 |
Previous Article | Next Article 
The Journal of Neuroscience, January 1, 1998, 18(1):227-236
Tissue and Zonal-Specific Expression of an Olfactory Receptor
Transgene
Pankaj
Qasba and
Randall R.
Reed
The Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Departments of Molecular
Biology and Genetics and Neuroscience, The Johns Hopkins University
School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland 21205
 |
ABSTRACT |
Discrimination of odorants is thought to arise from the selective
expression of one of a small number of individual receptors in any
single olfactory neuron. Receptor genes are expressed in a small subset
of neurons throughout a zonally restricted region of the sensory
epithelium. We demonstrate that a 6.7 kb region upstream of the
M4 olfactory receptor coding region was sufficient to
direct expression in olfactory epithelium. Moreover, reporter expression recapitulated the zonal restriction and distributed neuronal
expression observed for endogenous olfactory receptors. Transgenic
lines were obtained that directed expression in two different receptor
zones, one of which was identical to the endogenous M4
receptor. When the reporter was expressed in the same zone as the
endogenous M4 receptor, the two expression patterns
were, in large part, nonoverlapping. These results suggest a model in which important regulatory elements are located in close proximity to
transcription initiation sites of the olfactory receptor genes and
receive information defining zonal patterning via long-range processes.
Key words:
transgene; receptors; zones; M4; sensory
neurons; olfactory epithelium
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The remarkable sensitivity of the
mammalian olfactory system to discriminate a vast variety of diverse
odors is the result of complex anatomical, cellular, biochemical, and
genetic specialization. Humans, for example, can discriminate among
10,000 or so distinct odors, which include resolution of many
stereoisomers into distinct perceived odor quality (Amoore, 1970 ). The
underlying mechanism or mechanisms that contribute to the exquisite
discriminatory capability of the olfactory system remain to be
answered.
Cells within the olfactory epithelium follow a highly ordered
developmental program, resulting in a high level of expression of gene
products essential for odorant signal transduction. The primary event
in signal transduction occurs in the olfactory sensory neurons that
line the posterior nasal cavity (Jones et al., 1988 ; Reed, 1992b ).
Unlike other neurons, olfactory neurons are replaced continuously by
the underlying layer of stem cells (Graziadei and Graziadei, 1979 ;
Monti-Graziadei and Graziadei, 1979 ). The neuronal precursor cells
undergo a complex developmental program, followed by differentiation to
mature olfactory neurons.
The assumption that olfactory receptors would display homology to other
G-protein-coupled receptors led to the identification of a large
multigene family thought to encode odorant receptors in rat (Buck and
Axel, 1991 ). Subsequently, additional members of this family have been
identified (Levy et al., 1991 ; Parmentier et al., 1992 ; Strotmann et
al., 1992 , 1994 ; Raming et al., 1993 ; Sullivan, 1996). These receptors
exhibit, as predicted, a seven transmembrane domain topology
characteristic of the G-protein-coupled receptor superfamily. The size
of the odorant receptor repertoire in mammals may include as many as
1000 genes (Levy et al., 1991 ; Reed, 1992a ) that are divided into
subfamilies of multiple, highly related receptors (Buck and Axel,
1991 ). The small number (0.5-1%) of olfactory neurons that express
individual odorant receptor genes within the rodent neuroepithelium
suggest that each neuron might express only one or a few odorant
receptor genes (Ressler et al., 1993 ; Vassar et al., 1994 ) Therefore,
each cell possesses a unique functional identity or receptor phenotype
that is specific to the receptor or receptors it expresses. How does an
olfactory neuron express a restricted subset of receptors selectively
from the enormous odorant receptor repertoire? This differential
expression of individual members of the olfactory receptor family in
the sensory neurons represents a complex problem in gene
regulation.
In mammals, the olfactory epithelium appears to be organized into
distinct topographic regions or zones in which expression of a
particular receptor gene appears to be restricted to one of the four
zones in the epithelium (Ressler et al., 1993 ; Vassar, 1993) Within the
zone the distribution of neurons expressing a given receptor is random.
Chromosomal mapping studies have revealed clusters of odorant receptor
genes at a single locus, and numerous such loci have been mapped to
different chromosomes (Sullivan, 1996). However, receptors expressed in
the same zone map to different loci, and a single locus can contain
genes expressed in different zones. Selective receptor expression could
depend on using transcription factors or novel mechanisms such as gene
rearrangement or gene conversion (Hicks et al., 1977 ; Davis and
Davidson, 1986 ; Reed, 1992a ).
To assess the feasibility of these models, we examined the pattern of
odorant receptor gene expression with a transgenic approach, using a
single-copy mouse olfactory receptor gene from a subfamily that
contained only one member. We constructed transgenic lines, using the
receptor 5 flanking DNA to define the regulatory regions that may be
present within the putative 6.7 kb promoter region involved in tissue
specificity and zonal patterns of receptor expression for this
receptor. We demonstrate that expression of a reporter gene driven by
the 6.7 kb DNA fragment upstream of a receptor coding region imparts
several aspects of the complex receptor regulation. Specifically, this
putative odorant receptor promoter was sufficient to direct olfactory
receptor expression in a tissue-specific, zonal-specific manner, and
this expression within the zone was seen only in a subset of neurons.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Cloning of mouse M4
A 550 bp PCR product, representing a heterogeneous mix of mouse
genes encoding odorant receptor coding region segments (transmembrane region II and VI; Levy et al., 1991 ), was used as a probe to screen a
mouse genomic library in FIX at low stringency (wash conditions, 2×
SSC at 55°C). One of the clones isolated, M4, was
restriction-mapped further and analyzed in detail. The majority of the
M4 coding sequence was contained on a 1.0 kb
HindIII fragment. An adjacent 5 HindIII fragment
of 6.7 kb, potentially containing M4 upstream sequences, was
cloned and characterized.
For genomic DNA hybridization analysis, mouse DNA was digested
separately with HindIII, BamHI, and
EcoRI, size-fractionated on a 1% agarose gel, and
transferred to Genescreen Plus. The filter was UV-cross-linked (UV
Stratalinker 2400, Stratagene, La Jolla, CA); prehybridized at 65°C
in 6× SSC, 5× Denhardt's, 0.5% SDS, and 100 µg/ml denatured,
fragmented salmon sperm DNA; and hybridized in the same buffer at
65°C with 32P-labeled fragment. Wash conditions were as
indicated in the figure legends.
