https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6760-3389
Figures
Abstract
The cis-regulatory data that help in transcriptional regulation is arranged into modular pieces of a few hundred base pairs called CRMs (cis-regulatory modules) and numerous binding sites for multiple transcription factors are prominent characteristics of these cis-regulatory modules. The present study was designed to localize transcription factor binding site (TFBS) clusters on twelve Anterior-posterior (A-P) genes in Tribolium castaneum and compare them to their orthologous gene enhancers in Drosophila melanogaster. Out of the twelve A-P patterning genes, six were gap genes (Kruppel, Knirps, Tailless, Hunchback, Giant, and Caudal) and six were pair rule genes (Hairy, Runt, Even-skipped, Fushi-tarazu, Paired, and Odd-skipped). The genes along with 20 kb upstream and downstream regions were scanned for TFBS clusters using the Motif Cluster Alignment Search Tool (MCAST), a bioinformatics tool that looks for set of nucleotide sequences for statistically significant clusters of non-overlapping occurrence of a given set of motifs. The motifs used in the current study were Hunchback, Caudal, Giant, Kruppel, Knirps, and Even-skipped. The results of the MCAST analysis revealed the maximum number of TFBS for Hunchback, Knirps, Caudal, and Kruppel in both D. melanogaster and T. castaneum, while Bicoid TFBS clusters were found only in D. melanogaster. The size of all the predicted TFBS clusters was less than 1kb in both insect species. These sequences revealed more transversional sites (Tv) than transitional sites (Ti) and the average Ti/Tv ratio was 0.75.
Citation: Moudgil A, Sobti RC, Kaur T (2023) In-silico identification and comparison of transcription factor binding sites cluster in anterior-posterior patterning genes in Drosophila melanogaster and Tribolium castaneum. PLoS ONE 18(8): e0290035. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0290035
Editor: Shailender Kumar Verma, University of Delhi, INDIA
Received: April 16, 2023; Accepted: July 26, 2023; Published: August 17, 2023
Copyright: © 2023 Moudgil et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: All relevant data are within the paper.
Funding: The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Introduction
To know the development processes occurring in metazoans, it is vital to comprehend the regulatory mechanics of the underlying transcriptional network. The genomic sequence of an organism contains a significant amount of information that specifies how and when genes will be expressed. Despite the availability of genome sequences for many metazoans, very little is known about how this biological data is encoded [1, 2]. Previous research on the early development of Drosophila melanogaster, a model organism for more than three decades, provides an excellent context for studying the cis-regulatory modules (CRMs). CRMs are certain areas of non-protein-coding DNA, that play a significant role in controlling the expression patterns of genes to build an embryo’s tissue [3]. The CRMs are composed of groups of short DNA sequences that are acknowledged and bound by certain transcription factors [4]. The enhancers, promoters, and silencers consist of cis-regulatory sequences, recognized as CRMs [5]. Enhancers and silencers are usually found upstream (5′), downstream (3′), or in the intron (or introns) of the gene they control, although they can also be found far away while promoter sequences are always present upstream to the target gene [6]. During the early stages of embryonic development, a quick cascade of gene regulation determines the segmented body pattern of D. melanogaster [7]. The process of Anterior-Posterior (A-P) segmentation is initiated by the maternal gene products that are present in the gradient. The bicoid protein gradient exhibiting morphogenetic features is the best-known example. A spatial-differential, concentration-dependent expression (or repression), of certain zygotic genes, is regarded to establish the bicoid protein gradient [8, 9]. The first zygotic gene to be expressed belongs to the gap genes cascade which is a well-studied system in D. melanogaster [10]. The gap genes control the pair-rule genes which further regulate the segment polarity genes and the Homeotic gene complex in succession [10–13]. In addition to this, the maternal genes, gap genes, pair-rule genes, and Homeotic gene complex also self-regulate themselves as shown in Fig 1. An ideal framework for researching the cis-regulatory sequences is provided by all research on the early stages of Drosophila development. A variety of interactions between different transcription factors (TF) and their target regulatory areas have been thoroughly defined [11, 14], and comparative investigations have demonstrated that cis-regulatory regions are often functionally conserved throughout the genus [15–17]. Previous research characterized transcription factor binding site (TFBS) locations in the early Drosophila embryo and estimated the binding affinity of each factor using Position weight matrices (PWMs) [1, 18]. PWMs are a valuable method for analysing the location of potential binding sites and estimating their binding strength [19, 20]. All the research about the cis-regulatory modules is mainly focused on the Drosophila genus. Not much has been done on other insect species. Over the last two decades, T. castaneum has emerged as a potent organism to study short germ segmentation, embryonic head and leg development, metamorphosis, and in insect biology. The anterior-posterior patterning in Tribolium follows an ancestral route i.e. short germ embryogenesis, which is different from D. melanogaster which follows the latest route i.e. long germ embryogenesis [21, 22]. In this paper, we investigate the Transcription factor binding sites cluster i.e. Cis-regulatory modules in the gap genes and pair-rule genes of D. melanogaster, and compare them with their orthologs present in T. castaneum.
Material and methods
Data collection
The Translated gene sequences for the A-P patterning genes of D. melanogaster were downloaded from Flybase (FB2021_03) [23]. The NCBI database (pBlast) was then used to collect the A-P patterning protein sequences of T. castaneum orthologous to those of D. melanogaster [24]. The orthologous sequences with a high query-covered value and a low error value were selected. The genomic data viewer was used to access these sequences. Following that, 20 kb flanking sequences were added both upstream (-) and downstream (+) to each target gene’s sequence. The gene sequences along with the additional flanking sequences were then downloaded in the FASTA format. The sequence location of genes alongwith the flanking regions are given in Tables 1 and 2 for D. melanogaster and T. castaneum respectively.
Motif collection
The JASPAR database, which is open to the public, contains position weight matrices (PWMs), of various species in six taxonomic groupings. The PWM motifs used for the present study were Bicoid, Hunchback, Caudal, Giant, Kruppel, Knirps, and Even-skipped of D. melanogaster. These were downloaded in meme format from JASPAR software [25].
