Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Molecular and Cellular Biology, April 2005, p. 2622-2631, Vol. 25, No. 7
0270-7306/05/$08.00+0 doi:10.1128/MCB.25.7.2622-2631.2005
Copyright © 2005, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
Department of Cell Biology, Neurobiology, and Anatomy, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin ,1 Department of Medicine, Molecular Cardiology Research Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania2
Received 5 December 2004/ Returned for modification 25 December 2004/ Accepted 29 December 2004
|
|
|---|
|
|
|---|
Molecular and genetic analyses have suggested that the GATA factors may also act to control hepatogenesis (2, 36, 38, 39, 44, 46, 47). The GATA family of zinc finger transcription factors currently consists of six members in mammals (34). GATA1, -2, and -3 appear to act primarily in hematopoietic cells while GATA4, -5, and -6 are expressed in a diverse array of tissues (25). In vivo footprinting analyses of pluripotent embryonic gut endoderm revealed that GATA4 bound the Albumin (Alb1) enhancer prior to the onset of albumin expression in the primary liver bud, implying a role for GATA4 in regulating the onset of hepatic mRNA expression (2, 3, 5, 7, 15). Genetic evidence supporting a requirement for GATA factors in development of the gastrointestinal tract and its derivatives, including the liver, has emerged from studies with multiple model systems: GATA5 has been implicated in gut and liver development in zebra fish (37, 38), END1 is required for endoderm development in Caenorhabditis elegans (46, 47), SERPENT is essential for gut development in Drosophila melanogaster (36, 39), and GATA6 contributes to branching morphogenesis of the lungs (18, 43).
Of the known GATA proteins, GATA6 is a particularly appealing candidate for a factor that may contribute toward liver development because GATA6 regulates expression of the nuclear hormone receptor HNF4 (16, 22, 27, 33). Moreover, development of Gata6/ embryos arrests during gastrulation with a phenotype that is very similar to that associated with Hnf4/ embryos, which is consistent with GATA6 acting upstream of HNF4 during development (4, 20, 27). This early embryonic lethality, which is believed to be a consequence of extraembryonic endoderm dysfunction, has so far prevented the use of Gata6/ embryos for any analyses of the role of GATA6 during liver development. However, extraembryonic endoderm deficiencies can be rescued by generating embryos from embryonic stem (ES) cells by using tetraploid embryo complementation (12, 22). We therefore attempted to address whether GATA6 is required for hepatogenesis by generating embryos from Gata6/ ES cells by the tetraploid embryo complementation approach. We found that Gata6/ ES cell-derived embryos survive until E10.5, definitively demonstrating that embryonic lethality in GATA6-knockout embryos is a consequence of loss of GATA6 function in the extraembryonic endoderm as suggested previously (20, 27). Analyses of the developing liver in these embryos show that GATA6 is dispensable for hepatic specification but essential for liver bud expansion and for normal expression of hepatic mRNAs within the nascent hepatoblasts. We also examined heart, septum transversum mesenchyme, and vascular development in Gata6/ ES cell-derived embryos because they are the source of paracrine signals that are necessary for liver development. In contrast to the liver, however, we found that development of these tissues is not significantly affected by the absence of GATA6.
|
|
|---|
![]() View larger version (29K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 1. Generation of Gata6/ ES cells. (A) Schematic showing that Gata6 exons (boxes), which encode the DNA binding domain (Zn), were replaced with a neomycin phosphotransferase cassette (neo) by using the targeting vector described by Morrisey et al. (27). Relative positions of probes and the sizes of the BamHI (B), BstZ171 (Bs), and MluI (M) restriction enzyme products that they identify are shown. (B) Southern blots confirming the genotype of ES cells containing wild-type (Wt), heterozygous (+/), and homozygous (/) mutant alleles of Gata6. The size of restriction fragments, shown in kilobases (kb), was calculated by comparison to a DNA ladder. wt, wild type; mut, mutant.
