SUMMARYThe SIX family of homeodomain-containing DNA-binding proteins play crucial roles in both Drosophila and vertebrate retinal specification. In flies, three such family members exist, but only two, Sine oculis (So) and Optix, are expressed and function within the eye. In vertebrates, the homologs of Optix (Six3 and Six6) and probably So (Six1 and Six2) are also required for proper eye formation. Depending upon the individual SIX protein and the specific developmental context, transcription of target genes can either be activated or repressed. These activities are thought to occur through physical interactions with the Eyes absent (Eya) coactivator and the Groucho (Gro) co-repressor, but the relative contribution that each complex makes to overall eye development is not well understood. Here, we attempt to address this issue by investigating the role that each complex plays in the induction of ectopic eyes in Drosophila. We fused the VP16 activation and Engrailed repressor domains to both So and Optix, and attempted to generate ectopic eyes with these chimeric proteins. Surprisingly, we find that So and Optix must initially function as transcriptional repressors to trigger the formation of ectopic eyes. Both factors appear to be required to repress the expression of non-retinal selector genes. We propose that during early phases of eye development, SIX proteins function, in part, to repress the transcription of non-retinal selector genes, thereby allowing induction of the retina to proceed. This model of repressionmediated induction of developmental programs could have implications beyond the eye and might be applicable to other systems.

SUMMARYThe eye-antennal disc of Drosophila gives rise to numerous adult tissues, including the compound eyes, ocelli, antennae, maxillary palps and surrounding head capsule. The fate of each tissue is governed by the activity of unique gene regulatory networks (GRNs). The fate of the eye, for example, is controlled by a set of fourteen interlocking genes called the retinal determination (RD) network. Mutations within network members lead to replacement of the eyes with head capsule. Several studies have suggested that in these instances all retinal progenitor and precursor cells are eliminated via apoptosis and as a result the surrounding head capsule proliferates to compensate for retinal tissue loss. This model implies that the sole responsibility of the RD network is to promote the fate of the eye. We have re-analyzed eyes absent mutant discs and propose an alternative model. Our data suggests that in addition to promoting an eye fate the RD network simultaneously functions to actively repress GRNs that are responsible for directing antennal and head capsule fates. Compromising the RD network leads to the inappropriate expression of several head capsule selector genes such as cut, Lim1 and wingless. Instead of undergoing apoptosis, a population of mutant retinal progenitors and precursor cells adopt a head capsule fate. This transformation is accompanied by an adjustment of cell proliferation rates such that just enough head capsule is generated to produce an intact adult head. We propose that GRNs simultaneously promote primary fates, inhibit alternative fates and establish cell proliferation states.

Pax genes encode DNA binding proteins that play pivotal roles in the determination of complex tissues. Members of one subclass, Pax6, function as selector genes and play key roles in the retinal development of all seeing animals. Mutations within the Pax6 homologs including fly eyeless, mouse Small eye and human Pax6 lead to severe retinal defects in their respective systems. In Drosophila eyeless and twin of eyeless, play non-redundant roles in the developing retina. One particularly interesting characteristic of these genes is that, although expression of either gene can induce ectopic eye formation in non-retinal tissues, there are differences in the location and frequencies at which the eyes develop. eyeless induces much larger ectopic eyes, at higher frequencies, and in a broader range of tissues than twin of eyeless. In this report we describe a series of experiments conducted in both yeast and flies that has identified protein modules that are responsible for the differences in tissue transformation. These domains appear to contain transcriptional activator and repressor activity of distinct strengths. We propose a model in which the selective presence of these activities and their relative strengths accounts, in part, for the disparity to which ectopic eyes are induced in response to the forced expression of eyeless and twin of eyeless. The identification of both transcriptional activator and repressor activity within the Pax6 protein furthers our understanding of how this gene family regulates tissue determination.

In eye development the tasks of tissue specification and cell proliferation are regulated, in part, by the Pax6 and Pax6(5a) proteins respectively. In vertebrates, Pax6(5a) is generated as an alternately spliced isoform of Pax6. This stands in contrast to the fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster, which has two Pax6(5a) homologs that are encoded by the eyegone and twin of eyegone genes. In this report we set out to determine the respective contributions that each gene makes to the development of the fly retina. Here we demonstrate that both eyg and toe encode transcriptional repressors, are expressed in identical patterns but at significantly different levels. We further show, through a molecular dissection of both proteins, that Eyg makes differential use of several domains when compared to Toe and that the number of repressor domains also differs between the two Pax6(5a) homologs. We predict that these results will have implications for elucidating the functional differences between closely related members of other Pax subclasses.

The eyes absent (eya) gene of the fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster, is a member of an evolutionarily conserved gene regulatory network that controls eye formation in all seeing animals. The loss of eya leads to the complete elimination of the compound eye while forced expression of eya in non-retinal tissues is sufficient to induce ectopic eye formation. Within the developing retina eya is expressed in a dynamic pattern and is involved in tissue specification/determination, cell proliferation, apoptosis, and cell fate choice. In this report we explore the mechanisms by which eya expression is spatially and temporally governed in the developing eye. We demonstrate that multiple cis-regulatory elements function cooperatively to control eya transcription and that spacing between a pair of enhancer elements is important for maintaining correct gene expression. Lastly, we show that the loss of eya expression in sine oculis (so) mutants is the result of massive cell death and a progressive homeotic transformation of retinal progenitor cells into head epidermis.