Meme suite analysis
For the discovery of transcription factor binding site (TFBS) clusters, MCAST, an application of MEME Suite was run [26]. MCAST scans for clusters of matches to one or more nucleotide motifs in sequences [27]. The input of sequence was given in text file in FASTA format while the motifs were given in Meme format. ARR1 of Saccharomyces cerevisiae was used as an outgroup. For the identification of TFBS, the parameters which were used in the present study were: p-value should be less than 0.005, the error value less than 5 and the gap between two TFBS should be less than 30 base pairs. The result was displayed in the HTML format and a cluster with greater motif score, and low error value was selected as pCRM.
Annotation of transcription start site (TSS)
Transcription start sites (TSS) for the A-P genes were predicted using the genome data viewer tool of NCBI in the case of D. melanogaster and T. castaneum [28].
Annotation of promotor region, exon, intron region of the gene
Putative promoter regions, exon, and intronic regions were identified using two databases Ensemble and NCBI [28, 29].
The NCBI database’s genome data viewer was used to get the necessary sequence, which featured intron, exon, and promoter sequences. The intron and exon of the given sequence were represented by different colours. Exons were represented by light pink, introns by green, and the following gene by blue colour. The promotor sequence area was recovered up to 1000 bp upstream of the TSS region, including the AT-rich region and the TATA box.
The searched-for sequence, which contained the 5’ flanking area, the promotor, the exon, the intron, and the 3’ flanking region, was retrieved from the Ensemble website.
Sequence alignment and variation of predicted cis-regulatory modules
All the predicted pCRM were aligned using the ClustalW [30] tool in Bioedit software [31] and these aligned sequences were subjected to calculate the conserved sites, transition pairs (Ti), transversional pairs (Tv), and transition/transversion (Ti/Tv) ratio in MEGA XI software [32].
Interaction between the TFs
In the present study, the STRING database was used to predict the protein-protein interactions between the different transcription factors searched for their binding sites on the A-P patterning genes [33].
Results
TFBS clusters in gap genes of D. melanogaster and T. castaneum
The results of the MCAST analysis for identifying TFBS clusters in the gap genes (Hunchback, Knirps, and Caudal) are depicted in Fig 2. The results reveal that the location of transcription factor binding sites (TFBS) on the Hunchback gene is upstream to the transcription start site (TSS) in both D. melanogaster and T. castaneum (Fig 2.1). However, the results are variable in D. melanogaster and T. castaneum for another gap gene called Knirps, on which, the TFBS cluster is located within intron 2 of the gene in the dipteran insect and upstream in the coleopteron (Fig 2.2). As far as the Caudal gene is concerned, the cluster of TFBS is located downstream to the TSS in both the insect species (Fig 2.3). The cluster was found to be present within exon 1 of the gene in D. melanogaster and exon 3 of the gene in T. castaneum.
2.1 shows the predicted transcription factor binding site clusters in Hunchback for D. melanogaster and T. castaneum.A) Locations of the gene, transcription start site (TSS) and the transcription factor binding site (TFBS) cluster as predicted by the MCAST software for the Hunchback gene in D. melanogaster, B) Binding sites for different transcription factors on the predicted TFBS cluster in the gene Hunchback for D. melanogaster, C) Locations of the gene, TSS and the TFBS cluster as predicted by the MCAST software for the Hunchback gene in T. castaneum, D) Binding sites for different transcription factors on the predicted TFBS cluster in the gene Hunchback for T. castaneum. 2.2 shows the predicted transcription factor binding site clusters in Knirps for D. melanogaster and T. castaneum. A) Locations of the gene, TSS and the TFBS cluster as predicted by the MCAST software for the Knirps gene in D. melanogaster, B) Binding sites for different transcription factors on the predicted TFBS cluster in the gene Knirps for D. melanogaster, C) Locations of the gene, TSS and the TFBS cluster as predicted by the MCAST software for the Knirps gene in T. castaneum, D) Binding sites for different transcription factors on the predicted TFBS cluster in the gene Knirps for T. castaneum, 2.3 shows the predicted transcription factor binding site clusters in Caudal for D. melanogaster and T. castaneum. A) Locations of the gene, TSS and the TFBS cluster as predicted by the MCAST software for the Caudal gene in D. melanogaster, B) Binding sites for different transcription factors on the predicted TFBS cluster in the gene Caudal for D. melanogaster, C) Locations of the gene, TSS and the TFBS cluster as predicted by the MCAST software for the Caudal gene in T. castaneum, D) Binding sites for different transcription factors on the predicted TFBS cluster in the gene Caudal for T. castaneum.
Fig 3 illustrates the results of MCAST analysis for predicting TFBS clusters on Kruppel, Giant, and Tailless genes. The TFBS cluster in the Kruppel gene is present upstream to the TSS in D. melanogaster and downstream to TSS in T. castaneum (Fig 3.1). In case of the Giant gene, the cluster of TFBS is present upstream to TSS in both D. melanogaster and T. castaneum as depicted in Fig 3.2. The location of the TFBS cluster in the gene Tailless is upstream in D. melanogaster while downstream to the TSS in T. castaneum.
3.1 shows the predicted transcription factor binding site clusters in Kruppel for D. melanogaster and T. castaneum. A) Locations of the gene, TSS and the TFBS cluster as predicted by the MCAST software for the Kruppel gene in D. melanogaster, B) Binding sites for different transcription factors on the predicted TFBS cluster in the gene Kruppel for D. melanogaster, C) Locations of the gene, TSS and the TFBS cluster as predicted by the MCAST software for the Kruppel gene in T. castaneum, D) Binding sites for different transcription factors on the predicted TFBS cluster in the gene Kruppel for T. castaneum, 3.2 shows the predicted transcription factor binding site clusters in Giant for D. melanogaster and T. castaneum. A) Locations of the gene, TSS and the TFBS cluster as predicted by the MCAST software for the Giant gene in D. melanogaster, B) Binding sites for different transcription factors on the predicted TFBS cluster in the gene Giant for D. melanogaster, C) Locations of the gene, TSS and the TFBS cluster as predicted by the MCAST software for the Giant gene in T. castaneum, D) Binding sites for different transcription factors on the predicted TFBS cluster in the gene Giant for T. castaneum 3.3 shows the predicted transcription factor binding site clusters in Tailless for D. melanogaster and T. castaneum. A) Locations of the gene, TSS and the TFBS cluster as predicted by the MCAST software for the Tailless gene in D. melanogaster, B) Binding sites for different transcription factors on the predicted TFBS cluster in the gene Tailless for D. melanogaster, C) Locations of the gene, TSS and the TFBS cluster as predicted by the MCAST software for the Tailless gene in T. castaneum, D) Binding sites for different transcription factors on the predicted TFBS cluster in the gene Tailless for T. castaneum.
