| Literature DB >> 16784547 |
Daniel E Zak1, Haiping Hao, Rajanikanth Vadigepalli, Gregory M Miller, Babatunde A Ogunnaike, James S Schwaber.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Identifying the gene regulatory networks governing physiological signal integration remains an important challenge in circadian biology. Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) has been implicated in circadian function and is expressed in the suprachiasmatic nuclei (SCN), the core circadian pacemaker. The transcription networks downstream of EGFR in the SCN are unknown but, by analogy to other SCN inputs, we expect the response to EGFR activation to depend on circadian timing.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2006 PMID: 16784547 PMCID: PMC1779538 DOI: 10.1186/gb-2006-7-6-r48
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Genome Biol ISSN: 1474-7596 Impact factor: 13.583
Figure 1EGFR activation induces circadian time (CT) dependent and CT independent transcriptional programs in the SCN. Results for genes with expression changes detected at a False Discovery Rate (FDR) <2% (see Materials and methods). (a) Genes with expression levels modulated by CT but not EGF treatment. (b) Genes with expression responses to EGFR activation that were not CT-dependent. (c) Genes with expression levels modulated by EGFR activation at nighttime only. (d) Genes with expression levels modulated by EGFR activation during daytime only. (e) Genes up-regulated by EGFR activation during the circadian day and repressed at night. (f) Genes down-regulated by EGFR activation during the circadian day and induced at night. Blue and red shades represent negative and positive scaled log2-expression levels or expression differences, respectively. C.1 and C.2 represent daytime control rats whereas C.N1 and C.N2 represent nighttime control rats. E.1 and E.2 represent EGF-treated (20 nM, 1 hour) daytime rats while E.N1 and E.N2 represent EGF-treated nighttime rats. Log2-expression levels in these cases were scaled for each gene by first subtracting random components for each rat, and then subtracting the mean log2-expression level over all conditions. To facilitate comparisons between genes, these mean-zeroed expression levels were divided by their maximum absolute value. dE.1 and dE.2 represent scaled EGF-induced log-expression differences in daytime rats while dE.N1 and dE.N2 represent scaled EGF-induced log-expression differences in nighttime rats. To facilitate comparisons between genes, these expression differences were divided by their maximum absolute value. Genes are represented by gene symbols, except in cases where annotation was not available and clone IDs are given instead. Images were created using the free Treeview program [62]. Additional data file 1 displays the relativeanimal-animal variability in the expression responses for a selected subset of genes.
EGF responsive genes in the SCN are involved in diverse cellular processes and potentially regulated by diverse transcription factors
| GO | ||||||||||
| PAINT | ATF3 | 0.02 | 0.16 | 5 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 2.9 | 0.02 | 0.52 | |
| CREBATF | 3.E-03 | 0.06 | 5 | 0.1 | 0.5 | 4.3 | 0.04 | 0.59 | ||
| CRE-BP1:c-Jun | 0.01 | 0.14 | 7 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 2.6 | 0.02 | 0.31 | ||
| CONS | V$AP1_2 | 0.02 | 0.90 | 71 | 0.8 | 0.1 | 1.1 | 0.03 | 0.11 | |
| V$OCT1_07 | 0.02 | 0.90 | 10 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 2.0 | 0.05 | 0.23 | ||
| V$RORA2_01 | 0.01 | 0.54 | 6 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 3.1 | 0.06 | 0.19 | ||
| Circ. | ||||||||||
| GO | ||||||||||
| PAINT | c-Ets-1/68 | 0.07 | 0.36 | 8 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 1.8 | 0.06 | 0.13 | |
