Abstract
E2F and DP family proteins are evolutionally conserved transcription factors among higher eukaryotes. E2F and DP proteins typically form a heterodimeric complex, which controls cell proliferation by regulating expression of growth-related genes. In addition, E2F family proteins have roles in various cellular events that require the expression of context-specific genes. E2F proteins use distinct mechanisms to regulate context-specific genes in different circumstances. The primary goal of this chapter is to compare three distinct mechanisms of mammalian E2F-mediated transcriptional regulation that control cell proliferation, endoreplication and apoptosis. Briefly, E2F7 and E2F8 control endoreplication by suppressing the expression of their target genes. They do not require DP or pRb. In control of apoptosis, E2F1 regulates the expression of the tumor suppressor gene Arf by binding to a non-canonical E2F binding site, within the Arf promoter, in a DP-independent manner. Furthermore, we examine the functions of E2F and DP in Drosophila melanogaster (fruit fly) to identify those mechanisms of E2F-mediated transcriptional regulation that have been evolutionarily conserved. The detailed mechanisms of how E2F protein regulates the expression of context-specific target genes will be instrumental in understanding how a single family of transcription factor regulates diverse pleiotropic cellular processes in an organism.
Keywords
- E2F
- DP
- pRb
- Arf
- p53
- cell cycle
- endoreplication
- apoptosis
1. Introduction
The temporal control of gene expression is essential to the execution of cellular events such as proliferation, growth, self-renewal, differentiation and death. For example, a proliferating cell performs the sequential processes of the cell cycle by the orderly expression of genes involved in DNA replication, DNA repair, mitosis and cytokinesis [1, 2]. During the cell cycle,

Figure 1.
The E2F/DP complex controls cell cycle progression with pRB. (A) Schematic view of the pRb/E2F/DP pathway. Solid line indicates the function of pRb/E2F/DP complex to repress the expression of growth-related E2F-target genes in quiescence. Dashed arrows indicate the signal cascade following activation by mitogenic signals. pRb-P indicates phosphorylated pRb. (B) Regulation of growth-related E2F target genes by the pRB/E2F/DP complex during the cell cycle. The pRb/E2F/DP complex actively represses the transcription of growth-related E2F target genes in quiescence, while free activator E2F/DP complex promotes transcription of the target genes when pRb family proteins are phosphorylated by G1-cyclin/cdk.
Genome wide gene expression profiles and analysis of the function of individual E2F family proteins have revealed that E2F family members have roles in various cellular processes including endoreplication [6], cell death [7], autophagy [8] and differentiation [9]. Since it is unlikely that E2F simultaneously induces genes involved in these distinct, often mutually exclusive cellular processes, cells must have multiple mechanisms, by which specific E2F target genes are expressed to function in line with intracellular circumstances. Indeed, the mechanism of E2F1 regulation of tumor suppressor genes,
2. Structures of mammalian and fly E2F and DP family members
The human and mouse genomes contain eight E2F family genes and three DP family genes (Figure 2) [3]. E2F family proteins can be distinguished as “activator” or “repressor” by their functions in transcription, or “typical” or “atypical” based on their structure. E2F1–5 genes encode proteins composed of a winged-helix

Figure 2.
E2F and DP family members in human, mouse and fly. E2F families can be divided into two groups by functional or structural properties. Activator E2Fs are required to induce expression of growth-related E2F target genes at G1/S phase transition. E2F3a-5 are expressed in quiescence (G0) and G1 phase to repress target gene transcription by pRb-dependent mechanisms. E2F6–8 have the ability to repress target gene transcription by pRb-independent mechanisms. Typical E2Fs possess DBD, LZ, MB and TAD, while atypical E2Fs possess two DBD without a TAD. DP family proteins share DBD and LZ. TAD is found in mammalian DP1.
After completion of the human and mouse genome sequencing projects, searches for homologous sequences to the E2F-DBD identified atypical E2F family members, E2F7 and E2F8 that are structurally distinct from E2F1 to 6 (Figure 2) [24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29]. E2F7 and 8 contain two DBDs but lack a transactivation domain. These atypical E2Fs recognize canonical E2F binding sites in a DP-independent manner and function to repress transcription of E2F target genes by a pRb-independent mechanism.