TFBS clusters in Pair rule genes of D. melanogaster and T. castaneum
Fig 4 shows the results for the TFBS clusters as predicted by the MCAST software for the Even-skipped, Hairy, and Runt pair-rule genes in D. melanogaster and T. castaneum. The cluster of TFBS in both Even-skipped and Runt genes are present upstream of the TSS in both D. melanogaster and T. castaneum (Fig 4.1 and 4.3). Fig 4.2, shows the cluster of TFBS on the Hairy gene. The cluster is present upstream to the TSS in D. melanogaster and downstream to the TSS in T. castaneum.
4.1 shows the predicted transcription factor binding site clusters in Even-skipped for D. melanogaster and T. castaneum, A) Locations of the gene, TSS and the TFBS cluster as predicted by the MCAST software for the Even-skipped gene in D. melanogaster, B) Binding sites for different transcription factors on the predicted TFBS cluster in the gene Even-skipped for D. melanogaster, C) Locations of the gene, TSS and the TFBS cluster as predicted by the MCAST software for the Even-skipped gene in T. castaneum, D) Binding sites for different transcription factors on the predicted TFBS cluster in the gene Even-skipped for T. castaneum. 4.2 shows the predicted transcription factor binding site clusters in Hairy for D. melanogaster and T. castaneum. A) Locations of the gene, TSS and the TFBS cluster as predicted by the MCAST software for the Hairy gene in D. melanogaster, B) Binding sites for different transcription factors on the predicted TFBS cluster in the gene Hairy for D. melanogaster, C) Locations of the gene, TSS and the TFBS cluster as predicted by the MCAST software for the Hairy gene in T. castaneum, D) Binding sites for different transcription factors on the predicted TFBS cluster in the gene Hairy for T. castaneum. 4.3 shows the predicted transcription factor binding site clusters in Runt for D. melanogaster and T. castaneum. A) Locations of the gene, TSS and the TFBS cluster as predicted by the MCAST software for the Runt gene in D. melanogaster, B) Binding sites for different transcription factors on the predicted TFBS cluster in the gene Runt for D. melanogaster, C) Locations of the gene, TSS and the TFBS cluster as predicted by the MCAST software for the Runt gene in T. castaneum, D) Binding sites for different transcription factors on the predicted TFBS cluster in the gene Runt for T. castaneum.
The CRMs for Odd-skipped, Fushi-tarazu, and Paired genes as predicted by the MCAST software are depicted in Fig 5. Fig 5.1 exhibits the cluster of TFBS on the Odd-skipped gene. The cluster of is present downstream to the TSS in D. melanogaster and upstream in T. castaneum. The clusters of TFBS in both Fushi-tarazu and Paired genes are present upstream to the TSS in both the insect species (Fig 5.2 and 5.3).
5.1 shows the predicted transcription factor binding site clusters in Odd-skipped for D. melanogaster and T. castaneum, A) Locations of the gene, TSS and the TFBS cluster as predicted by the MCAST software for the Odd-skipped gene in D. melanogaster, B) Binding sites for different transcription factors on the predicted TFBS cluster in the gene Odd-skipped for D. melanogaster, C) Locations of the gene, TSS and the TFBS cluster as predicted by the MCAST software for the Odd-skipped gene in T. castaneum, D) Binding sites for different transcription factors on the predicted TFBS cluster in the gene Odd-skipped for T. castaneum. 5.2 shows the predicted transcription factor binding site clusters in Fushi-Tarazu for D. melanogaster and T. castaneum. A) Locations of the gene, TSS and the TFBS cluster as predicted by the MCAST software for the Fushi-Tarazu gene in D. melanogaster, B) Binding sites for different transcription factors on the predicted TFBS cluster in the gene Fushi-Tarazu for D. melanogaster, C) Locations of the gene, TSS and the TFBS cluster as predicted by the MCAST software for the Fushi-Tarazu gene in T. castaneum, D) Binding sites for different transcription factors on the predicted TFBS cluster in the gene Fushi-Tarazu for T. castaneum. 5.3 shows the predicted transcription factor binding site clusters in Paired for D. melanogaster and T. castaneum. A) Locations of the gene, TSS and the TFBS cluster as predicted by the MCAST software for the Paired gene in D. melanogaster, B) Binding sites for different transcription factors on the predicted TFBS cluster in the gene Paired for D. melanogaster, C) Locations of the gene, TSS and the TFBS cluster as predicted by the MCAST software for the Paired gene in T. castaneum, D) Binding sites for different transcription factors on the predicted TFBS cluster in the gene Paired for T. castaneum.
The results depicted by the MCAST software, that is, location of the TSS, TFBS cluster, and size of the putative cluster in base pairs are summarized in Table 3 for D. melanogaster and Table 4 for T. castaneum. Table 5 depicts the number of transcription factor binding sites in all genes predicted by the software in both the insect species.
Here–and + represents the upstream and downstream location of predicted CRM respectively.
Here, Drosophila melanogaster and Tribolium castaneum are abbreviated as Dm and Tc respectively.
Multiple sequence alignment, conserved sites, transitional pairs, transversional pairs, and transition/transversion rate
All the predicted pCRMs were subjected to multiple sequence alignment using the CLUSTALW [30] tool in Bioedit software [31]. These were further analysed for the presence of conserved sites, transition pairs, transversional pairs, and transition/transversion rate using MEGA XI software [32]. The results for the analysis are depicted in Table 6.
Interaction between the TFs
Figs 6 and 7 depict the interactions between Bicoid, Hunchback, Caudal, Knirps, Kruppel, Giant, and Even-skipped transcription factors of D. melanogaster and T. castaneum respectively. These interactions were evaluated using the STRING database. As predicted by the software, the average local clustering coefficient is 0.857 for D. melanogaster and 0.837 for T. castaneum. The PPI enrichment p-value is < 1.0e-16 for D. melanogaster and 3.28e-12 for T. castaneum. The interaction between the TFs in both D. melanogaster and T. castaneum shows more enrichment, which suggested that these TFs proteins are biologically connected as a group.