|
MHC, CTGCTGGAGAGGTTATTCCTCG and GGAAGAGTGAGCGGCGCATCAAGG; ßMHC, GCCAACACCAACCTGTCCAAGTTC and TGCAAAGGCTCCAGGTCTGAGGGC; cardiac alpha actin, AGAGTATGATGAGGCAGGC and ATGACTGATGAGAGATGGGG; Mlc2a, AGGCACAACGTGGCTCTTCT and AGCTGGGAATAGGTCTCCTTCA; Mlc2v, GGAGGGCAACGGCACGGTCAT and AAGGCGAGCACAGGTAGGGTAAGC; Anf, GAGAGACGGCAGTGCTTCTAGGC and CGTGACACACCACAAGGGCTTAGG; skeletal actin, CGCGACATCAAAGAGAAGCT and GGGCGATGATCTTGATCTTC; Fgf1, CGGAAAGTGCGGGCGAAGTG and ACCGGGAGGGGCAGAAACAAGA; Bmp2, GGGACCCGCTGTCTTCTAGTGTTGC and TGAGTGCCTGCGGTACAGATCTAGCA; Bmp4, TCTAGAGGTCCCCAGAAGCAGCTGC and GCATTCGGTTACCAGGAATCATGGTG; Afp, TCGTATTCCAACAGGAGG and AGGCTTTTGCTTCACCAG; Alb1, CTTAAACCGATGGGCGATCTCACT and CCCCACTAGCCTCTGGCAAAAT; Hnf4, CTTCCTTCTTCATGCCAG and ACACGTCCCCATCTGAAG; Rbp, ATCCAGTGGTCATCGTTTCCTCGCT and GAACTTCGACAAGGCTCGTTTCTCTGG; Ttr, CTCACCACAGATGAGAAG and GGCTGAGTCTCTCAATTC. In situ hybridization. Embryos were embedded in paraffin. Sections were cut at 5 to 7 µm and were processed for in situ hybridization with 33P-labeled antisense RNA probes as described elsewhere (11, 35). Digital dark-field images were inverted and overlaid on bright-field images by using Adobe Photoshop. Experimental and control images were processed identically in all cases.
Immunohistochemistry. Immunohistochemistry was performed on paraformaldehyde-fixed paraffin sections as described previously (33) with a 1/500 dilution of primary antibodies recognizing HNF4 (Santa Cruz, catalog no. sc-6556), GATA4 (Santa Cruz, catalog no. sc-1237), or platelet endothelial cell adhesion molecule (PECAM; CD31; BD PharMingen).
|
|
|---|
![]() View larger version (28K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 2. Embryos generated from Gata6/ ES cells by tetraploid embryo complementation complete gastrulation. (A) Micrographs of E9.5 and E10.5 embryos generated from either Gata6+/ or Gata6/ ES cells. (B) Schematic showing position of primers relative to the Gata6 wild-type allele and null allele in which exons encoding the zinc finger domains of GATA6 were replaced by Neo; note that one of the Gata6 oligonucleotides contained sequences encoding a portion of the first zinc finger that were deleted in Gata6/ ES cells. wt, wild type; mut, mutant. (C) PCR analysis with primers that amplify Gata6 genomic DNA or the Neo gene confirms that Gata6 was present in control Gata6+/+ and Gata6+/ ES cells and embryos (lanes 2 to 5) but was absent from embryos derived from Gata6/ ES cells (lanes 6 to 10) or in reaction mixtures lacking template (0 DNA, lane 1).
|
![]() View larger version (65K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 3. The liver bud fails to expand and establish normal expression of hepatic markers in the absence of GATA6. Somite-matched embryos isolated at either E9.5 (A, B, E, F, and I to N) or E10.5 (C, D, G, and H) were generated from Gata6+/ (A, C, E, G, I, K, and M) or Gata6/ (B, D, F, H, J, L, and N) ES cells. (A to D) Hematoxylin- and eosin-stained transverse sections of embryos showing the developing liver (l; outlined by dashes) and septum transversum mesenchyme (s). (E to H) In situ hybridization analysis identifying Albumin mRNA (dark grains) in control but not Gata6/ liver buds(arrowheads). (I and J) Immunohistochemistry identifying HNF4 protein, which can be seen as brown staining, in nuclei of control but not GATA6-null liver primordia (arrowheads). Note the presence of HNF4 in the extraembryonic endoderm (arrow). (K to N) In situ hybridization to detect Hex mRNA (dark grains) in the liver bud (arrowhead) of Gata6+/ (K and M) or Gata6/ (L and N) E9.5 embryos containing 20 (K and L) or 23 (M and N) somite pairs. Experimental and control embryos are shown at the same magnification.
|
Immediately following inductive signaling from surrounding tissues, the nascent hepatic cells initiate the process of differentiation. The onset of differentiation is rapid, and levels of hepatic mRNAs increase quickly, which presumably reflects commitment of the endoderm to a hepatic fate. Radioactive in situ hybridization, shown in Fig. 3K and M, shows that expression of Hex mRNA, which encodes a homeobox transcription factor essential for liver development, increases significantly between 20 and 23 somites in control E9.5 embryos (1, 19, 23). In contrast, although Hex mRNA could be detected in Gata6/ ES cell-derived embryos, the level was lower than that seen in controls, and moreover, between 20 and 23 somites Hex mRNA levels failed to increase in the absence of GATA6 (Fig. 3L and N). The fact that albumin and HNF4 were undetectable and that Hex mRNAs failed to increase in GATA6-null embryos demonstrates that GATA6 is required for the liver bud to mature and commit to a normal hepatic developmental program.