The fly genome contains two
3. The role of the E2F/DP complex in cell proliferation
3.1. DP is essential in transcriptional regulation of growth-related E2F target genes in cultured cells
The concept of the pRb/E2F/DP pathway is based primarily on evidence obtained using rodent fibroblasts in culture [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]. The advantage of this system is the ease of manipulating the proliferative capacity of cells without losing cell viability by the absence or presence of fetal bovine serum in the culture medium [34, 35]. Fibroblasts continuously proliferate in culture medium that contains abundant serum. Withdrawing serum from the media causes cells to exit from the cell cycle, while re-introduction of serum leads to re-entry into the cell cycle. Thus, this system enables control of endogenous E2F activity by manipulating the amount of serum in culture media. In addition, using expression vectors and recombinant adenovirus containing various E2F genes, we can examine the specific activity of individual E2F proteins in quiescent fibroblast without other confounding proliferating signals [2]. The functional analysis of individual E2F proteins in quiescent fibroblasts revealed that activator E2Fs are sufficient to promote the G1/S transition in the cell cycle [34, 35]. Conversely, loss of activator E2Fs causes cell cycle arrest at G1 phase [36]. Accordingly, DP1 is required for G1/S transition and cell proliferation in human fibroblasts [13]. These observations indicate that the activator E2F/DP complexes promote and regulate the G1/S transition in cultured cells. However, subsequent studies revealed that the cell cycle arrest caused by concomitant loss of activator E2Fs in cultured fibroblasts is mediated through the p53-p21 axis, which reduces cdk activity [37]. Inactivation of p53 restores the proliferative ability of
Cell culture systems and

Figure 3.
The promoter activity of growth-related E2F target genes during the cell cycle. Solid line indicates the activity of wild-type promoter of growth-related E2F target genes. Dashed line indicates the activity of canonical E2F binding site mutant promoter of growth-related E2F target genes. The difference in promoter activity between wild-type and E2F binding site mutant is due to pRB/E2F/DP complex-dependent repression. Activator E2Fs increase the wild-type promoter activity to a higher level than the mutant promoter activity at the G1/S phase transition.
Activator E2Fs induce stronger activation of E2F target gene transcription compared to repressor E2Fs in reporter assays. Co-overexpression of DPs induces further activation of reporter transcription while knockdown of DP1 reduces promoter activity induced by activator E2Fs [13, 48, 49]. Thus, DP is essential for both active repression and activation of growth-related E2F target gene transcription (Figure 1B). The main role of DP in the regulation of growth-related E2F target gene expression is in DNA binding of the E2F/DP complex [3, 20]. A monomer of E2F or DP is able to bind to DNA
3.2. The role of the E2F/DP complex in mouse development
In order to form functional tissues and organs, stem cells and progenitor cells continuously proliferate to generate progeny cells, which must exit from the cell cycle at the onset of commitment to a differentiated state [51]. Because loss of all activator E2Fs or loss of DP1 induces cell cycle arrest of cells in culture [13, 36, 52],
Removing all E2f genes from a single mouse is technically impossible at this stage. The DP family has three members and DP1 is highly expressed in many tissues. Thus, it is anticipated that loss of DP1 would mimic the phenotype expected due to elimination of all E2F/DP complexes in the mouse.