5 rapid amplification of the cDNA ends (RACE)
One microgram of total RNA from mouse olfactory tissue was
reverse-transcribed by the Life Technologies (Gaithersburg, MD) first-strand cDNA synthesis kit (Superscript). An aliquot (10 µl) was
used for the 5 RACE reaction as described (Frohman et al., 1988 ). The
primers, RACE I and RACE II, and the nested M4-specific primers, PQ3 and PQ4, were used for the amplification reaction. Amplified products were resolved on a native polyacrylamide gel, cloned
into pBluescript, and sequenced with T7 and T3 primers. The PQ5 and PQ6
primers, based on the sequence of the 305 and 283 bp products from
independent RACE reactions, were used in combination with the T7 or T3
primers to map the location of the upstream exon on the 6.7 kb
HindIII genomic fragment cloned in pBluescript.
Primers used
Following is a list of the primers used: RACE I,
5 -GATGGATCCTGCAGAAGCTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT; RACE II, 5 -GATGGATCCTGCAGAAGC;
PQ1, 5 -CTCATCAGCCTCAGGAGCCATG (+M4);PQ2,
5 -CAGAAGTGACACTTAGATACTT ( M4); PQ3,
5 -GAAGGCTGAGAAACCAAAGAG (M4, 39 bp from ATG); PQ4, 5 -CTAGTCGAATTCCTGATATGGTGTAGTTCTGAC (M4, 7 bp from ATG
with EcoRI); PQ5, 5 -CAGGATTGTTCAGAAACCCAGCCCA (RACE,
bottom strand); PQ6, 5 -TCCCACAGGATTGTTCAG (RACE, top strand); PQ33,
5 -CGCTCGCCACTTCAACATCAACG ( -galactosidase top strand, +2400); PQ36,
5 -GCGACCCGCATTGACCCT ( -galactosidase bottom strand, 2651);
PQ37, 5 -GCATGCCCACATACACATGCCCAG (junction fragment
E5, top strand); PQ39, 5 -CCTCTGTATCTCAGGGGCACA (junction
fragment E5, bottom strand); PQ57,
5 -CTTAAGTGCGGCCGCACCATCCAGCGCCAC ( -galactosidase top strand,
+1980); PQ59, 5 -GAATTCAGCGGCCGCGCCGGGCAACTCTGGCTC ( -galactosidase bottom strand, 2260); PQ74,
5 -GGTTATCTCCAACATACCCAACTTCG (junction fragment D5, top
strand); PQ79, 5 -CATAATCTCACTTTGCTGAAACATCC (junction fragment
D5, bottom strand); RR318, 5 -GGACTTGCTATTCTGTGCATCTAG (mouse Protamine 1, bottom strand 920); and RR319,
5 -GAAGTGGCGAGCGATACACCGCAT ( -galactosidase top strand, +2700).
Cloning of junction fragment or fragments
The E5 transgene integration target site was isolated
by using genomic DNA from the liver tissue of E5 animals,
followed by digestion with BamHI and size fractionation on a
0.75% agarose gel. DNA fragments (6-12 kb) were excised from the gel,
electroeluted, and cloned into DASHII (Stratagene). Approximately
6 × 104 plaques were screened with a
32P-labeled 2 kb (BamHI-SstI)
fragment isolated from the -galactosidase reporter gene. Analysis of
one of the positive clones revealed an 11 kb DNA fragment that
contained -galactosidase sequences fused to mouse genomic DNA and
thus represented the insertion target site and the 3 flanking
transgene-genomic DNA junction region.
The D5 transgene integration site was cloned by an inverse
PCR approach. Genomic DNA from liver tissue of D5 transgenic
mice was digested to completion with SacI and ligated
overnight at 1 µg/ml final DNA concentration. Primers PQ33 and PQ36
were used in a PCR reaction, followed by a second round of PCR
amplification with PQ57 and PQ59 primers containing NotI
restriction sites. A unique 1.8 kb PCR product was generated by the
ligated reaction. No products were seen in the ligase minus controls or
in PCR reactions containing a single primer. The 1.8 kb product was
cloned in pBluescript and sequenced. Sequence analysis showed that the
1.8 kb fragment contained 330 bp of apparent mouse genomic DNA sequence
immediately adjacent to sequences derived from the reporter. Primer
pairs PQ 37/PQ39 and PQ74/PQ79 derived from the E5 and
D5 junction flanking DNA, respectively, were each used to
screen a mouse yeast artificial chromosome (YAC) DNA library (Research
Genetics, Huntsville, AL) according to the manufacturer's
recommendations. Overlapping YAC clones were identified for each of the
transgene insertion sites. All YAC clones were grown routinely in
ura trp minimal media. Total
genomic DNA from the YAC-containing strains was digested with
HindIII, size-fractionated on 1% agarose gels, and
transferred to nylon membrane.
Chromosome mapping
DNA samples derived from 94 backcrossed animals
[(C57BL/6JEi × SPRET/Ei) × SPRET/Ei, BSS panel, Jackson Laboratories, Bar Harbor, ME]
were used to map the two transgene insertion sites. Primer pairs
PQ37/39 and PQ74/79, derived from the E5 and D5
sites of transgene insertion, were used and scored for the presence (BL6) or absence (SPRET/Ei) of the expected band. Linkage
analysis was performed with Map Manager (Manly and Elliott, 1991 ;
Manly, 1993 ).
Transgenic DNA construct
The DNA fragment containing the 6.7 kb region upstream of the
M4 translation start site was fused to the Escherichia
coli -galactosidase gene/mouse protamine-I 3 untranslated
sequence (Peschon et al., 1987 ) such that the translation start of the reporter ATG was at the same position as the mouse M4
initiation codon. The 10.3 kb fragment was prepared for injection by
restriction digestion with XhoI and NotI to
excise the fragment from the vector backbone and was purified by
agarose gel electrophoresis. The transgene was injected into the
pronuclei of B6/C3 embryos at 4-6 ng/µl, and injected
eggs were transplanted into CD1 mothers (Hogan et al.,
1986 ). Potential founder animals were tested for the presence of the
transgene by PCR analysis of tail DNA, using the primer pair
RR318/RR319 that generated a 728 bp PCR product. Animals that were
positive by PCR were crossed to C57BL/6J or DBA/2J animals (Jackson Laboratories) to yield
F1 offspring, hemizygous for the transgene locus. Each
transgenic line was maintained by sister-brother mating of the
transgenic F1 animals.