Here in this figure, the pink colour represents the experimentally determined interactions, Sky blue shows the interactions curated from databases between the proteins. The blue colour node represents the gene co-occurrence. The black colour node depicts the co-expression of protein and the violet colour represents the protein homology. The yellow colour node represents the interactions that are predicted through text mining.
Here in this figure, the pink colour represents the experimentally determined interactions, Sky blue shows the interactions curated from databases between the proteins. The blue colour node represents the gene co-occurrence. The black colour node depicts the co-expression of protein and the violet colour represents the protein homology. The yellow colour node represents the interactions that are predicted through text mining.
In D. melanogaster, the software predicted that the transcription factor bicoid shows co-expression with Hunchback. Hunchback shows protein homology with Kruppel. There was no co-expression of proteins detected in the T. castaneum and protein homology was identified between Hunchback and Kruppel as in D. melanogaster. The software depicted known experimentally determined interactions between all proteins except for Caudal, Knirps, and Even-skipped in both D. melanogaster and T. castaneum. No interaction between Caudal and Even-skipped proteins were predicted in both insects.
Discussion
The determination of the early body design in D. melanogaster is done by the action of cis-regulatory elements in the genome that regulate gene expression during development. Transcription factors (TFs) bind to these regions and regulate target gene expression [34]. Translation of localised maternal mRNAs during oogenesis constructs the initial TF gradients in the embryo at the top of the A-P patterning cascade [35, 36]. These maternal TFs then bind to gap gene specific embryonic regulatory regions, thereby regulating gap TF expression patterns during early A-P specification [9, 37]. The interaction between the different TFs was predicted using the STRING database. Based on computational modelling, it seems that these TFs are interconnected and have a role in coordinating the insect development. Previous studies suggested that the self-regulation pathway and the activities of other maternal-effect genes and gap genes control the expression of gap genes involved in the establishment of the A-P axis. [21]. In addition to the regulation of gap genes, these genes act as TFs for the regulation of genes involved in the A-P axis formation cascade which are pair-rule genes, segment polarity genes, and Homeotic selector genes [21, 38]. Consistent with the interaction identified by STRING software in the present study, previous studies on Bicoid and Hunchback have revealed that these proteins have compatible binding with each other [39]. The Kruppel protein interacts with the Hunchback protein in order to repress the latter’s expression and simultaneously regulate its own expression, as evidenced by previous research [40]. The findings of our study indicate that the proteins Hunchback and Kruppel exhibit homology, implying a shared evolutionary ancestry between these proteins. Gap TFs also control the downstream cascade of A-P Patterning genes [41, 42]. The binding of TFs to particular clusters of activator and repressor binding sites inside embryonic CRMs tightly controls gene expression patterns at each phase in the cascade. Individual CRMs have distinct molecular characteristics that influence transcriptional output. When a TF attaches to a CRM, it might behave as an activator or a repressor, depending on the situation [43, 44]. Hundreds of cis-regulatory motif sequences have been identified across all model species using both experimental [45–48] and bioinformatic [49–52] approaches, as well as the discovery of the related transcription factors binding to them [53]. The cluster of these transcription factor binding sites can be recognized as putative enhancers or CRM which help in the process of transcription. Many key regulators of early development have been identified courtesy of sophisticated genetic screening and the molecular biology and biochemistry of these factors, as well as their target sequences, have gained considerable interest in Drosophila [54, 55]. In-silico identification of CRM in early development in D. melanogaster and D. pseudoobscura were predicted and in-vivo testing was done on pCRMs [1, 56]. Tribolium is a good illustration of short germ embryogenesis in insects since it represents the ancestral kind of embryogenesis. In comparison to Drosophila, the blastoderm phase determines only the cephalic and thoracic segments, but not the abdominal segments. While the Bicoid gradient has been used to study pattern development in Drosophila, it is considered that this is not the case in Tribolium as Bicoid is not present in the insect. The alteration from Caudal activation of the Hunchback gap region to direct activation by Bicoid was an evolutionary shift from short to long germ embryogenesis [38, 57]. The previous studies on A-P patterning comparison have been done on different species of Drosophila but there is no study which compares A-P patterning in different insect species belonging to different insect order [58]. Hence, the present study was performed to check whether the insects belonging to different orders, have different developmental patterns but have similar genes, and are controlled by similar cis-regulatory modules or not.
In D. melanogaster, the zygotic Hunchback gene is activated by the synergetic interaction between the Hunchback and Bicoid transcription factors [59–61], the result predicted by the present study also depicted a similar result. The cluster predicted by MCAST has the maximum number of Hunchback transcription factor sites in both D. melanogaster and T. castaneum. As mentioned above, in Tribolium the bicoid gene is absent therefore Tribolium has additional caudal sites which help in Hunchback gene activation and expression. In the case of Knirps, the maximum number of transcription factors binding sites again are of Hunchback in addition to other factors in both D. melanogaster and T. castaneum. Previous Drosophila studies suggest that the Hunchback acts as a repressor for Knirps, as binding of the Hunchback suppresses the Knirps in the anterior half of the embryo [62, 63] Caudal gene is one of the most studied gap genes in D. melanogaster and T. castaneum, which help in the activation of gap genes and pair-rule genes in insects. Caudal is known to be a downstream core promoter element [39] and our results also depict the same. Both in D. melanogaster and T. castaneum the cluster is found to be downstream to the transcription start site. Both clusters have TFBS for Hunchback and Caudal, while Drosophila has additional sites for Bicoid also.