Hepatic specification occurs in Gata6/ ventral endoderm. The finding that Hex mRNA was present in the endoderm of Gata6/ embryos suggested that hepatic development had been induced within the ventral foregut. However, Hex mRNA is also expressed in the developing ventral pancreas, and so it seemed possible that the identification of Hex transcripts reflected development of the pancreas rather than liver. To definitively address whether hepatic specification had occurred in the absence of GATA6, we determined the extent of liver gene expression in ventral endoderm isolated from experimental and control E8.0 embryos containing six to eight somite pairs by RT-PCR. It is at this developmental stage that inductive cues acting on the endoderm specify hepatic cell fate (15). Figure 4A shows that, as expected, Gata6 mRNA could be detected by RT-PCR in control ventral endoderm but was not detected in Gata6/ endoderm. Importantly, this result confirmed the absence of any GATA6-positive tetraploid embryo-derived extraembryonic endoderm, which could potentially confound the analysis. Examination of steady-state levels of mRNAs encoding alpha-fetoprotein (Afp), albumin, HNF4, retinol binding protein (Rbp4), and transthyretin (Ttr), all of which are expressed in hepatoblasts, revealed that all were identified at comparable levels between control and Gata6/ ventral endoderm isolates. The fact that Alb mRNA could be detected by RT-PCR in the ventral endoderm of E8.0 Gata6/ embryos but not by in situ hybridization at E9.5 likely reflects the relative sensitivity of the two assays. These data show that GATA6 is dispensable for hepatic specification and that Gata6/ ventral endoderm is competent to initiate a program of liver gene expression.
![]() View larger version (56K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 4. GATA6 is dispensable for specification of the hepatic endoderm. (A) RT-PCR analysis of hepatic mRNAs in ventral endoderm isolated from Gata6+/ (lanes 2 and 3) or Gata6/ embryos (lanes 4 and 5) containing six to eight somite pairs. Amplification of Hprt was used as a loading control, and omission of reverse transcriptase from the RT-PCR and amplifications lacking template (lane 1) confirmed the absence of contaminating DNA. (B) GATA4 protein can be identified by immunohistochemistry (IHC) as nuclear staining in the presumptive hepatic endoderm (arrowhead) of both Gata6+/ and Gata6/ E8.5 embryos containing 8 to 10 somite pairs. Insets show high-resolution images of boxed areas. VE, extraembryonic visceral endoderm; H, developing heart; L, presumptive hepatic endoderm.
|
GATA4 is transiently expressed in the early ventral endoderm and may complement loss of GATA6 during hepatic specification. If GATA4 and GATA6 have redundant roles in controlling liver gene expression during hepatic specification, it raises the question of why GATA4 is apparently unable to compensate for loss of GATA6 during later stages of hepatic development at E9.5 when the liver bud is expanding. With this in mind we examined expression of GATA4 and GATA6 in embryos containing 12 somites (E8.5), which had just completed hepatic specification, and in embryos containing 25 somites, in which hepatoblasts were migrating from the expanding liver bud. Figures 5A, C, E, G, and I show that, by 12 somites, GATA4 and -6 continue to be expressed in the specified hepatic endoderm of the liver bud as well as in the surrounding septum transversum mesenchyme. By 25 somites Gata6 mRNA was identified in the expanding hepatoblast cells, although at levels lower than those found in the septum transversum (Fig. 5B, D, and F). This is consistent with previously published immunostaining data that show GATA6 protein also present in hepatoblasts of E14.5 livers (31). However, strikingly and in contrast to Gata6, GATA4 expression is abruptly extinguished in hepatoblasts as the cells delaminate from the specified hepatic endoderm coincident with the stage at which loss of GATA6 results in a hepatic phenotype (Fig. 5H and J). This low to undetectable expression of GATA4 in hepatic parenchymal cells is also seen in adult livers. Figures 5K and L show that expression of GATA4 is most predominant in the endothelial cells surrounding the sinusoidal capillaries and large veins of the adult liver and in contrast is difficult to detect by immunohistochemistry in the hepatocytes. In situ hybridization studies showed that Gata4 mRNA was also undetectable in hepatoblasts in embryos at E9.5 (data not shown), suggesting that regulation was likely at the level of transcription. This dynamic expression of GATA4 in the early ventral endoderm is consistent with the proposal that GATA4 and GATA6 have redundant functions during hepatic specification but that only GATA6 is available to control expansion of the liver bud and commitment of hepatoblasts to express the normal profile of hepatic mRNAs.