Detection of transgene expression and immunocytochemistry
Histochemical methods were adapted and modified from Danciger et
al. (1989) and Stefanin et al. (1967) . Transgene expression in the
mouse olfactory epithelium was examined by staining with the
chromogenic substrate X-gal
(5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indolyl- -D-galactopyranoside). Mice
(4-6 weeks old) were anesthetized deeply and fixed by intracardiac perfusion with >50 ml of PBS, followed immediately by >50 ml of fixative [0.5% glutaraldehyde and picric acid-formaldehyde
(PAF/Zamboni) (Stefanin et al., 1967 ) in buffered PBS, or Bouin's
fixative (for antibody staining)]. The mouse nose was dissected,
post-fixed for 2-4 hr at 4°C, and submerged in 30% sucrose in PBS
overnight. The tissue was embedded in OCT medium (Miles, Elkhart, IN)
and quick-frozen in liquid nitrogen. Serial coronal sections (10 µm) were cut on a Microm cryostat at 20°C, mounted on Superfrost/Plus slides (Fisher Scientific, Pittsburgh, PA), air-dried, and stored at
80°C until use. On thawing, the slides were washed in
PBS-Mg2+, fixed for 5 min in the appropriate
fixative, and subjected to X-gal or antibody staining. The pattern of
expression of M4 was defined by the following methods.
-Galactosidase staining. The fixed slides were washed in
PBS-Mg2+ for 5 min and incubated in X-gal staining
solution (Emson et al., 1990 ) at 37°C for 12-18 hr. After washes in
PBS-Mg2+, the color reaction was stopped by a final
wash in 2% paraformaldehyde in PBS and mounted in Aquamount
(Polysciences, Warrington, PA).
Antibody. Rabbit antisera directed against the last 20 amino
acids of M4 were affinity-purified over a specific peptide
column and used in the immunohistochemical experiments. Sections were rehydrated and post-fixed in Bouin's solution as described above and
immersed in ice-cold methanol for 3 min to ensure permeabilization of
cell membranes. After several washes in PBS-Mg2+,
slides were incubated with 5% normal goat serum for 1 hr, reacted with
the affinity-purified antibody (diluted 1:500 with 2% normal goat
serum in PBS-Mg2+) for 4 hr at room temperature, and
incubated with biotinylated goat anti-rabbit IgG at 1:200 for 2 hr
(Vector Laboratories, Burlingame, CA), followed by
avidin-biotin- peroxidase (ABC) complex at 1:100 for 1 hr (Vector).
The slides were washed four times for 5 min in
PBS-Mg2+ between each incubation. Immunoreactive
material was visualized by incubation with diaminobenzidine (DAB, 0.5 mg/ml) and hydrogen peroxide (0.015%), followed by a 10 min wash in
H2O.
Antibody and -galactosidase double labeling. Sections
were perfused and post-fixed in Zamboni and stained for
-galactosidase activity with X-gal (5 hr), followed by antibody
staining as described above except that incubation with primary
antibody was extended to 12-18 hr at 4°C.
 |
RESULTS |
Isolation of a mouse odorant receptor gene
The olfactory receptor gene family displays highest homology in
the regions corresponding to transmembrane domains II and VI.
Degenerate oligonucleotides based on these regions were used in an
reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR) reaction with olfactory cDNA to
generate a product of 550 bp containing a heterogeneous population
mixture of receptor sequences (Levy et al., 1991 ). A mouse genomic DNA
library was screened with this probe at low stringency, and positive
clones were identified at a frequency of 0.3%, suggesting the
existence of ~600 receptor-related sequences per haploid genome (Buck
and Axel, 1991 ; Reed, 1992a ). Among 12 recombinant phages that were
analyzed in some detail, the isolate M4 was chosen for
further study on the basis of several criteria. The M4 phage
DNA encoded an open reading frame of 317 amino acids that share
homology with other members of the odorant receptor family. The genomic
DNA in the M4 phage extended >6.7 kb upstream and 2.2 kb
downstream of the coding region. Finally, Southern blot analysis
demonstrated that the M4 coding region hybridized at high
stringency to a single restriction fragment in mouse genomic DNA (Fig.
1). Although many odorant receptors exist
in subfamilies of highly homologous genes, the use of M4,
which appeared to have only a single member in its subfamily, was
chosen to simplify the analysis of transcriptional regulation and
expression of odorant receptors. Specifically, we wished to compare the
expression of the endogenous M4 gene by in situ
hybridization and specific antibodies with the expression of reporter
constructs carrying potential regulatory sequences.

View larger version (46K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 1.
M4 is a single copy gene.
a, Partial restriction map of the mouse
M4 gene locus showing the schematic location of the
M4 open reading frame (filled
box). Deduced protein sequence shows 317 amino acids,
representing the M4 coding region. B,
BamHI; H, HindIII; R, EcoRI. b, Five
micrograms of mouse liver DNA were digested with the indicated enzymes
in each lane. The Southern blot was probed with the
32P-labeled M4 coding sequence. The probe
showed a single band hybridizing in each lane. The size shown on the
right corresponds to each of the hybridized bands.
|
|
Endogenous expression pattern of M4
The pattern of M4 expression was examined by RT-PCR in
six different tissues, using primers specific for the M4
coding region. A 1 kb product corresponding to the M4 RNA
was seen in olfactory tissue as well as a faint product in pancreas
that was not reproduced in subsequent experiments and may represent
low-level genomic DNA contamination of this sample (Fig.
2a). The use of RT-PCR to
examine the expression pattern of olfactory receptors was hampered by
the characteristic absence of introns within the coding regions. Nonetheless, this experiment demonstrated that M4 expression
was restricted predominantly to olfactory epithelium.

View larger version (63K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 2.
Endogenous expression of M4. RNA
from different tissues was used in a RT-PCR assay with primers PQ1 and
PQ2, spanning the M4 coding region. PCR products (1 kb)
are shown resolved on a 1% agarose gel. The grouped tissues represent
two independent sets of RT-PCR reactions with brain, olfactory bulb,
olfactory neuroepithelium (nose), liver, pancreas, and testis. Sections (10 µm) cut through the mouse nasal cavity were used in
immunohistochemical staining, using anti-M4 antibody. A
restricted distribution of the M4-positive cells is
shown confined to the posterior loop, indicated by
arrowheads (middle panel). A
higher magnification of the section is shown in the bottom
panel; M4-expressing neurons are marked with
arrowheads.
|
|
The restricted expression of the M4 receptor within the
olfactory epithelium was assessed by immunohistochemistry, using
specific antibody to this receptor. The polyclonal antisera were
generated to the last 20 amino acids of the M4 coding
sequence in a region that displays the greatest divergence among
members of this receptor family (Buck and Axel, 1991 ; Levy et al.,
1991 ). Immunoreactive cells were observed in the epithelial layer at
positions characteristic of the mature sensory neurons. The most
intense staining was seen in the dendrites, dendritic knobs, and cilia
of the receptor cells, thereby supporting the identification of the
immunoreactive cells as the sensory neurons Figure 2b.
