The mouse forkhead gene Foxp2 modulates expression of the lung genes.

Department of Biochemistry, Hamamatsu University School of Medicine, 1-20-1 Handa-yama, Higashi-ku, Hamamatsu, Japan.
Life sciences (Impact Factor: 2.3). 07/2010; 87(1-2):17-25. DOI: 10.1016/j.lfs.2010.05.009
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Foxp2 is expressed in the lung during mouse development. A monoclonal anti-mouse Foxp2 antibody was created to determine the expression pattern in the developing lung. Next, transcriptional control of two lung genes, CC10 and surfactant protein C (SPC) genes, by Foxp2 was investigated in H441 and A549 cells. Thirdly, expression patterns of Foxp2 and Foxf2 were compared in the developing lung. Finally, Foxp2 expression was determined in the Foxf2-null mice.
Immunohistochemical staining and in situ hybridization were applied to the sections of lungs in the developing embryos.
Monoclonal anti-Foxp2 antibody demonstrated that Foxp2 was expressed in the bronchial epithelium at E10.5 and its expression became restricted to the distal portion of the elongating bronchiolar epithelium and finally to type II alveolar epithelial cells around birth and in the adult. Foxp2 activated the SPC gene promoter in the presence of Nkx2.1 in A549 cells while it repressed the CC10 gene promoter in H441 cells. Next, the expression domains of the Foxp2 and Foxf2 were found to be exclusive in the lung. Finally, the expression of Foxp2 did not change in the lung of Foxf2-null mice.
The Foxp2 protein is expressed in the growing distal edge of airway epithelium. When the bronchiolus elongates, Foxp2 suppresses CC10 expression. When the lung alveolus is formed, Foxp2 modulates the Nkx2.1-mediated SPC expression in type II alveolar cells. Foxp2 and Foxf2 independently play distinct roles in the alveoli and the mesenchyme, respectively.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Thymus development is a complicated process that includes highly dynamic morphological changes and reciprocal tissue interactions between endoderm-derived epithelial cells of the anterior foregut and neural crest-derived mesenchymal cells. We generated and characterized a Tbx1-AmCyan1 reporter transgenic mouse to visualize thymus precursor cells during early embryonic development. In transgenic embryos, AmCyan1 fluorescence was specifically detected in the endoderm of the developing 3rd and 4th pharyngeal pouches and later in thymus epithelium until E14.5. Cells expressing AmCyan1 that were isolated based on AmCyan1 fluorescence expressed endodermal, thymic, and parathyroid markers, but they did not express neural crest or endothelial markers; these findings indicated that this transgenic mouse strain could be used to collect thymic or parathyroid precursor cells or both. We also showed that in nude mice, which exhibit defects in thymus development, the thymus precursors were clearly labeled with AmCyan1. In summary, these AmCyan1-fluorescent transgenic mice are useful for investigating early thymus development.
    Transgenic Research 11/2012; 22(3). DOI:10.1007/s11248-012-9664-5 · 2.28 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: As one of the most conserved genes in vertebrates, FoxP2 is widely involved in a number of important physiological and developmental processes. We systematically studied the evolutionary history and functional adaptations of FoxP2 in teleosts. The duplicated FoxP2 genes (FoxP2a and FoxP2b), which were identified in teleosts using synteny and paralogon analysis on genome databases of eight organisms, were probably generated in the teleost-specific whole genome duplication event. A credible classification with FoxP2, FoxP2a and FoxP2b in phylogenetic reconstructions confirmed the teleost-specific FoxP2 duplication. The unavailability of FoxP2b in Danio rerio suggests that the gene was deleted through nonfunctionalization of the redundant copy after the Otocephala-Euteleostei split. Heterogeneity in evolutionary rates among clusters consisting of FoxP2 in Sarcopterygii (Cluster 1), FoxP2a in Teleostei (Cluster 2) and FoxP2b in Teleostei (Cluster 3), particularly between Clusters 2 and 3, reveals asymmetric functional divergence after the gene duplication. Hierarchical cluster analyses of hydrophobicity profiles demonstrated significant structural divergence among the three clusters with verification of subsequent stepwise discriminant analysis, in which FoxP2 of Leucoraja erinacea and Lepisosteus oculatus were classified into Cluster 1, whereas FoxP2b of Salmo salar was grouped into Cluster 2 rather than Cluster 3. The simulated thermodynamic stability variations of the forkhead box domain (monomer and homodimer) showed remarkable divergence in FoxP2, FoxP2a and FoxP2b clusters. Relaxed purifying selection and positive Darwinian selection probably were complementary driving forces for the accelerated evolution of FoxP2 in ray-finned fishes, especially for the adaptive evolution of FoxP2a and FoxP2b in teleosts subsequent to the teleost-specific gene duplication.
    PLoS ONE 12/2013; 8(12):e83858. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0083858 · 3.53 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study builds on the hypothesis put forth in Boeckx and Benítez-Burraco (2014), according to which the developmental changes expressed at the levels of brain morphology and neural connectivity that resulted in a more globular braincase in our species were crucial to understand the origins of our language-ready brain. Specifically, this paper explores the links between two well-known 'language-related' genes like FOXP2 and ROBO1 implicated in vocal learning and the initial set of genes of interest put forth in Boeckx and Benítez-Burraco (2014), with RUNX2 as focal point. Relying on the existing literature, we uncover potential molecular links that could be of interest to future experimental inquiries into the biological foundations of language and the testing of our initial hypothesis. Our discussion could also be relevant for clinical linguistics and for the interpretation of results from paleogenomics.
    Frontiers in Psychology 01/2014; 5:1324. DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01324 · 2.80 Impact Factor