3.3. The role of DP in fly development
Mammalian genomes contain several E2F and DP family members, and their functional relationships are very complicated. Because the fly genome contains two E2Fs, only one DP and no atypical E2Fs, the combinatorial interactions and possibility of compensation by other family members are more limited [4, 33]. In drosophila, loss of
4. The role of atypical E2Fs in endoreplication
4.1. Atypical E2Fs inhibit cell cycle progression in cultured cell
E2F7 and E2F8 are atypical E2F proteins, which are composed of two DBDs lacking a transactivation domain or pRb binding motif (Figure 2) [3, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 33]. They do not interact with DP, and thus atypical E2Fs function independently of DP protein. Since overexpression of atypical E2Fs represses the promoter activity of growth-related E2F target genes, they are designated repressor E2Fs. They function via a pRb-independent mechanism. E2F7 recruits the transcriptional co-repressor CtBP to repress the activity of its target promoter in fibroblasts [61]. Details of molecular mechanisms of how atypical E2Fs regulate E2F target genes have been controversial. DBD1 of E2F7 is similar to the DBD of the E2F family, while DBD2 of E2F7 is homologous to that of the DP family. Both DBDs are necessary for the DNA binding ability of atypical E2Fs. Crystal structure analysis revealed that DBD1 and DBD2 bind to a typical E2F binding site in a manner similar to the E2F4/DP2 heterodimeric complex [62]. This suggests the possibility that atypical E2Fs are able to function as a monomer (Figure 4A). However, they form a homodimer or a heterodimer of E2F7 and E2F8 in cells (Figure 4A) [24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29]. How this dimeric complex of atypical E2Fs binds to DNA remains to be addressed. In addition, it is reported that E2F7 inhibits the function of E2F1 by direct interaction (Figure 4A) [61]. How then does an E2F1/E2F7 heterodimer bind to DNA and how does E2F7 dominate E2F1 activity on their target promoter? Overexpression of atypical E2Fs inhibits proliferation of fibroblasts in culture [24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29]. Expression of atypical E2Fs is upregulated in G1/S transition of fibroblasts because their expression is under the control of typical E2Fs. These suggest that atypical E2Fs may function as a negative feedback loop to antagonize the function of activator E2Fs in S-phase of the cell cycle. However, cells can proliferate in the presence of atypical E2Fs. If they are dispensable in the control of cell proliferation, what is the role of atypical E2Fs in the physiological setting?

Figure 4.
Atypical E2Fs regulate growth-related E2F target genes by DP-independent mechanism(s) and control endoreplication. (A) Possible mechanisms to repress target promoters by atypical E2Fs. Atypical E2Fs repress the transcription of their target genes by forming a dimer of atypical E2Fs, or monomer, or binding to an activator E2F. (B) Archetypal cell cycle and endoreplication. Four phases (G1, S, G2, M) are proceeded in the archetypal cell cycle, while endoreplication repeats G1 and S phases. Atypical E2Fs are induced at G1/S phase and antagonize activator E2Fs at S phase in an endoreplication cycle. (C) Endoreplication in fly. Cul4 induces an acute degradation of dE2f1 to skip G2 and M phases.
4.2. Atypical E2Fs control endoreplication during mouse development
Mouse atypical E2Fs play crucial roles in endoreplication of placental
Loss of
4.3. Endoreplication in fly development
Fly is a model organism that lacks atypical
5. The role of E2F1 in apoptosis and tumor suppression
5.1. E2F1 induces apoptosis in a DP-independent manner in mammalian fibroblasts
Cultured cell systems also demonstrated that E2F1 can function to induce apoptosis [1, 2, 7]. Overexpression of E2F1 induces p53-dependent and p53-dependent apoptosis in cultured cells in the absence of survival signals provided by serum (Figure 5A). Overexpression of E2F1 induces the expression of Arf, which activates p53 through suppression of MDM2 [1, 2, 5, 10, 68]. E2F1 bypasses p53-dependent apoptosis by inducing the expression of the p53 homolog, p73 [69, 70]. In contrast to control of cell proliferation, DP1 and DP2 are not necessary for E2F1-induced apoptosis [13], indicating that E2F1-induced apoptosis is the second model of DP-independent E2F function. The function of E2F1 to induce apoptosis is intuitively contradictory to its role in promoting cell proliferation. Why does E2F1 protein have these opposing roles? Since endogenous pRb family proteins are unable to suppress the activity of E2F generated by overproduction of E2F, exogenous overexpression of E2F1 is supposed to recapitulate deregulated E2F activity that results from functional defects in pRb family proteins. Consistent with this theory, adenovirus E1A protein, which directly binds to pRb and inhibits its function, also induces apoptosis through the Arf-MDM2-p53 pathway in fibroblasts [71, 72, 73]. Therefore, the role of E2F1-mediated apoptosis has been interpreted as a defensive mechanism to protect against and/or counter oncogenic activation of E2F1 that induces abnormal proliferation in the context of pRb dysfunction.

Figure 5.