The M4 expression pattern was examined by using serial
coronal sections spanning the entire anterior-posterior extent of the olfactory neuroepithelium. Expression of M4 followed a zonal
pattern, and within this zone only a subset of neurons expressed the M4 protein. This pattern was consistent in the two nasal cavities and
between different animals. The restriction of odorant receptor family
expression to a single zone within the olfactory epithelium has been
characterized extensively in several laboratories (Ressler et al.,
1993 ; Vassar, 1993). The zone of expression of the M4 receptors correlates precisely with the K4/K7 receptor subfamily (Ressler et al., 1993 ), using in situ hybridization studies.
In the nomenclature of Buck, this pattern corresponds to zone-II (Buck,
1992 ). No antibody staining was seen in the olfactory stem cells or in
the supporting sustentacular cells. In situ results using
the M4 coding region as a probe (data not shown) paralleled the data obtained with the M4-specific antibody. On the
basis of the reported density of olfactory neurons within the mouse neuroepithelium (Ressler et al., 1993 ) and the densities of the M4-positive neurons in our studies, we estimated that
M4 is expressed in ~0.5-1% of olfactory neurons within
the zone.
Proximal promoter has a 4 kb intron
A 5 RACE analysis was used to identify sequences upstream of the
translation and transcription start sites (Frohman et al., 1988 ) and to
define the intron/exon boundaries in the M4 5 untranslated region. A 330 bp product observed in reactions with olfactory epithelial RNA, M4-specific and RACE-specific primers
represented 5 untranslated sequences of the M4 message.
Three experiments with different RACE primers generated products that
were slightly smaller than the original 330 bp fragment, suggesting
that the 5 end of the M4 RNA and the site of transcription
initiation had been reached. Oligonucleotide primers were designed to
the 5 and 3 ends of the 330 bp RACE and used in a PCR reaction to identify the location of these sequences on the M4 genomic
template. All of the sequences obtained in the RACE experiments resided in a single 300 bp exon located 4 kb 5 to the M4 initiation
codon (Fig. 3). All of the olfactory
receptors analyzed to date contain one or multiple additional exons
upstream of a single coding-region exon. A canonical 3 splice site was
observed 12 bp upstream of the M4 coding region. The results
suggested that the 6.7 kb fragment upstream of the M4
translation start site region contained the transcription initiation
site and possibly the regulatory regions/cis-elements that
may be involved in M4 receptor regulation and zonal
expression.

View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 3.
Mapping and sequence analysis of the
M4 transcription start site. A schematic diagram shows
the M4 ATG and the 5 proximal region (6.7 kb). The
open box represents the 1 kb M4 coding
region, and the M4-specific (PQ3-PQ4 nested) primers
are shown by the two bars used in the RACE reaction.
Results from the RACE analysis mapped the transcription start site 4 kb
5 to the ATG, resulting in 2.7 kb of untranscribed sequences 5 of the
300 bp exon. The underlined AG and ATG
represent the splice donor site and the translation start site,
respectively. The bottom panel shows the PCR products
generated from the genomic DNA as the template, 2.7 kb containing the
300 bp exon (E), lane 2. A 4 kb
PCR product represents the intron (I),
lane 7. Lanes 3-5 represent the negative controls and lane 6 the positive PCR control (see
Materials and Methods). M, Marker lanes.
|
|
To determine whether these upstream sequences in the mouse
M4 odorant gene were sufficient to direct expression in the
olfactory neuroepithelium, we generated a reporter construct consisting of 6.7 kb upstream of the M4 coding region fused to a
-galactosidase-mouse protamine reporter cassette (Fig.
4). This reporter gene construct hopefully would enable a functional analysis of the putative promoter region of M4 in transgenic animals and would allow
identification of functional regulatory regions present within this 6.7 kb fragment. Eight lines of transgenic mice were identified that
carried the introduced construct and transmitted the integrated
sequences through the germline. The copy number in these transgenic
lines varied between 2 and 10 copies integrated at a single site.
Although each transgenic line contained copies that appeared to be
intact by restriction analysis, additional copies with truncations of the 5 and 3 sequences were observed in most of the lines.

View larger version (24K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 4.
Structure of the M4 transgene
construct. The 6.7 kb DNA 5 to the M4 ATG was fused to
the E. coli gene encoding lacZ and the 3 end of
the mouse protamine 1 structural gene
( -galactosidase, mp1, shaded
boxes). The mp1 gene provides a
poly(A+) addition site and a 93 bp intron. Primers
designed across the intron are shown by the arrows.
Below, An agarose gel showing a 635 bp PCR product
generated from the transgene message, lane 3, and a 728 bp from the genomic transgene (T-G) DNA, lane
5. No products are seen in lanes 2 and
4, representing the wild-type mouse DNA and samples with
no reverse transcriptase ( RT), respectively. Marker lanes are shown as lanes 1 and
6.
|
|
M4 transgene expression is zonally restricted and,
within the zone, expressed only by a subset of neurons
Expression of the reporter gene was examined initially by RT-PCR
in five tissues: liver, brain, spleen, testis, and olfactory epithelium. Primers (RR318 and RR319) were chosen that flanked a 93 bp
intron at the 3 end of the reporter cassette and generated a 728 bp
product from the genomic DNA and a 635 bp product from messenger RNA to
permit discrimination between the transgene reporter expression and
genomic contamination (Fig. 4). In three of the lines, RT-PCR analysis
revealed transgene expression in olfactory epithelium and in testis,
whereas in the other lines no expression was detected in any of the
tissues examined. Expression in testis has been reported for other
members of the odorant receptor family and may reflect the propensity
of this tissue to display "fortuitous" expression of transgenes and
endogenous genes, with no apparent function in that tissue. Expression
in two of the lines, D5 and E5, was examined in
additional tissues, and expression was still restricted to olfactory
tissue and testis (Fig. 5).

View larger version (30K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 5.
Reporter transgene expression of E5
and D5 in different tissues. RT-PCR experiment was
performed on the cDNA from seven different tissues, using the primer
pair RR318 and RR319. A 728 bp PCR product was generated with the
genomic DNA from the transgenic mouse (TG), whereas the
cDNA from various tissues generated a 635 bp product that is 93 bp
smaller. The right panel represents the
-galactosidase reporter expression in the D5
transgenic line. The top panel
(+RT) shows PCR products with reverse
transcriptase, and the bottom panel
( RT) is shown without reverse transcriptase.
Expression in the E5 transgenic line is shown on the
left panel with a 123 bp marker lane represented by
M. The tissues are NE, nose;
BR, brain; TE, testis; SP,
spleen; LU, lung; LR, liver; and
KI, kidney.
|
|
The three transgenic lines (D2, D5, and
E5) were examined for -galactosidase (lacZ)
enzyme expression in tissue sections from nose, liver, spleen, and
testis by staining with the chromogenic substrate X-gal. No staining
was detected in the spleen or liver in any of the lines. In testis,
moderate staining was observed in a subset of cells but was
indistinguishable in wild-type and transgenic mice. In each of the
three lines in which transgene expression was detected, expression
within the olfactory epithelium was restricted zonally and within that
zone was observed only in a subset of neuronal cells.