![]() View larger version (132K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 5. Expression of GATA4 but not GATA6 is extinguished in migrating hepatoblasts. Embryos containing 12 (A, C, E, G, and I) or 25 (B, D, F, H, and J) somite pairs and adult livers (K and L) were isolated and processed for in situ hybridization to detect Gata6 mRNA (A to F) or for immunohistochemistry to detect GATA4 protein (G to L). Both GATA4 protein (brown nuclear staining; G and I) and Gata6 mRNA (A, C, and E) can be detected in the septum transversum mesenchyme (arrowheads) and liver bud (arrows) of 12-somite-pair embryos. At 25 somite pairs, Gata6 mRNA and GATA4 protein were detected in septum transversum mesenchyme (arrowheads; B, D, F, H, and J). In the liver bud (arrows; B, D, F, H, and J), however, the presence of Gata6 mRNA could be identified but GATA4 protein was undetectable. GATA4 protein was also detected predominantly in the endothelial cells (arrows) but not in hepatocytes (arrowheads) of adult livers (K and L). Panels E, F, I, J, and L show high-resolution images of boxed areas in panels C, D, G, H, and K, respectively. Both bright-field (A and B) and corresponding dark-field (C to F) images of Gata6 in situ hybridization analyses are presented. The presence of mRNA can be detected as bright silver grains in dark-field images; note the absence of staining in neural tubes (asterisks).
|
![]() View larger version (68K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 6. GATA6 is dispensable for early development of the heart, septum transversum meschyme, and vasculature. (A and B) Immunohistochemistry (brown staining) identifies PECAM-positive endothelial cells (e; arrows) surrounding the presumptive hepatic endoderm in both control and GATA6-null embryos at E9.5. (C and D) Septum transversum mesenchyme that expresses GATA4 can be identified surrounding the presumptive hepatic bud (arrow) in both Gata6+/ and Gata6/ E9.5 embryos by immunohistochemistry. (E to H) Hematoxylin- and eosin-stained sections of Gata6+/ and Gata6/ fetal hearts at E9.5 finds no substantive differences in the morphology of endocardium or myocardium, which both express GATA4 protein as determined by immunohistochemistry (brown nuclear staining) (G and H). l, liver; s, septum transversion; a, atrium; v, ventricle. (I) RT-PCR analysis of cardiac mRNAs in hearts isolated from Gata6+/ (lanes 2 and 3) or Gata6/ (lanes 4 and 5) E9.5 embryos. Amplification of Hprt was used as a loading control, omission of reverse transcriptase [()RT] from the RT-PCR and amplifications lacking template (lane 1) confirmed the absence of contaminating DNA, and PCR with Gata6 primers confirmed that only control embryos expressed Gata6 mRNA. All gene names use official nomenclature with common names below in parentheses where appropriate.
|
|
|
|---|
The availability of Gata6/ embryos that develop to E10.5 has also allowed us to demonstrate an essential role for GATA6 in controlling development of the mammalian liver. Although analysis of cell-type-specific knockouts of GATA6 will be necessary to definitively establish whether this factor acts cell autonomously during hepatogenesis, the observation that development of the heart, septum transversum, and embryonic vasculature appears relatively normal in Gata6/ embryos is consistent with GATA6 acting within the endoderm. Molecular and biochemical studies also support a cell-autonomous role for GATA factors in controlling liver development. Analyses of the Albumin gene's transcriptional regulatory elements have uncovered several transcription factors that appear to have roles in hepatic development (2, 15). Of these factors, FoxA and GATA4 have been shown to interact with the Albumin enhancer in pluripotent definitive endoderm prior to the onset of Albumin gene expression and hepatic specification (15). GATA4 and FoxA are unusual in that they can recognize their respective binding sites and form stable complexes in the context of compacted chromatin, which is normally recalcitrant to transcription factor binding (5, 7). Importantly, binding of either FoxA or GATA4 opens compacted chromatin, and FoxA appears to have the capacity to reposition nucleosomes around the Albumin enhancer (5, 7). Based on these observations, it has been proposed that FoxA and GATA4 may act as potentiators of endodermal differentiation (44). In this scheme, binding of these factors would remodel local areas of chromatin around the transcriptional regulatory elements of liver genes in the pluripotent endoderm, rendering them capable of binding transcriptional activators. This would maintain these genes in a competent but inactive state. If transcriptional activators were induced in response to inductive signals, they would then have access to the transcriptionally competent genes and initiate differentiation through activation of gene expression. Most of the studies that have led to this model have focused on GATA4 as the factor that acts in conjunction with FoxA to mediate hepatic competency of the endoderm (5-7). However, GATA binding sites can be recognized by GATA4, -5, and -6, suggesting that any of these could potentially act as pioneer factors.