The previous studies of the Kruppel gene suggest that the Kruppel has TFBS for Hunchback, Bicoid, Giant, and Knirps [62, 64]. Hunchback and Bicoid are known as activators of the Kruppel gene, while Knirps and Giant are known to be their repressors [62]. The present study result has also predicted similar binding sites in D. melanogaster as in evident in previous studies while T. castaneum has TFBS clusters for Hunchback and Caudal only. For the expression of Giant gene in Drosophila, Hunchback functions as a concentration-dependent repressor of Giant, suppressing its most anterior expression [65–67]. Giant will not be transcribed in the anterior domain without the presence of Bicoid [65]. Activation in the posterior domain necessitates the combined actions of the Caudal and Bicoid [65, 68]. Similar TFBS was found in D. melanogaster and T. castaneum. In addition to these predicted pCRMs, binding sites for Kruppel and Knirps were predicted in D. melanogaster while only one Kruppel site was predicted in T. castaneum. These results suggest that the gap genes transcription in D. melanogaster is mainly controlled by Hunchback, Bicoid, and Caudal proteins while in T. castaneum, Hunchback and Caudal are majorly the transcription factors for the gap genes.
Gap genes with maternal gradients act across shorter distances and overlap at their borders, resulting in the seven-stripe expression patterns of the pair-rule genes [69, 70] Even-skipped is one of the most extensively studied pair-rule gene in D. melanogaster. Previous studies documented the individual Even-skipped stripe responds to the different gradients and combinations of gap gene transcription factors [43, 71–73]. The present study predicts the gene has TFBS clusters for Hunchback and Knirps only in both D. melanogaster and T. castaneum, this combination in previous studies was found to influence the stripe 3+7 enhancer in Drosophila melanogaster [74]. In the earlier D. melanogaster study, it was found that the gap genes mainly Hunchback, Giant, Kruppel, and Knirps act as a repressor for the Runt, which is a primary pair-rule gene [75]. Similar TFBS were predicted in the present study, with the exception that no Kruppel binding site was found in both D. melanogaster and T. castaneum. In addition to these known TFs, additional binding sites for Caudal were also found in both D. melanogaster and T. castaneum. The gap genes mainly, Hunchback, Knirps, and Kruppel are known to influence the expression of pair-rule genes [76, 77]. The hairy gene also has similar TFBS, which is alike to the cluster predicted in D. melanogaster. The cluster have TFBS for Hunchback, Knirps, and Kruppel in addition to these, binding sites for Caudal and one Giant transcription factor were also predicted. In contrast to D. melanogaster, hairy gene in T. castaneum showed binding sites for Hunchback, Caudal and Giant site. The Hairy functions in the trunk and head segmentation in D. melanogaster. A previous study on Hairy gene in T. castaneum suggests that the gene functions only during trunk segmentation in T. castaneum and is non-functional during the head segmentation pathway [78]. The Fushi-tarazu, Odd-skipped, and Paired are regarded as secondary pair rule genes in D. melanogaster [3, 79]. These genes are known to have Hunchback Kruppel, Knirps and Giant as repressor factors in different combinations [80]. The MCAST analysis revealed binding sites for Hunchback, Caudal and Even-skipped factors in the secondary pair rule genes for both D. melanogaster and T. castaneum. In addition, Drosophila Fushi-tarazu gene showed binding sites for bicoid and giant also. As far as the Odd skipped gene is concerned, both D. melanogaster and T. castaneum have TFBS for Hunchback and Knirps. The gene in D. melanogaster also showed binding sites for Bicoid and Even-skipped. The Odd skipped gene in T. castaneum showed binding sites for Kruppel and Caudal also. Paired being a secondary pair-rule gene, is controlled by the primary pair-rule genes in D. melanogaster and T. castaneum [81]. Most of the Predicted Cis-regulatory elements of the pair rule genes have TFBS for the Hunchback, Bicoid, Caudal, Knirps, and Kruppel in D. melanogaster. However, in T. castaneum, most pCRMs have TFBS for hunchback, knirps, caudal, and kruppel. The size of the predicted Cis-regulatory elements is between 200 bp to 850 bp for D. melanogaster and 240 bp– 950 bp for T. castaneum. The results of the MCAST analysis in the present study suggest that most of the transcription factors which control the A-P patterning cascade are conserved in D. melanogaster and T. castaneum with the exception that there are no binding sites for Bicoid in T. castaneum.
Transitions (Ti) are referred to as pyrimidine- or purine-based A-G or C-T switching. A transversion (Tv) is the exchange of two-ring purine nucleobases for one-ring pyrimidine bases. There are four conversion possibilities: A-C, A-T, C-G, and G-T. From the last decade, the Ti/Tv ratio has been employed as a significant metric for the reconstruction of phylogenetic trees and the calculation of divergence. Even the High-throughput sequencing studies employ the Ti/Tv ratio as a quality control measure. Assuming that there are two potential transitions and four possible transversions, the Ti/Tv ratio, which divides the number of transition SNPs by the number of transversion SNPs, should equal 0.5 if replacement variations occur at random. Nonetheless, a transversion is considered a more important change than a transition since it requires more energy than replacement without affecting the ring structure. Hence, the transition and transversion ratio is frequently more than 0.5 in actual sequencing data [82–85]. Studies also suggest that the Tv’s have more significant effects on regulatory DNA, such as TF binding motif studies and allele-specific TF binding [86]. Keeping in mind, the importance of Ttransitions and transversion, the present study also evaluated the number of Ti, Tv sites, and Ti/Tv ratio in the predicted enhancers of A-P patterning genes. The Tv sites were found to be more than the Ti sites and the average Ti/Tv ratio was 0.75 as given in Table 5. As the Tv is most likely to affect the amino acid sequence than the Ti, the more Tv can be indicative of a large number of variations, which will ultimately affect gene expression [81–85].
Conclusion
This study marks the first-ever attempt to conduct an integrated examination of the location, size, and composition of clusters of transcription factor binding sites (TFBS) within the cis-regulatory elements of multiple anterior-posterior (A-P) patterning genes that exhibit orthology to gene sequences found in Drosophila. The present investigation has revealed that comparable transcription factors (TFs) could regulate the expression of anterior-posterior (A-P) patterning genes in Diptera and Coleoptera taxa of insects. The majority of transcription factors (TFs) were observed to be situated upstream of the transcription start site (TSS), although a subset were also identified downstream of the TSS. In both Drosophila melanogaster and Tribolium castaneum, the Hunchback transcription factor binding site (TFBS) exhibited the highest frequency among all identified TFBS. The present study contributes to the advancement of our understanding regarding the evolutionary patterns of genes and cis-regulatory elements in two distinct orders of insects. Subsequent validation of these findings may be achieved through in-vitro and in-vivo experimentation.