Two lines, D5 and E5, revealed robust expression
of -galactosidase in the neuroepithelium that resembled the
endogenous M4 expression in several respects. The reporter
expression was confined to the epithelial layer of the olfactory tissue
and displayed a bilaterally symmetric and zonally restricted pattern
(Fig. 6 a,b).
Within the neuroepithelium only a small fraction (~1%) of the cells
expressed the reporter. These -galactosidase-expressing cells
displayed X-gal staining in dendritic processes leading to the luminal
surface. No X-gal staining was observed in other major cell types of
the epithelium, the stem cells and the supporting sustentacular cells
(Fig. 6d).

View larger version (100K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 6.
Patterns of expression of -galactosidase in
mouse nasal cavity of D5 and E5
transgenic mice. a, Coronal sections of the mouse nasal
cavity are shown with the schematic localization of the D5 (left) and the right nasal cavity of
an E5 transgenic mouse stained with X-gal at a similar
sectioning level. The extents of the transgene expression (which
coincided with M4 antibody staining) are indicated in
blue. The regions in a comparable section that were not
expressing OMP by in situ hybridization are indicated in
green. The septum (SEPTUM), the
positions of ectoturbinates 1 and 2, and the
positions of endoturbinates II and III
are indicated. The dorsal region is displayed at the top
of the image. Overlays were produced by scanning images and processing
them in Photoshop. Coronal sections through the E5 mouse
nasal cavity (b-d) were stained with X-gal. The
reporter expression is localized to the mature neurons within the
neuroepithelial layer. A low magnification of the E5
coronal section (a-c) shows X-gal staining, marked with blue arrowheads. The staining is confined to the most
lateral and ventral regions of the epithelium on both sides of the
septum (zone IV). Higher magnification of the section
(d) shows X-gal-positive neurons over the central
portion of the epithelium (blue arrowheads). Double-labeled sections from a D5 transgene animal were
post-fixed in Zamboni and stained for activity with X-gal, followed by
M4 antibody (e, g). A coronal section at low magnification shows double-stained neuroepithelium with X-gal staining in
blue; peroxidase-stained M4-positive
cells are represented by brown arrowheads (zone II). Regions of the epithelium showing no X-gal or M4
staining are depicted by gray arrows. A
high-magnification micrograph (f) shows M4-positive neurons colocalized with neurons expressing
-galactosidase, which is driven by the putative M4
promoter region. Approximately 1% of the M4 or
-galactosidase-positive cells showed double staining (black
arrowheads) within the same cell with peroxidase and X-gal (g).
|
|
The reporter transgenes were expressed in two distinct topographical
patterns within the neuroepithelium. The -galactosidase-positive cells in the D5 line were restricted to the same zone as the
endogenous M4 receptor (zone II), whereas staining in the
E5 line was confined exclusively to zone IV. These
observations suggest that a construct carrying the 6.7 kb 5 segment
was sufficient to direct -galactosidase expression in a
tissue-specific and zonal-specific manner in the olfactory
neuroepithelium but was insufficient by itself to define the particular
zone where the expression will occur.
M4 and D5 express in the same zone
With analysis of the zonal expression pattern of the two transgene
lines, it was evident that D5 X-gal staining was in the same
zone as that seen with M4 endogenous antibody staining.
Figure 6, e and f, shows the colocalization of
anti-M4 peroxidase staining and histochemical X-gal staining
in zone II of the olfactory neuroepithelium. Furthermore, serial
coronal sections spanning the anterior-posterior extents of the
olfactory epithelia also revealed that the regions that stained with
the anti-M4 antibody and -galactosidase activity were
always coincident. It was possible to perform double-labeling experiments by incubating the sections first with the X-gal chromogenic reagent to reveal the transgene-expressing cells and subsequently staining them with the M4-specific antibody. From 15 complete sections derived from several animals (n = 3),
a total of 1031 M4-labeled and 500 -galactosidase-positive cells were observed. A total of eight
double-positive cells (M4+
-gal+) were observed on these sections (Fig.
6g). This frequency corresponds to what might be expected if
expression of the two proteins were independent events, i.e.,
~0.5-1% of the M4+ cells should be
-galactosidase-positive and vice versa.
Analysis and chromosomal mapping the transgene
Although the frequency of obtaining lines that expressed the
introduced transgene and the observation of expression was similar to
or only slightly lower that that observed for other olfactory promoter-driven reporters, the observation of transgene expression in
two different zones suggested that the site of integration might be
important in achieving the expression pattern. With a large family of
the odorant receptors distributed throughout the genome, it was
possible that the transgene was in proximity of another receptor or
receptors and had acquired the zonal expression pattern appropriate for
the flanking receptor. Subsequent breeding experiments with the
transgene progeny and genomic Southern analysis confirmed a single
integration site in the E5 and D5 lines. To explore the possibility that other receptors present in proximity to
the transgene insertion site might influence the pattern of expression,
we cloned and examined the sites of genomic insertion for E5
and D5.
The E5 transgene insertion site was cloned from a
size-fractionated genomic library (9-15 kb) as described in Materials
and Methods. The transgene-genomic junction fragment in the
D5 line was identified by an inverse PCR approach (Cuypers
et al., 1984 ; Benkel et al., 1995 ) (data not shown). Genomic DNA from
the parental strain as well as the two transgenic lines was subjected
to hybridization with the isolated junction fragments. In each case a
novel mobility fragment was observed in the appropriate lane that
corresponded to the junction between the transgene sequences and the
target fragment (Fig. 7). To explore
sequences adjacent to the site of transgene insertion, we identified
three and four overlapping YACs for D5 and E5,
respectively. Total genomic DNA from yeast cultures containing the YACs
was hybridized with a 550 bp PCR product representing a complex mixture
of odorant receptors (Levy et al., 1991 ). No receptor-related sequences
were identified by using low-stringency hybridization or by PCR
amplification of receptors with the use of degenerate oligonucleotides
capable of amplifying most members of the odorant receptor family.

View larger version (85K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 7.