Our data show that, as development proceeds, GATA6 alone is necessary for expansion of the liver bud and commitment of the endoderm to a hepatic cell fate. However, based on the finding that hepatic mRNA expression is unaltered in the absence of GATA6 in E8.5 embryos containing six to eight somites, hepatic specification of Gata6/ ventral endoderm appears to be intact. This may seem surprising given the compelling molecular evidence that supports a role for the GATA factors in regulating competency and, as a consequence, hepatic specification. However, examination of the expression of GATA4 within the endoderm of both wild-type and Gata6/ embryos offers a possible explanation of why GATA6 is dispensable for hepatic specification. We have demonstrated that GATA4 can be detected in the ventral endoderm prior to specification of the hepatic lineage. This expression continues within the presumptive nascent hepatic cells until the 12- to 14-somite stage of development (
E9.0). However, after this developmental time point GATA4 is rapidly lost from the cells within the nascent hepatic endoderm as the liver bud expands, although expression remains within dorsal domains of the foregut. In contrast to GATA4, Gata6 mRNA can be detected within the presumptive hepatic endoderm throughout these early stages of hepatogenesis. Based on these analyses we speculate that GATA4 compensates for loss of GATA6 during hepatic specification but that GATA6 alone is present to control subsequent stages of hepatic development. These results also suggest that GATA factors not only act during competency and specification stages but continue to be required as the liver bud is expanding. These proposals may ultimately be answered by the generation of embryos lacking both GATA4 and GATA6.
In addition to regulating development of the liver, GATA6 has also been implicated in heart development (32). Our studies of rescued GATA6-null embryos revealed at most only subtle changes in cardiac morphology; in some embryos formation of trabeculae within the developing ventricular regions appeared to be slightly reduced compared to controls. Although these data show that GATA6 is dispensable for early heart formation, it is possible that GATA6 is required for some physiological aspects of fetal cardiovascular function, which could conceivably explain the relatively small size of GATA6-null embryos. GATA4 is also expressed in the developing heart, and we have previously reported that GATA4-null embryos have an extremely thin ventricular myocardium and complete absence of the proepicardium (42). This did not appear to be the case for Gata6/ ES cell-derived embryos in which development of both proepicardium and myocardium was generally indistinguishable from control embryos. In addition, as was the case for Gata4/ embryos, GATA6-null embryos presented no alteration in cardiac gene expression, including expression of GATA4. Comparing the phenotypes presented by Gata4/ and Gata6/ ES cell-derived embryos, it is clear that the relationship between GATA4, GATA6, and their regulation of development is complex; in some cases, for example in hepatic specification and cardiac gene expression, there appears to be redundancy in function between GATA4 and GATA6, while in others, for example in development of the septum transversum and proepicardium, one factor appears to have a dominant role. Whether these factors act in a redundant or nonredundant manner may be explained by subtle differences in the timing of expression of the two factors in a given tissue during development or by differences in the binding of GATA4 and GATA6 to specific partners, such as Fog proteins and other coactivators. At the moment these issues are difficult to address; however, they may be resolved in the future by the availability of conditional alleles or by the use of specific short interfering RNAs.
In summary, we have demonstrated that providing Gata6/ embryos with a wild-type extraembryonic endoderm allows these embryos to proceed through gastrulation. Examination of these rescued Gata6/ embryos reveals that, although they are smaller, development of many tissues occurs normally, with the exception of the liver, which arrests shortly after formation of the primary hepatic bud. While several transcription factors have been shown to influence hepatocyte differentiation and maturation of the liver, GATA6 can now be classified as one of a very few that are essential for the earliest stages of hepatic development. The future challenges that arise from this study clearly include defining the molecular mechanisms through which GATA6 controls development of the hepatic primordium.
This work was supported by NIH NIDDK grants DK55743, DK60064, and DK66226 and an AHA postdoctoral fellowship 0120668Z to A.J.W.
|
|
|---|
gene expression. Mol. Cell. Biol. 21:7320-7330.
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»