Acknowledgments
The authors express their gratitude towards Dr. Nivedita Gupta, Assistant Professor-I at Amity Institute of English Studies and Research, Amity University, Noida, for performing copyediting on the manuscript to ensure accuracy in language usage, spelling, and grammar.
References
- 1. Berman BP, Nibu Y, Pfeiffer BD, Tomancak P, Celniker SE, Levine M, et al. Exploiting transcription factor binding site clustering to identify cis-regulatory modules involved in pattern formation in the Drosophila genome. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2002;99: 757–762. pmid:11805330
- 2.
Davidson EH. Genomic regulatory systems: development and evolution. San Diego: Academic Press; 2001.
- 3. Dillon N, Sabbattini P. Functional gene expression domains: defining the functional unit of eukaryotic gene regulation. Bioessays. 2000;22: 657–665. pmid:10878578
- 4.
Davidson E. The regulatory genome - 1st edition. 2006 [cited 16 May 2023]. https://www.elsevier.com/books/the-regulatory-genome/davidson/978-0-12-088563-3
- 5. Ni P, Wilson D, Su Z. A map of cis-regulatory modules and constituent transcription factor binding sites in 80% of the mouse genome. BMC Genomics. 2022;23: 714. pmid:36261804
- 6. Levine M, Tjian R. Transcription regulation and animal diversity. Nature. 2003;424: 147–151. pmid:12853946
- 7. Ingham PW. The molecular genetics of embryonic pattern formation in Drosophila. Nature. 1988;335: 25–34. pmid:2901040
- 8. Driever W, Thoma G, Nüsslein-Volhard C. Determination of spatial domains of zygotic gene expression in the Drosophila embryo by the affinity of binding sites for the bicoid morphogen. Nature. 1989;340: 363–367. pmid:2502714
- 9. Struhl G, Struhl K, Macdonald PM. The gradient morphogen bicoid is a concentration-dependent transcriptional activator. Cell. 1989;57: 1259–1273. pmid:2567637
- 10. Jaeger J. The gap gene network. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2011;68: 243–274. pmid:20927566
- 11. Johnston DS, Nüsslein-Volhard C. The origin of pattern and polarity in the Drosophila embryo. Cell. 1992;68: 201–219. pmid:1733499
- 12. Reinitz J, Sharp DH. Mechanism of eve stripe formation. Mechanisms of Development. 1995;49: 133–158. pmid:7748785
- 13. Small S, Kraut R, Hoey T, Warrior R, Levine M. Transcriptional regulation of a pair-rule stripe in Drosophila. Genes Dev. 1991;5: 827–839. pmid:2026328
- 14. Rivera-Pomar R, Jãckle H. From gradients to stripes in Drosophila embryogenesis: filling in the gaps. Trends in Genetics. 1996;12: 478–483. pmid:8973159
- 15. Langeland JA, Carroll SB. Conservation of regulatory elements controlling hairy pair-rule stripe formation. Development. 1993;117: 585–596. pmid:8330529
- 16. Lukowitz W, Schröder C, Glaser G, Hülskamp M, Tautz D. Regulatory and coding regions of the segmentation gene hunchback are functionally conserved between Drosophila virilis and Drosophila melanogaster. Mechanisms of Development. 1994;45: 105–115. pmid:8199047
- 17. Ludwig MZ, Patel NH, Kreitman M. Functional analysis of eve stripe 2 enhancer evolution in Drosophila: rules governing conservation and change. Development. 1998;125: 949–958. pmid:9449677
- 18. Papatsenko DA, Makeev VJ, Lifanov AP, Régnier M, Nazina AG, Desplan C. Extraction of Functional Binding Sites from Unique Regulatory Regions: The Drosophila Early Developmental Enhancers. Genome Res. 2002;12: 470–481. pmid:11875036
- 19. Berg OG, Von Hippel PH. Selection of DNA binding sites by regulatory proteins. Journal of Molecular Biology. 1987;193: 723–743. pmid:3612791
- 20. Fickett JW. Finding genes by computer: the state of the art. Trends in Genetics. 1996;12: 316–320. pmid:8783942
- 21. Kimelman D, Martin BL. Anterior-posterior patterning in early development: three strategies: Anterior-posterior patterning in early development. WIREs Dev Biol. 2012;1: 253–266. pmid:23801439
- 22.
Sobti RC, editor. Advances in animal experimentation and modeling: understanding life phenomena. London, United Kingdom: Elsevier, Academic Press, an Imprint of Elsevier; 2022.
- 23. Larkin A, Marygold SJ, Antonazzo G, Attrill H, dos Santos G, Garapati PV, et al. FlyBase: updates to the Drosophila melanogaster knowledge base. Nucleic Acids Research. 2021;49: D899–D907. pmid:33219682
- 24. Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Myers EW, Lipman DJ. Basic local alignment search tool. Journal of Molecular Biology. 1990;215: 403–410. pmid:2231712
- 25. Fornes O, Castro-Mondragon JA, Khan A, van der Lee R, Zhang X, Richmond PA, et al. JASPAR 2020: update of the open-access database of transcription factor binding profiles. Nucleic Acids Research. 2019; gkz1001. pmid:31701148
- 26. Bailey TL, Johnson J, Grant CE, Noble WS. The MEME Suite. Nucleic Acids Res. 2015;43: W39–W49. pmid:25953851
- 27. Bailey TL, Noble WS. Searching for statistically significant regulatory modules. Bioinformatics. 2003;19: ii16–ii25. pmid:14534166
- 28. Rangwala SH, Kuznetsov A, Ananiev V, Asztalos A, Borodin E, Evgeniev V, et al. Accessing NCBI data using the NCBI Sequence Viewer and Genome Data Viewer (GDV). Genome Res. 2021;31: 159–169. pmid:33239395
- 29. Cunningham F, Allen JE, Allen J, Alvarez-Jarreta J, Amode MR, Armean IM, et al. Ensembl 2022. Nucleic Acids Research. 2022;50: D988–D995. pmid:34791404
- 30. Thompson JD, Higgins DG, Gibson TJ. CLUSTAL W: improving the sensitivity of progressive multiple sequence alignment through sequence weighting, position-specific gap penalties and weight matrix choice. Nucl Acids Res. 1994;22: 4673–4680. pmid:7984417
- 31.