Disruption of the transgene integration sites in
D5 and E5. Five micrograms of
C57BL/6J (Wt) and D5 and
E5 mouse liver DNA were digested with
PvuII (left) or EcoRI
(right), electrophoresed in 0.75% agarose, blotted onto
a nylon membrane, and hybridized with the 32P-labeled
probe. The primer pair PQ74/PQ79 generated a D5-specific junction probe used on the left, and PQ 37/PQ39
generated a probe for E5 junction that was used on the
right. DNA sizes are indicated on the
sides of the panels. Both D5
(PvuII-digested) and E5
(EcoRI) lanes show an extra band, representing the
transgene insertion-induced disruption.
|
|
The chromosomal location of the two integration target sites for
E5 and D5 was determined by using a C57Bl6xMus
Spretus backcross panel that previously had been analyzed for a large
number of other chromosomal markers. The presence of specific PCR
products from the insertion sites that were capable of distinguishing
between the two parental chromosomes permitted mapping of the insertion site. The E5 junction site is located near D6MIT8 at 35 cm
on mouse chromosome six (LOD score 8.8). The D5 insertion
site mapped near D10Bir6 at 26 cm on chromosome 10 (LOD score 6.1). The
D5 insertion site is located 18 cm from olfactory receptor
Olfr8 recently mapped to chromosome 10 (Sullivan, 1996). To date, no olfactory receptors have been mapped to chromosome six.
 |
DISCUSSION |
The restricted/differential expression of odorant receptors within
the olfactory epithelium has been hypothesized to play an important
role in the ability of this tissue to discriminate among olfactory
stimuli. The identification of a receptor family that displays a
complex expression pattern consisting of zonal restriction and an
apparently stochastic distribution within that zone lends support to
the hypothesized role of these receptors in odorant detection. The
regulatory mechanisms that underlie these expression patterns remain
mainly unknown. However, we have described here the extent of the DNA
sequences that are required to recapitulate the zonally restricted and
stochastic expression of a reporter within the sensory neurons of the
olfactory epithelium.
M4 and its properties
The mouse M4 receptor, identified initially in a screen
of genomic DNA, shares the characteristic expression patterns of the members of the family originally described by Buck and Axel (1991) . The
M4 gene, existing as a subfamily with itself as the only
member, is expressed preferentially in the olfactory epithelium. An
antibody to the highly divergent region at the C terminus of the
protein revealed staining in the dendrite, dendritic knob, and cilia of a small fraction of the sensory neurons within a single zone of the
epithelium. The localization of the receptor protein to these structures parallels the observations made for other components of the
odorant signaling pathway.
Analysis of the genomic organization of the M4 gene
confirmed the absence of introns within the coding region, consistent with all other known members of this family. The 5 end of the mRNA,
identified by RACE-PCR, was encoded by a single exon separated by a 4.0 kb intron from the translation initiation site. All of the sequences
present in mRNA could be identified in the cloned genomic fragment,
suggesting that gene conversion events in the flanking untranslated
sequence were not likely to contribute to the regulation of this
receptor.
Transgenic lines tissue expression
The M4 promoter/ -galactosidase reporter
construct led to detectable expression in three of the eight lines that
were generated. This frequency was comparable to that observed for
other promoter/reporter constructs in transgenic mice (Walters et
al., 1996 ). Notably, in each of the lines examined, no expression of
the reporter was detected in tissues other than olfactory epithelium
and testis. The expression of the -galactosidase reporter within the
olfactory epithelium in all three expressing lines was restricted to
the mature olfactory neurons and paralleled in several respects the endogenous pattern of the M4 receptor. The earliest
expression within the neuronal lineage was in the region corresponding
to immature neurons and was most intense in cells with characteristic mature neuronal morphology. In both D5 and E5 the
reporter expression was restricted topographically to zones previously
described for members of the odorant receptor family (Ressler et al.,
1993 ), and, like the endogenous receptors within a zone, positive
neurons were scattered randomly. The stereotypic distribution of
staining in these transgenic lines was constant in all animals and was maintained through the germline. The appearance of the reporter in two
different zones in the two lines has important implications for the
mechanisms responsible for this patterning. Although we cannot rule out
the possibility that zonal expression arises from deletion of negative
regulatory elements in truncated copies of the inserted transgene,
aspects of the regulation must arise from elements contained within the
M4 promoter region. We conclude from these studies that the
6.7 kb fragment from the M4 gene is sufficient to direct
most aspects of the regulated expression associated with odorant
receptors.
The ability of the reporter construct to define a zonally restricted
pattern of expression without the specification of the zone suggests a
hierarchical mechanism in which distinct processes direct the observed
pattern. Perhaps the zonal patterning is predetermined and specified
for a large region of the genome by processes analogous to the genomic
imprinting and X inactivation described in other systems. The transgene
inherits the zonal pattern native to that locus. Endogenous receptors
then can be seen as committed to expression in a particular zone by
virtue of their location within the genome.
The selection and restriction of receptor expression within a single
neuron are poorly understood. The pattern of expression of endogenous
M4 protein and the reporter in the D5 line suggest that they
occur as independent events, with each occurring in ~1% of the
neurons within the zone. The anticipated frequency of double-labeled
cells then would be 1% of the M4-positive cells, approximately the number that was observed in these experiments. One
should not conclude from these experiments that multiple receptors are
expressed in individual neurons. The absence of functional receptor
protein expression from the reporter construct might prevent the
feedback mechanisms that could serve to restrict expression to a single
functional receptor in each cell.
The examination of the chromosomal distribution of odorant receptors
and their zonal expression within the epithelium (Sullivan, 1996)
demonstrated that receptors expressed in different zones could
cosegregate in these linkage studies. In situ hybridization studies and detailed analysis of genomic organization of receptor subfamilies (Sullivan, 1996) indicate that members of a single subfamily are restricted to a single zone and are closely juxtaposed in
the genome. Taken together, these data suggest that zonal patterns of
expression arise from control elements that dictate some aspects of
receptor expression (zones) over long genomic distances. A second
aspect of receptor regulation, the expression within a small subset of
the neurons within a zone, might be achieved via competition between
discrete promoters for active enhancers. Models for regulation of
clustered genes with a globin system have been described (Engel and
Choi, 1988). The data presented here suggest that small segments of DNA
upstream from odorant receptor coding regions are receptive to both
kinds of regulation. The observation that transgene expression
respected zonal boundaries but could be relocalized to a different zone
suggests that distant signals are responsible for defining the zone,
functioning perhaps via elements located within the proximal
promoter.
Models for receptor regulation
The selective expression of odorant receptor genes is likely to
arise from a hierarchical series of regulated transcriptional controls.
The data presented here in combination with the work of others
(Sullivan et al., 1995 ) suggest that an early event in receptor
expression is the establishment of zones within the epithelium. An
attractive model is that the zones are specified by an activation
process in which regions of the genome are made competent for
expression in one of the zones. Alternatively, receptor-encoding regions of the genome could be repressed for expression (Chess et al.,
1994 ) in other than the appropriate zone via a process much like
inactivation on the X chromosome. Once the repertoire of receptors that
are competent for expression in any particular zone is established, the
selection of the individual receptor or small number of receptors to be
expressed in a single olfactory neuron is achieved via subsequent
competition for trans-acting factors or relief from negative
regulation mediated by DNA methylation or inhibitory factors. These
processes are consistent with the data from Chess et al. (1994) ,
suggesting that receptor selection does not involve the activation of
both alleles of a single receptor gene; rather, expression appears to
occur stochastically on a small fraction of receptor genes.