E2F1 regulation of
5.2. DP-independent regulation of Arf expression by E2F1 in mammalian fibroblast
The transcription of the
We have approached this issue by investigating mechanisms of how E2F regulates
In parallel to our study, Hallstrom et al. reported different mechanisms of regulation of E2F1-induced apoptosis [74, 77]. They found that (i) The MB domain determines specificity of E2F1 to induce apoptosis. A chimeric E2F1 mutant containing E2F3 MB loses the ability to induce apoptosis, while insertion of the E2F1 MB domain into E2F3 confers the ability to induce apoptosis. (ii) E2F1 binds to Jab1, a subunit of the COP9 signalosome (CSN), through its MB domain. The E2F1-Jab1 interaction is specific to E2F1 because the amino acid sequence of MB domain varies among individual E2F proteins. (iii) Jab1 enhances E2F1-indued activation of p53 and apoptosis. (iv) Jab1 enhances induction of
5.3. Arf suppresses tumorigenesis in the Rb mutant mouse
Homozygous mutation of the
5.4. E2F-induced apoptosis in fly requires DP
Overexpression of
6. Conclusion and perspective
In this chapter, we considered multiple roles of E2F transcription factor by introducing three distinct mechanisms of E2F-mediated transcription. The classic model of the E2F/DP complex explains how the heterodimeric complex regulates growth-related E2F target genes by collaborating with pRb family proteins during the cell cycle [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]. There is no doubt that the pRb/E2F/DP pathway instructs both entry into and exit from the cell cycle. However, recent studies revealed that cells have complementary mechanisms in control of cell cycle progression at the G1/S phase transition. Future studies should address the mechanisms, by which cells can control the exit from the cell cycle in the absence of the pRB/E2F/DP complex. The classic E2F/DP model is not sufficient to explain all function of E2F family proteins. Two additional mechanisms, described above, at least partly fill that knowledge gap. Atypical E2Fs play a crucial role in endoreplication by antagonizing the function of activator E2Fs in DP-independent and Rb-independent manners [3, 33, 63]. In addition to their role in endoreplication, atypical E2Fs may also mediate tumor suppression in multiple tissues including liver and skin [87, 88]. How they function in suppressing tumorigenesis is an important question for future studies. E2F1 also functions via DP-independent mechanisms, which mediate tumor suppression via regulation of apoptotic genes including
Acknowledgments
This work was supported in part by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP15K06957.
References
- 1.
Muller H, Helin K. The E2F transcription factors: Key regulators of cell proliferation. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta. 2000; 1470 :1-12 - 2.
Nevins JR et al. Role of the Rb/E2F pathway in cell growth control. Journal of Cellular Physiology. 1997; 173 :233-236 - 3.
Chen HZ, Tsai SY, Leone G. Emerging roles of E2Fs in cancer: An exit from cell cycle control. Nature Reviews. Cancer. 2009; 9 :785-797 - 4.
Dimova DK, Dyson NJ. The E2F transcriptional network: Old acquaintances with new faces. Oncogene. 2005; 24 :2810-2826 - 5.
Sherr CJ, McCormick F. The RB and p53 pathways in cancer. Cancer Cell. 2002; 2 :103-112 - 6.
Weng L et al. Critical role of active repression by E2F and Rb proteins in endoreplication during drosophila development. The EMBO Journal. 2003; 22 :3865-3875 - 7.
Shan B, Lee WH. Deregulated expression of E2F-1 induces S-phase entry and leads to apoptosis. Molecular and Cellular Biology. 1994; 14 :8166-8173 - 8.
Jiang H et al. The RB-E2F1 pathway regulates autophagy. Cancer Research. 2010; 70 :7882-7893 - 9.
Muller H et al. E2Fs regulate the expression of genes involved in differentiation, development, proliferation, and apoptosis. Genes & Development. 2001; 15 :267-285 - 10.
Komori H et al. Distinct E2F-mediated transcriptional program regulates p14ARF gene expression. The EMBO Journal. 2005;24 :3724-3736 - 11.
Ozono E et al. E2F-like elements in p27Kip1 promoter specifically sense deregulated E2F activity. Genes to Cells. 2009; 14 :89-99 - 12.
Ozono E et al. Tumor suppressor TAp73 gene specifically responds to deregulated E2F activity in human normal fibroblasts. Genes to Cells. 2012;17 :660-672 - 13.
Komori H et al. Differential requirement for dimerization partner DP between E2F-dependent activation of tumor suppressor and growth-related genes. Scientific Reports. 2018; 8 :8438 - 14.
Ikeda MA, Jakoi L, Nevins JR. A unique role for the Rb protein in controlling E2F accumulation during cell growth and differentiation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 1996; 93 :3215-3220 - 15.