| CREB | 0.01 | 0.10 | 7 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 2.7 | 0.01 | 0.11 | ||
| CREBATF | 8.E-04 | 0.02 | 5 | 0.1 | 0.5 | 5.7 | 0.02 | 0.60 | ||
| CRE-BP1:c-Jun | 0.01 | 0.10 | 6 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 3.0 | 0.01 | 0.23 | ||
| E2F | 0.03 | 0.20 | 5 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 2.7 | 0.02 | 0.28 | ||
| CONS | ||||||||||
| V$CETS1P54_01 | 0.03 | 0.71 | 46 | 0.7 | 0.1 | 1.2 | 0.05 | 0.13 | ||
| V$CREBP1_Q2 | 0.03 | 0.71 | 8 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 2.1 | 0.04 | 0.36 | ||
| V$ER_Q6_02 | 0.02 | 0.69 | 30 | 0.5 | 0.1 | 1.4 | 0.01 | 0.10 | ||
| V$RORA2_01 | 1.E-03 | 0.11 | 6 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 4.4 | 0.03 | 0.14 | ||
| ChIP | HNF1-alpha | 0.04 | 0.11 | 6 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 2.3 | 0.15 | 0.25 | |
| Circ. | SCN circadian genes [17] | 0.05 | - | 13 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 1.6 | 0.07 | - | |
| GO | ||||||||||
| Protein kinase activity | 2.E-03 | 0.02 | 6 | 0.3 | 0.1 | 4.2 | 0.03 | 0.37 | ||
| Protein serine/threonine kinase activity | 1.E-03 | 0.02 | 6 | 0.3 | 0.1 | 4.8 | 0.02 | 0.32 | ||
| Transferase activity | 2.E-03 | 0.02 | 9 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 2.8 | 0.04 | 0.22 | ||
| CONS | ||||||||||
| CONS | V$CREB_Q2 | 2.E-03 | 0.15 | 5 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 4.8 | 0.01 | 0.65 | |
| V$CREB_Q4 | 9.E-04 | 0.12 | 6 | 0.5 | 0.1 | 4.5 | 4.E-03 | 0.55 | ||
| V$CREB_Q4_01 | 4.E-03 | 0.19 | 7 | 0.5 | 0.05 | 2.9 | 0.01 | 0.50 | ||
| ChIP | CREB (relaxed) | 0.11 | 0.11 | 6 | 0.5 | 0.03 | 1.7 | 0.24 | 0.35 | |
| CONS | V$AP1_C | 3.E-03 | 0.14 | 27 | 0.7 | 0.1 | 1.5 | 0.03 | 0.17 | |
| V$CEBP_Q2_01 | 0.02 | 0.40 | 31 | 0.8 | 0.1 | 1.3 | 0.04 | 0.16 | ||
| V$ER_Q6_02 | 4.E-03 | 0.16 | 23 | 0.6 | 0.1 | 1.6 | 0.02 | 0.15 | ||
| V$HFH4_01 | 2.E-03 | 0.13 | 7 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 3.6 | 4.E-03 | 0.20 | ||
| V$LMO2COM_02 | 0.02 | 0.43 | 29 | 0.7 | 0.1 | 1.3 | 0.06 | 0.13 | ||
Statistically significant enrichments for specific cellular functions or TF binding sites (Attribute) are given for gene groups with specific circadian time dependent EGF responses (Gene group). Distinct gene groups are enriched for distinct and overlapping functions and TF binding sites. GO, gene ontology functional annotation; PAINT, TF binding sites predictions using PAINT [21]; CONS, TF binding sites based on evolutionary conservation [27]; ChIP, TF binding predictions based on the protein-DNA interaction data [28, 29]; Circ., established circadian rhythmic SCN gene expression [17]; pENRICH, gene group enrichment p value; pENRICH(FDR), false discovery rate (FDR) adjusted pENRICH; No. of genes, number of genes in gene group with the attribute; GFRAC, fraction of genes in the gene group with the attribute; AFRAC, fraction of all genes on the microarray with the attribute that are in the gene group; ENRICH, fold enrichment of the attribute in the gene group over random; pM(LOCAL), local meta-analysis enrichment p value; pM(GLOBAL), global meta-analysis enrichment p value. pENRICH, pENRICH(FDR), No. of genes, GFRAC, AFRAC, and ENRICH values are for results obtained using the standard normalization and are based on gene groups defined at a significance threshold of 1% FDR for GO enrichments, a significance threshold of 2% for PAINT, CONS and ChIP enrichments, and a significance threshold of 5% for circadian gene enrichments. pM(LOCAL) values are for standard normalization results and gene group significance thresholds of 5%, 2%, and 1% FDR for GO, PAINT, CONS, and ChIP enrichments and gene group significance thresholds of 20%, 10%, and 5% FDR for Circ. enrichments. Emphasized attributes are robust as indicated by both meta-analysis p values (pM(LOCAL) < 0.06 and pM(GLOBAL) < 0.1).