Hall TA. BIOEDIT: A USER-FRIENDLY BIOLOGICAL SEQUENCE ALIGNMENT EDITOR AND ANALYSIS PROGRAM FOR WINDOWS 95/98/ NT. 1999.
- 32. Tamura K, Stecher G, Kumar S. MEGA11: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis Version 11. Battistuzzi FU, editor. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 2021;38: 3022–3027. pmid:33892491
- 33. Szklarczyk D, Gable AL, Nastou KC, Lyon D, Kirsch R, Pyysalo S, et al. The STRING database in 2021: customizable protein–protein networks, and functional characterization of user-uploaded gene/measurement sets. Nucleic Acids Research. 2021;49: D605–D612. pmid:33237311
- 34. Howard ML, Davidson EH. cis-Regulatory control circuits in development. Developmental Biology. 2004;271: 109–118. pmid:15196954
- 35. Berleth T, Burri M, Thoma G, Bopp D, Richstein S, Frigerio G, et al. The role of localization of bicoid RNA in organizing the anterior pattern of the Drosophila embryo. The EMBO Journal. 1988;7: 1749–1756. pmid:2901954
- 36. Steward R, Zusman SB, Huang LH, Schedl P. The dorsal protein is distributed in a gradient in early Drosophila embryos. Cell. 1988;55: 487–495. pmid:2460244
- 37. Driever W, Nüsslein-Volhard C. The bicoid protein determines position in the Drosophila embryo in a concentration-dependent manner. Cell. 1988;54: 95–104. pmid:3383245
- 38. Rudolf H, Zellner C, El-Sherif E. Speeding up anterior-posterior patterning of insects by differential initialization of the gap gene cascade. Developmental Biology. 2020;460: 20–31. pmid:31075221
- 39. Juven-Gershon T, Hsu J-Y, Kadonaga JT. Caudal, a key developmental regulator, is a DPE-specific transcriptional factor. Genes Dev. 2008;22: 2823–2830. pmid:18923080
- 40. Treisman J, Desplan C. The products of the Drosophila gap genes hunchback and Krüppel bind to the hunchback promoters. Nature. 1989;341: 335–337. pmid:2797150
- 41. Qian S, Capovilla M, Pirrotta V. The bx region enhancer, a distant cis-control element of the Drosophila Ubx gene and its regulation by hunchback and other segmentation genes. The EMBO Journal. 1991;10: 1415–1425. pmid:1902784
- 42. Štanojević D, Hoey T, Levine M. Sequence-specific DNA-binding activities of the gap proteins encoded by hunchback and Krüppel in Drosophila. Nature. 1989;341: 331–335. pmid:2507923
- 43. Tony Ip Y, Kraut R, Levine M, Rushlow CA. The dorsal morphogen is a sequence-specific DNA-binding protein that interacts with a long-range repression element in drosophila. Cell. 1991;64: 439–446. pmid:1988156
- 44. Small S, Blair A, Levine M. Regulation of Two Pair-Rule Stripes by a Single Enhancer in the Drosophila Embryo. Developmental Biology. 1996;175: 314–324. pmid:8626035
- 45. Agostini F, Cirillo D, Ponti RD, Tartaglia GG. SeAMotE: a method for high-throughput motif discovery in nucleic acid sequences. BMC Genomics. 2014;15: 925. pmid:25341390
- 46. Bailey TL, Williams N, Misleh C, Li WW. MEME: discovering and analyzing DNA and protein sequence motifs. Nucleic Acids Research. 2006;34: W369–W373. pmid:16845028
- 47. Jolma A, Kivioja T, Toivonen J, Cheng L, Wei G, Enge M, et al. Multiplexed massively parallel SELEX for characterization of human transcription factor binding specificities. Genome Res. 2010;20: 861–873. pmid:20378718
- 48. Jothi R, Cuddapah S, Barski A, Cui K, Zhao K. Genome-wide identification of in vivo protein-DNA binding sites from ChIP-Seq data. Nucleic Acids Research. 2008;36: 5221–5231. pmid:18684996
- 49. Luehr S, Hartmann H, Soding J. The XXmotif web server for eXhaustive, weight matriX-based motif discovery in nucleotide sequences. Nucleic Acids Research. 2012;40: W104–W109. pmid:22693218
- 50. Bulyk ML. Computational prediction of transcription-factor binding site locations. Genome Biol. 2003;5: 201. pmid:14709165
- 51. Sullivan AM, Arsovski AA, Lempe J, Bubb KL, Weirauch MT, Sabo PJ, et al. Mapping and Dynamics of Regulatory DNA and Transcription Factor Networks in A. thaliana. Cell Reports. 2014;8: 2015–2030. pmid:25220462
- 52. Tompa M, Li N, Bailey TL, Church GM, De Moor B, Eskin E, et al. Assessing computational tools for the discovery of transcription factor binding sites. Nat Biotechnol. 2005;23: 137–144. pmid:15637633
- 53. Weirauch MT, Yang A, Albu M, Cote AG, Montenegro-Montero A, Drewe P, et al. Determination and Inference of Eukaryotic Transcription Factor Sequence Specificity. Cell. 2014;158: 1431–1443. pmid:25215497
- 54. Kapil S, Sobti RC, Kaur T. Prediction and analysis of cis-regulatory elements in Dorsal and Ventral patterning genes of Tribolium castaneum and its comparison with Drosophila melanogaster. Mol Cell Biochem. 2023 [cited 9 Apr 2023]. pmid:37004638
- 55. Lewis EB. A gene complex controlling segmentation in Drosophila. Nature. 1978;276: 565–570. pmid:103000
- 56. Nüsslein-Volhard C, Wieschaus E. Mutations affecting segment number and polarity in Drosophila. Nature. 1980;287: 795–801. pmid:6776413
- 57. Berman BP, Pfeiffer BD, Laverty TR, Salzberg SL, Rubin GM, Eisen MB, et al. Computational identification of developmental enhancers: conservation and function of transcription factor binding-site clusters in Drosophila melanogaster and Drosophila pseudoobscura. Genome Biol. 2004;5: R61. pmid:15345045
- 58. Wolff C, Schröder R, Schulz C, Tautz D, Klingler M. Regulation of the Tribolium homologues of caudal and hunchback in Drosophila: evidence for maternal gradient systems in a short germ embryo. Development. 1998;125: 3645–3654. pmid:9716530
- 59. Wunderlich Z, Fowlkes CC, Eckenrode KB, Bragdon MDJ, Abiri A, DePace AH. Quantitative comparison of the anterior-posterior patterning system in the embryos of five Drosophila species. G3 Genes|Genomes|Genetics. 2019;9: 2171–2182. pmid:31048401
- 60. Simpson-Brose M, Treisman J, Desplan C. Synergy between the hunchback and bicoid morphogens is required for anterior patterning in Drosophila. Cell. 1994;78: 855–865. pmid:8087852
- 61. Sauer F, Rivera-Pomar R, Hoch M, Jäckle H. Gene regulation in the Drosophila embryo. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B. 1996;351: 579–587. pmid:8735281
- 62.
