian oscillation of a mammalian homologue of the Drosophila period gene. Nature 389:512-516[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 45. | Touhara, K., K. Lerro, B. C. Bonning, B. D. Hammock, and G. D. Prestwich. 1993. Ligand binding by recombinant insect juvenile hormone binding protein. Biochem. J. 32:2068-2075[CrossRef]. |
| 46. | Van Gelder, R. N., and M. A. Krasnow. 1996. A novel circadianly expressed Drosophila melanogaster gene dependent on the period gene for its rhythmic expression. EMBO J. 15:1625-1631[Medline]. |
| 47. |
Vitaterna, M. H.,
D. P. King,
A.-M. Chang,
J. M. Kornhauser,
P. L. Lowrey,
J. D. McDonald,
W. F. Dove,
L. H. Pinto,
F. W. Turek, and J. S. Takahashi.
1994.
Mutagenesis and mapping of a mouse gene, Clock, essential for circadian behavior.
Science
264:719-725 |
| 48. |
Vosshall, L. B.,
J. L. Price,
A. Sehgal,
L. Saez, and M. W. Young.
1994.
Specific block in nuclear localization of period protein by a second clock mutation, timeless.
Science
263:1606-1609 |
| 49. | Wojtasek, H., and G. D. Prestwich. 1995. Key disulfide bonds in an insect hormone binding protein: cDNA cloning of a juvenile hormone binding protein of Heliothis virescens and ligand binding by native and mutant forms. Biochemistry 34:5234-5241[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 50. | Zeng, H., P. E. Hardin, and M. Rosbash. 1994. Constitutive overexpression of the Drosophila period protein inhibits period mRNA cycling. EMBO J. 13:3590-3598[Medline]. |
| 51. | Zeng, H., Z. Qian, M. P. Myers, and M. Rosbash. 1996. A light-entrainment mechanism for the Drosophila circadian clock. Nature 380:129-135[CrossRef][Medline]. |
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»