![[Feedback]](/icons/banner/feedbackACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[For Subscribers]](/icons/banner/subscriberACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[Archive]](/icons/banner/archiveACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[Search]](/icons/banner/searchACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[Contents]](/icons/banner/tocACT.gif){kind=icon}
|
|
|
|
|
||
Vol. 16, No. 9, pp. 1150-1162, May 1, 2002
Laboratory for Development and Evolution, University Museum of
Zoology, Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge,
Cambridge CB2 3EJ, UK
Hox genes specify the different morphologies of segments along the
anteroposterior axis of animals. How they control complex segment
morphologies is not well understood. We have studied how the Hox gene
Ultrabithorax (Ubx) controls specific differences between the bristle patterns of the second and third thoracic segments
(T2 and T3) of Drosophila melanogaster. We find that Ubx blocks the development of two particular bristles on T3 at different points in sensory organ development. For the apical bristle,
a precursor is singled out and undergoes a first division in both the
second and third legs, but in the third leg further differentiation of
the second-order precursors is blocked. For the posterior sternopleural
bristle, development on T3 ceases after proneural cluster initiation.
Analysis of the temporal requirement for Ubx shows that in both
cases Ubx function is required shortly before bristle
development is blocked. We suggest that interactions between
Ubx and the bristle patterning hierarchy have evolved independently on many occasions, affecting different molecular steps.
The effects of Ubx on bristle development are highly dependent on the context of other patterning information. Suppression of bristle
development or changes in bristle morphology in response to endogenous
and ectopic Ubx expression are limited to bristles at specific
locations.
[Key Words: Drosophila; Hox; Ubx; sensory organs; bristle; context]
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  S. E. Bondos, X.-X. Tan, and K. S. Matthews Physical and Genetic Interactions Link Hox Function with Diverse Transcription Factors and Cell Signaling Proteins Mol. Cell. Proteomics, May 1, 2006; 5(5): 824 - 834. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 B. Monier, M. Astier, M. Semeriva, and L. Perrin Steroid-dependent modification of Hox function drives myocyte reprogramming in the Drosophila heart Development, December 1, 2005; 132(23): 5283 - 5293. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. M. Hersh and S. B. Carroll Direct regulation of knot gene expression by Ultrabithorax and the evolution of cis-regulatory elements in Drosophila Development, April 1, 2005; 132(7): 1567 - 1577. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. O. Gaufo, S. Wu, and M. R. Capecchi Contribution of Hox genes to the diversity of the hindbrain sensory system Development, March 15, 2004; 131(6): 1259 - 1266. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. O. Gaufo, K. R. Thomas, and M. R. Capecchi Hox3 genes coordinate mechanisms of genetic suppression and activation in the generation of branchial and somatic motoneurons Development, November 1, 2003; 130(21): 5191 - 5201. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. Orgogozo, F. Schweisguth, and Y. Bellaiche Binary cell death decision regulated by unequal partitioning of Numb at mitosis Development, March 12, 2003; 129(20): 4677 - 4684. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