Gilbert SF. The origins of anterior-posterior polarity. Developmental Biology 6th edition. 2000 [cited 12 Jun 2023]. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK10039/
- 63. Pankratz MJ, Busch M, Hoch M, Seifert E, Jäckle H. Spatial Control of the Gap Gene knirps in the Drosophila Embryo by Posterior Morphogen System. Science. 1992;255: 986–989. pmid:1546296
- 64. Hoch M, Gerwin N, Taubert H, Jäckle H. Competition for Overlapping Sites in the Regulatory Region of the Drosophila Gene Krüppel. Science. 1992;256: 94–97. pmid:1348871
- 65. Eldon ED, Pirrotta V. Interactions of the Drosophila gap gene giant with maternal and zygotic pattern-forming genes. Development. 1991;111: 367–378. pmid:1716553
- 66. Kraut R, Levine M. Mutually repressive interactions between the gap genes giant and Kruppel define middle body regions of the Drosophila embryo. Development. 1991;111: 611–621. pmid:1893878
- 67. Struhl G, Johnston P, Lawrence PA. Control of Drosophila body pattern by the hunchback morphogen gradient. Cell. 1992;69: 237–249. pmid:1568245
- 68. Rivera-Pomar R, Lu X, Perrimon N, Taubert H, Jäckle H. Activation of posterior gap gene expression in the Drosophila blastoderm. Nature. 1995;376: 253–256. pmid:7617036
- 69. Frasch M, Hoey T, Rushlow C, Doyle H, Levine M. Characterization and localization of the even-skipped protein of Drosophila. The EMBO Journal. 1987;6: 749–759. pmid:2884106
- 70. Macdonald PM, Ingham P, Struhl G. Isolation, structure, and expression of even-skipped: A second pair-rule gene of Drosophila containing a homeo box. Cell. 1986;47: 721–734. pmid:2877745
- 71. Fujioka M, Emi-Sarker Y, Yusibova GL, Goto T, Jaynes JB. Analysis of an even-skipped rescue transgene reveals both composite and discrete neuronal and early blastoderm enhancers, and multi-stripe positioning by gap gene repressor gradients*. Development. 1999;126: 2527–2538. pmid:10226011
- 72. Goto T, Macdonald P, Maniatis T. Early and late periodic patterns of even skipped expression are controlled by distinct regulatory elements that respond to different spatial cues. Cell. 1989;57: 413–422. pmid:2720776
- 73. Small S, Blair A, Levine M. Regulation of even-skipped stripe 2 in the Drosophila embryo. The EMBO Journal. 1992;11: 4047–4057. pmid:1327756
- 74. Struffi P, Corado M, Kaplan L, Yu D, Rushlow C, Small S. Combinatorial activation and concentration-dependent repression of the Drosophila even skipped stripe 3+7 enhancer. Development. 2011;138: 4291–4299. pmid:21865322
- 75. Klinger M, Gergen JP. Regulation of runt transcription by Drosophila segmentation genes. Mechanisms of Development. 1993;43: 3–19. pmid:8240970
- 76. Carroll SB, Laymon RA, McCutcheon MA, Riley PD, Scott MP. The localization and regulation of Antennapedia protein expression in Drosophila embryos. Cell. 1986;47: 113–122. pmid:3093083
- 77. Frasch M, Levine M. Complementary patterns of even-skipped and fushi tarazu expression involve their differential regulation by a common set of segmentation genes in Drosophila. Genes Dev. 1987;1: 981–995. pmid:2892761
- 78. Aranda M, Marques-Souza H, Bayer T, Tautz D. The role of the segmentation gene hairy in Tribolium. Dev Genes Evol. 2008;218: 465–477. pmid:18679713
- 79. Nasiadka A, Dietrich BH, Krause HM. Anterior-posterior patterning in the Drosophila embryo. Advances in Developmental Biology and Biochemistry. Elsevier; 2002. pp. 155–204.
- 80. Schroeder MD, Greer C, Gaul U. How to make stripes: deciphering the transition from non-periodic to periodic patterns in Drosophila segmentation. Development. 2011;138: 3067–3078. pmid:21693522
- 81. Choe CP, Miller SC, Brown SJ. A pair-rule gene circuit defines segments sequentially in the short-germ insect Tribolium castaneum. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2006;103: 6560–6564. pmid:16611732
- 82. The 1000 Genomes Project Consortium. A map of human genome variation from population-scale sequencing. Nature. 2010;467: 1061–1073. pmid:20981092
- 83. Guo Y, Ye F, Sheng Q, Clark T, Samuels DC. Three-stage quality control strategies for DNA re-sequencing data. Briefings in Bioinformatics. 2014;15: 879–889. pmid:24067931
- 84. Wang GT, Peng B, Leal SM. Variant Association Tools for Quality Control and Analysis of Large-Scale Sequence and Genotyping Array Data. The American Journal of Human Genetics. 2014;94: 770–783. pmid:24791902
- 85. Wang J, Raskin L, Samuels DC, Shyr Y, Guo Y. Genome measures used for quality control are dependent on gene function and ancestry. Bioinformatics. 2015;31: 318–323. pmid:25297068
- 86. Guo C, McDowell IC, Nodzenski M, Scholtens DM, Allen AS, Lowe WL, et al. Transversions have larger regulatory effects than transitions. BMC Genomics. 2017;18: 394. pmid:28525990