In the experiments with a transgenic receptor promoter construct, we
have defined sequences that are sufficient for receiving zonal
specification and permitting the stochastic selection of transgene
expression in the appropriate cell type. These results permit the
dissection of essential sequences for each of these processes and the
trans-acting factors that result in the remarkable regulation of odorant receptor expression.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
Received Sept. 23, 1996; revised Oct. 17, 1997; accepted Oct. 22, 1997.
We are grateful for the contributions of Karen Schrader and to the
members of the Reed laboratory for stimulating and supportive discussions.
Correspondence should be addressed to Dr. Randall R. Reed, Room 800 PCTB, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 725 North Wolfe
Street, Baltimore, MD 21205.
 |
REFERENCES |
-
Amoore JE
(1970)
In: Molecular basis of odor. Springfield, IL: Thomas.
-
Benkel BF,
Perreault J,
Gagnon C,
Conklin K
(1995)
A rapid PCR-based test for the endogenous viral element ev3 of chickens.
Anim Genet
26:189-191[Web of Science][Medline].
-
Buck LB
(1992)
The olfactory multigene family.
Curr Opin Genet Dev
2:467-473[Medline].
-
Buck L,
Axel R
(1991)
A novel multigene family may encode odorant receptors: a molecular basis for odor recognition.
Cell
66:175-187.
-
Chess A,
Simon I,
Cedar H,
Axel R
(1994)
Allelic inactivation regulates olfactory receptor gene expression.
Cell
78:823-824[Web of Science][Medline].
-
Choi OR,
Engel DJ
(1988)
Developmental regulation of
-globin gene switching.
Cell
55:17-26[Web of Science][Medline]. -
Cuypers HT,
Selten G,
Quint W,
Zijlstra M,
Berns A
(1984)
Murine leukemia virus-induced T-cell lymphomagenesis: integration of proviruses in a distinct chromosomal region.
Cell
37:141-150[Web of Science][Medline].
-
Danciger E,
Mettling C,
Vidal M,
Morris R,
Margolis F
(1989)
Olfactory marker protein gene: its structure and olfactory neuron-specific expression in transgenic mice.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
86:8565-8569[Abstract/Free Full Text].
-
Davis RL,
Davidson N
(1986)
The memory gene dunce+ encodes a remarkable set of RNAs with internal heterogeneity.
Mol Cell Biol
65:1464-1470.
-
Emson PC,
Shoham S,
Feler C,
Buss T,
Price J,
Wilson CJ
(1990)
The use of a retroviral vector to identify foetal striatal neurons transplanted into the adult striatum.
Exp Brain Res
79:427-430[Web of Science][Medline].
-
Frohman MA,
Dush MK,
Martin GR
(1988)
Rapid amplification of full-length cDNA from rare transcripts: amplification using a single gene-specific oligonucleotide primer.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
85:8998-9002[Abstract/Free Full Text].
-
Graziadei PPC,
Graziadei GAM
(1979)
Neurogenesis and neuron regeneration in the olfactory system of mammals. I. Morphological aspects of differentiation and structural organization of the olfactory sensory neurons.
J Neurocytol
8:1-18[Web of Science][Medline].
-
Hicks JB,
Strathern JN
(1977)
Interconversion of mating type in S. cerevisiae and the Cassette model for gene trasfer.
Brookhaven Symp Biol
29:233-242.
-
Hogan BLM,
Horsburgh G,
Cohen J,
Hetherington CM,
Fisher G,
Lyon MF
(1986)
Small eyes (Sey): a homozygous lethal mutation on chromosome 2 which affects the differentiation of both lens and nasal placodes in the mouse.
J Embryol
97:95-110.
-
Jones DT,
Barbosa E,
Reed RR
(1988)
Expression of G-protein
subunits in rat olfactory neuroepithelium: candidates for olfactory signal transduction.
Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol
53:349-353. -
Levy NS,
Bakalyar HA,
Reed RR
(1991)
Signal transduction in olfactory neurons.
J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol
39:633-637[Web of Science][Medline].
-
Manly KF
(1993)
A Macintosh program for storage and analysis of experimental genetic mapping data.
Mamm Genome
4:303-313[Web of Science][Medline].
-
Manly KF,
Elliott RW
(1991)
RI Manager, a microcomputer program for analysis of data from recombinant inbred strains.
Mamm Genome
1:123-126[Web of Science][Medline].
-
Monti-Graziadei AG,
Graziadei PPC
(1979)
Studies on neuronal plasticity and regeneration in the olfactory system: morphologic and functional characteristics of the olfactory sensory neuron.
In: Neural growth and differentiation, pp 373-396. New York: Raven.
-
Parmentier M,
Libert S,
Schiffmann S,
Lefort A,
Eggericks D,
Ledent C,
Mollereau C,
Gerard C,
Perret J,
Grootegoed A,
Vassart G
(1992)
Expression of members of the putative olfactory receptor gene family in mammalian germ cells.
Nature
355:453-455[Medline].
-
Peschon JJ,
Behringer RR,
Braister RL,
Palmiter RD
(1987)
Spermatid-specific expression of protamine 1 in transgenic mice.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
84:5316-5319[Abstract/Free Full Text].
-
Raming K,
Krieger J,
Strotmann J,
Boekhoff I,
Kubick S,
Baumstark C,
Breer H
(1993)
Cloning and expression of odorant receptors.
Nature
361:353-356[Medline].
-
Reed RR
(1992a)
The mechanisms of sensitivity and specificity in olfaction.
Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol
57:501-504[Abstract/Free Full Text].
-
Reed RR
(1992b)
Signaling pathways in odorant detection.
Neuron
8:205-209[Web of Science][Medline].
-
Ressler KJ,
Sullivan SL,
Buck LB
(1993)
A zonal organization of odorant receptor gene expression in the olfactory epithelium.
Cell
73:597-609[Web of Science][Medline].
-
Stefanin M,
De Martino C,
Zamboni L
(1967)
Fixation of ejaculated spermatozoa for electron microscopy.
Nature
216:173-174[Medline].
-
Strotmann J,
Wanner I,
Krieger J,
Raming K,
Breer H
(1992)
Expression of odorant receptors in spatially restricted subsets of chemosensory neurones.
NeuroReport
3:1053-1056[Web of Science][Medline].