Gaubatz S et al. E2F4 and E2F5 play an essential role in pocket protein-mediated G1 control. Molecular Cell. 2000; 6 :729-735 - 16.
Takahashi Y, Rayman JB, Dynlacht BD. Analysis of promoter binding by the E2F and pRB families in vivo: Distinct E2F proteins mediate activation and repression. Genes & Development. 2000; 14 :804-816 - 17.
Trimarchi JM et al. E2F-6, a member of the E2F family that can behave as a transcriptional repressor. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 1998; 95 (6):2850-2855 - 18.
Cartwright P et al. E2F-6: A novel member of the E2F family is an inhibitor of E2F-dependent transcription. Oncogene. 1998; 17 :611-623 - 19.
Morkel M et al. An E2F-like repressor of transcription. Nature. 1997; 390 :567-568 - 20.
Okuda M et al. The interaction mode of the acidic region of the cell cycle transcription factor DP1 with TFIIH. Journal of Molecular Biology. 2016; 428 :4993-5006 - 21.
Qiao H et al. Human TFDP3, a novel DP protein, inhibits DNA binding and transactivation by E2F. The Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2007; 282 :454-466 - 22.
Milton A et al. A functionally distinct member of the DP family of E2F subunits. Oncogene. 2006; 25 :3212-3218 - 23.
Kovesdi I, Reichel R, Nevins JR. Role of an adenovirus E2 promoter binding factor in E1A-mediated coordinate gene control. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 1987; 84 :2180-2184 - 24.
de Bruin A et al. Identification and characterization of E2F7, a novel mammalian E2F family member capable of blocking cellular proliferation. The Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2003; 278 :42041-42049 - 25.
Di Stefano L, Jensen MR, Helin K. E2F7, a novel E2F featuring DP-independent repression of a subset of E2F-regulated genes. The EMBO Journal. 2003; 22 :6289-6298 - 26.
Logan N et al. E2F-7: A distinctive E2F family member with an unusual organization of DNA-binding domains. Oncogene. 2004; 23 :5138-5150 - 27.
Christensen J et al. Characterization of E2F8, a novel E2F-like cell-cycle regulated repressor of E2F-activated transcription. Nucleic Acids Research. 2005; 33 :5458-5470 - 28.
Logan N et al. E2F-8: An E2F family member with a similar organization of DNA-binding domains to E2F-7. Oncogene. 2005; 24 :5000-5004 - 29.
Maiti B et al. Cloning and characterization of mouse E2F8, a novel mammalian E2F family member capable of blocking cellular proliferation. The Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2005; 280 :18211-18220 - 30.
Kim M, Tang JP, Moon NS. An alternatively spliced form affecting the marked box domain of drosophila E2F1 is required for proper cell cycle regulation. PLoS Genetics. 2018; 14 :e1007204 - 31.
Royzman I, Whittaker AJ, Orr-Weaver TL. Mutations in drosophila DP and E2F distinguish G1-S progression from an associated transcriptional program. Genes & Development. 1997; 11 :1999-2011 - 32.
Frolov MV et al. Functional antagonism between E2F family members. Genes & Development. 2001; 15 :2146-21460 - 33.
Lammens T et al. Atypical E2Fs: New players in the E2F transcription factor family. Trends in Cell Biology. 2009; 19 :111-118 - 34.
Johnson DG, Ohtani K, Nevins JR. Autoregulatory control of E2F1 expression in response to positive and negative regulators of cell cycle progression. Genes & Development. 1994; 8 :1514-1525 - 35.
Slansky JE et al. A protein synthesis-dependent increase in E2F1 mRNA correlates with growth regulation of the dihydrofolate reductase promoter. Molecular and Cellular Biology. 1993; 13 :1610-1618 - 36.
Wu L et al. The E2F1-3 transcription factors are essential for cellular proliferation. Nature. 2001; 414 :457-462 - 37.
Sharma N et al. Control of the p53-p21CIP1 Axis by E2f1, E2f2, and E2f3 is essential for G1/S progression and cellular transformation. The Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2006; 281 :36124-36131 - 38.
Timmers C et al. E2f1, E2f2, and E2f3 control E2F target expression and cellular proliferation via a p53-dependent negative feedback loop. Molecular and Cellular Biology. 2007; 27 :65-78 - 39.