Figure 2TF transcriptional responses to SCN EGFR activation and their expression correlations with target gene groups. (a) Gene expression responses to EGFR activation of five TFs implicated by the gene group enrichment (qRT-PCR). c-Jun is consistently down-regulated during both day and night, c-Ets1 and Creb1 are both down-regulated during the day and up-regulated during the night, C/EBPα is consistently up-regulated during the night only, and C/EBPβ is consistently down-regulated during the day only. Red and blue shades represent positive and negative changes in expression, respectively. dE.1, dE.2, and dE.3 represent scaled normalized -ΔCt values (approximate log2 expression levels, see Materials and methods) in daytime rats while dE.N1 and dE.N2 represent scaled -ΔCt values in nighttime rats. To facilitate comparisons between genes, expression differences were divided by their maximum absolute values. Additional data file 2 displays the relative animal-animal variability in the expression responses. (b) Statistically significant (p < 0.01) average absolute Pearson correlations between scaled log2 TF expression levels (qRT-PCR) and scaled log2 expression levels of EGF responsive genes (microarray). Creb1 expression was strongly correlated with expression profiles of putative circadian time dependent target gene groups whereas c-Ets1 expression was more weakly, but nevertheless significantly, correlated with those gene groups. c-Jun was predicted to regulate target genes in a circadian time dependent manner but has a circadian time independent expression response that is significantly correlated with the circadian time independent gene group. C/EBPβ expression was significantly correlated with putative daytime C/EBP target genes while C/EBPα expression was significantly correlated with putative C/EBP target nighttime responsive genes. Black squares indicate the absence of statistically significant correlations whereas orange squares indicate the presence of statistically significant correlations. Correlation strength is represented by color intensity, with the lowest significant average absolute correlation being 0.5 (between C/EBPα and the overall EGF responsive gene set) and the highest significant average absolute correlation being 0.9 (between Creb1 and the genes responsive to EGF during the day and the night). Images for (a) and (b) were created using the free program Treeview [62].
Figure 3Hypothesized regulatory interactions that partially account for circadian time dependent EGFR transcriptional responses in the SCN. Modulation of the SCN gene expression response to EGFR activation (via EGF) by the circadian clock was investigated in the present study. We identified groups of genes with both CT-dependent and CT-independent expression responses, and these groups were enriched for specific cellular functions and the presence of specific TF binding sites in their promoters. Genes with CT-independent EGF responses were enriched for serine/threonine kinase activity and for C/EBPγ binding sites in their promoters. Given their CT-independent responses, and given that we observed weak CT-independent C/EBPγ expression responses to EGF, it is plausible that the EGFR-regulated signaling pathways responsible for their induction through C/EBPγ-dependent and -independent mechanisms function independently of the circadian clock. Genes with CT-dependent responses were enriched for involvement in cellular differentiation processes and the presence of c-Ets1, AP1, C/EBP, RORα, and CREB binding sites. Although RORα is a direct regulatory target of the circadian clock, we did not observe CT or EGFR expression responses for this gene and, thus, it may cause EGF induced CT-dependent gene regulation through post-transcriptional mechanisms. On the other hand, we did observe CT-dependent EGFR expression responses of c-Ets1, Creb1, C/EBPα, and C/EBPβ, constituting a mechanism by which these genes may cause CT-dependent expression responses of their target genes, and indicating that these TFs must be regulated by CT-dependent pathways. Interestingly, c-Jun EGFR expression responses were CT-independent, indicating that it must regulate CT-dependent expression responses through CT-dependent post-transcriptional mechanisms. Solid lines indicate direct interactions, dotted lines represent indirect CT-independent interactions, and dashed lines represent indirect CT-dependent interactions. CREB is emphasized given the strong support provided by multiple independent analyses for its involvement in the EGFR response.
Figure 4Experimental design. We used a total of four rats in the present microarray studies, two for the circadian day (8 hours after lights on, rats (a) and (b)), and two for the circadian night (2 hours after lights off, rats (c) and (d)). From each rat we obtained coronal slices that contained two SCN (left and right), separated by the third ventricle. Slices were separated along the third ventricle and placed in media containing EGF (20 nM) or control vehicle (C) for one hour. RNA for use with the microarrays was then extracted from SCN punches from the slices.
Figure 5Hierarchical analysis approach. Genes were first classified as EGF responsive by performing a likelihood ratio test to compare the fits of maximum likelihood estimated mixed models with and without EGF terms. EGF responsive genes were then classified as to whether or not they had a significant EGF:CT interaction, as determined by a Wald F-test of the REML estimated full model. EGF responsive genes with EGF:CT interactions were then classified according to whether they were responsive to EGF during the day only, during the night only, or at both times. Genes with significant EGF:CT interactions were then subdivided according to the directionality ofthe responses.