-
Strotmann J,
Wanner I,
Helfrich T,
Beck A,
Meinken C,
Kubick S,
Breer H
(1994)
Olfactory neurones expressing distinct odorant receptor subtypes are spatially segregated in the nasal neuroepithelium.
Cell Tissue Res
276:429-438[Web of Science][Medline].
-
Sullivan SL,
Bohm S,
Ressler KJ,
Horowitz LF,
Buck LB
(1995)
Target-independent pattern specification in the olfactory epithelium.
Neuron
15:779-789[Web of Science][Medline].
-
Sullivan SL,
Adamson MC,
Ressler KJ,
Kozak CA,
Buck LB
(1996)
The chromosomal distribution of mouse odorant receptor genes.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
93:884-888[Abstract/Free Full Text].
-
Vassar R,
Ngai J,
Axel R
(1993)
Spatial segregation of odorant receptor expression in the mammalian olfactory epithelium.
Cell
74:309-318[Web of Science][Medline].
-
Vassar R, Chao SK, Sitcheran R, Nunez JM, Vosshall LB, Axel
R (1994) Topographic organization of sensory projections to
the olfactory bulb. Cell 79 6:981-991.
-
Walters E,
Grillo M,
Tarozzo G,
Stein-Izsak C,
Corbin J,
Bocchiaro C,
Margolis FL
(1996)
Proximal regions of the olfactory marker protein gene promoter direct olfactory neuron-specific expression in transgenic mice.
J Neurosci Res
43:146-160[Web of Science][Medline].
Copyright © 1998 Society for Neuroscience 0270-6474/98/181227-10$05.00/0
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. C. McIntyre, S. C. Bose, A. J. Stromberg, and T. S. McClintock
Emx2 Stimulates Odorant Receptor Gene Expression
Chem Senses,
November 1, 2008;
33(9):
825 - 837.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. S. Michaloski, P. A.F. Galante, and B. Malnic
Identification of potential regulatory motifs in odorant receptor genes by analysis of promoter sequences
Genome Res.,
September 1, 2006;
16(9):
1091 - 1098.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
B. M. Shykind
Regulation of odorant receptors: one allele at a time
Hum. Mol. Genet.,
April 15, 2005;
14(suppl_1):
R33 - R39.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
X. Zhang, M. Rogers, H. Tian, X. Zhang, D.-J. Zou, J. Liu, M. Ma, G. M. Shepherd, and S. J. Firestein
High-throughput microarray detection of olfactory receptor gene expression in the mouse
PNAS,
September 28, 2004;
101(39):
14168 - 14173.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. P. Lane, J. Young, T. Newman, and B. J. Trask
Species Specificity in Rodent Pheromone Receptor Repertoires
Genome Res.,
April 1, 2004;
14(4):
603 - 608.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. S. Wang, J. W. Lewcock, P. Feinstein, P. Mombaerts, and R. R. Reed
Genetic disruptions of O/E2 and O/E3 genes reveal involvement in olfactory receptor neuron projection
Development,
March 15, 2004;
131(6):
1377 - 1388.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. W. Lewcock and R. R. Reed
A feedback mechanism regulates monoallelic odorant receptor expression
PNAS,
January 27, 2004;
101(4):
1069 - 1074.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. Serizawa, K. Miyamichi, H. Nakatani, M. Suzuki, M. Saito, Y. Yoshihara, and H. Sakano
Negative Feedback Regulation Ensures the One Receptor-One Olfactory Neuron Rule in Mouse
Science,
December 19, 2003;
302(5653):
2088 - 2094.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. Hoppe, H. Frank, H. Breer, and J. Strotmann
The Clustered Olfactory Receptor Gene Family 262: Genomic Organization, Promotor Elements, and Interacting Transcription Factors
Genome Res.,
December 1, 2003;
13(12):
2674 - 2685.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. M. Young and B. J. Trask
The sense of smell: genomics of vertebrate odorant receptors
Hum. Mol. Genet.,
May 15, 2002;
11(10):
1153 - 1160.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
B. Key and J. St John
Axon Navigation in the Mammalian Primary Olfactory Pathway: Where to Next?
Chem Senses,
March 1, 2002;
27(3):
245 - 260.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. P. Lane, J. C. Roach, I. Y. Lee, C. Boysen, A. Smit, B. J. Trask, and L. Hood
Genomic Analysis of the Olfactory Receptor Region of the Mouse and Human T-Cell Receptor alpha /delta Loci
Genome Res.,
January 1, 2002;
12(1):
81 - 87.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. Pyrski, Z. Xu, E. Walters, D. J. Gilbert, N. A. Jenkins, N. G. Copeland, and F. L. Margolis
The OMP-lacZ Transgene Mimics the Unusual Expression Pattern of OR-Z6, a New Odorant Receptor Gene on Mouse Chromosome 6: Implication for Locus-Dependent Gene Expression
J. Neurosci.,
July 1, 2001;
21(13):
4637 - 4648.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. P. Lane, T. Cutforth, J. Young, M. Athanasiou, C. Friedman, L. Rowen, G. Evans, R. Axel, L. Hood, and B. J. Trask
Genomic analysis of orthologous mouse and human olfactory receptor loci
PNAS,
June 19, 2001;
98(13):
7390 - 7395.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. Ma and G. M. Shepherd
Functional mosaic organization of mouse olfactory receptor neurons
PNAS,
October 23, 2000;
(2000)
220301797.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. J. Royal and B. Key
Development of P2 Olfactory Glomeruli in P2-Internal Ribosome Entry Site-Tau-LacZ Transgenic Mice
J. Neurosci.,
November 15, 1999;
19(22):
9856 - 9864.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
P. Mombaerts
Seven-Transmembrane Proteins as Odorant and Chemosensory Receptors
Science,
October 22, 1999;
286(5440):
707 - 711.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. Tsuboi, S.-i. Yoshihara, N. Yamazaki, H. Kasai, H. Asai-Tsuboi, M. Komatsu, S. Serizawa, T. Ishii, Y. Matsuda, F. Nagawa, et al.
Olfactory Neurons Expressing Closely Linked and Homologous Odorant Receptor Genes Tend to Project Their Axons to Neighboring Glomeruli on the Olfactory Bulb
J. Neurosci.,
October 1, 1999;
19(19):
8409 - 8418.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. W. Friedrich and S. I. Korsching
Chemotopic, Combinatorial, and Noncombinatorial Odorant Representations in the Olfactory Bulb Revealed Using a Voltage-Sensitive Axon Tracer
J. Neurosci.,
December 1, 1998;
18(23):
9977 - 9988.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. Ma and G. M. Shepherd
Functional mosaic organization of mouse olfactory receptor neurons
PNAS,
November 7, 2000;
97(23):
12869 - 12874.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
|

|