QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

Vol. 20, Issue 1, 256-269, January 1, 2009

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Supplemental Materials All Versions of this Article: E08-03-0288v1 20/1/256    most recent Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Deng, H. Articles by Simmonds, A. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Deng, H. Articles by Simmonds, A. J.

Alternative Requirements for Vestigial, Scalloped, and Dmef2 during Muscle Differentiation in Drosophila melanogaster

Hua Deng^*,, Sarah C. Hughes, John B. Bell, and Andrew J. Simmonds^*

*Department of Cell Biology, Department of Biological Sciences, and Department of Medical Genetics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2H7, Canada

Submitted March 17, 2008; Revised October 14, 2008; Accepted October 29, 2008
Monitoring Editor: Marianne Bronner-Fraser

Vertebrate development requires the activity of the myocyte enhancer factor 2 (mef2) gene family for muscle cell specification and subsequent differentiation. Additionally, several muscle-specific functions of MEF2 family proteins require binding additional cofactors including members of the Transcription Enhancing Factor-1 (TEF-1) and Vestigial-like protein families. In Drosophila there is a single mef2 (Dmef2) gene as well single homologues of TEF-1 and vestigial-like, scalloped (sd), and vestigial (vg), respectively. To clarify the role(s) of these factors, we examined the requirements for Vg and Sd during Drosophila muscle specification. We found that both are required for muscle differentiation as loss of sd or vg leads to a reproducible loss of a subset of either cardiac or somatic muscle cells in developing embryos. This muscle requirement for Sd or Vg is cell specific, as ubiquitous overexpression of either or both of these proteins in muscle cells has a deleterious effect on muscle differentiation. Finally, using both in vitro and in vivo binding assays, we determined that Sd, Vg, and Dmef2 can interact directly. Thus, the muscle-specific phenotypes we have associated with Vg or Sd may be a consequence of alternative binding of Vg and/or Sd to Dmef2 forming alternative protein complexes that modify Dmef2 activity.

Address correspondence to: Andrew J. Simmonds (andrew.simmonds{at}ualberta.ca).