Aslanian A et al. Repression of the Arf tumor suppressor by E2F3 is required for normal cell cycle kinetics. Genes & Development. 2004; 18 :1413-1422 - 40.
Sage J et al. Acute mutation of retinoblastoma gene function is sufficient for cell cycle re-entry. Nature. 2003; 424 :223-228 - 41.
Ohtani K, DeGregori J, Nevins JR. Regulation of the cyclin E gene by transcription factor E2F1. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 1995; 92 :12146-12150 - 42.
Magnaghi-Jaulin L et al. Retinoblastoma protein represses transcription by recruiting a histone deacetylase. Nature. 1998; 391 :601-605 - 43.
Luo RX, Postigo AA, Dean DC. Rb interacts with histone deacetylase to repress transcription. Cell. 1998; 92 :463-473 - 44.
Brehm A et al. Retinoblastoma protein recruits histone deacetylase to repress transcription. Nature. 1998; 391 :597-601 - 45.
Trouche D et al. RB and hbrm cooperate to repress the activation functions of E2F1. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 1997; 94 :11268-11273 - 46.
Nielsen SJ et al. Rb targets histone H3 methylation and HP1 to promoters. Nature. 2001; 412 :561-565 - 47.
Strobeck MW et al. BRG-1 is required for RB-mediated cell cycle arrest. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2000; 97 :7748-7753 - 48.
Girling R et al. A new component of the transcription factor DRTF1/E2F. Nature. 1993; 365 :468 - 49.
Helin K et al. Heterodimerization of the transcription factors E2F-1 and DP-1 leads to cooperative trans-activation. Genes & Development. 1993; 7 :1850-1861 - 50.
Zheng N et al. Structural basis of DNA recognition by the heterodimeric cell cycle transcription factor E2F-DP. Genes & Development. 1999; 13 :666-674 - 51.
Morrison SJ, Kimble J. Asymmetric and symmetric stem-cell divisions in development and cancer. Nature. 2006; 441 :1068-1074 - 52.
Maehara K et al. Reduction of total E2F/DP activity induces senescence-like cell cycle arrest in cancer cells lacking functional pRB and p53. The Journal of Cell Biology. 2005; 168 :553-560 - 53.
Tsai SY et al. Mouse development with a single E2F activator. Nature. 2008; 454 :1137-1141 - 54.
Chen D et al. Division and apoptosis of E2f-deficient retinal progenitors. Nature. 2009; 462 :925-929 - 55.
Liu H et al. Redeployment of Myc and E2f1-3 drives Rb-deficient cell cycles. Nature Cell Biology. 2015; 17 :1036-1048 - 56.
Kohn MJ et al. Dp1 is largely dispensable for embryonic development. Molecular and Cellular Biology. 2004;24 :7197-7205 - 57.
Kohn MJ et al. Dp1 is required for extra-embryonic development. Development. 2003;130 :1295-1305 - 58.
Duronio RJ et al. The transcription factor E2F is required for S phase during Drosophila embryogenesis. Genes & Development. 1995;9 :1445-1455 - 59.
Guarner A et al. E2F/DP prevents cell-cycle progression in endocycling fat body cells by suppressing dATM expression. Developmental Cell. 2017; 43 :689-703 e5 - 60.
Zappia MP, Frolov MV. E2F function in muscle growth is necessary and sufficient for viability in drosophila. Nature Communications. 2016; 7 :10509 - 61.
Liu B et al. Interaction of E2F7 transcription factor with E2F1 and C-terminal-binding protein (CtBP) provides a mechanism for E2F7-dependent transcription repression. The Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2013; 288 :24581-24589 - 62.
Morgunova E et al. Structural insights into the DNA-binding specificity of E2F family transcription factors. Nature Communications. 2015; 6 :10050 - 63.
Chen HZ et al. Canonical and atypical E2Fs regulate the mammalian endocycle. Nature Cell Biology. 2012; 14 :1192-1202 - 64.
Orr-Weaver TL. When bigger is better: The role of polyploidy in organogenesis. Trends in Genetics. 2015; 31 :307-315 - 65.
Zielke N et al. Control of Drosophila endocycles by E2F and CRL4(CDT2). Nature. 2011;480 :123-127 - 66.
Weiss A et al. Continuous Cyclin E expression inhibits progression through endoreduplication cycles in drosophila. Current Biology. 1998; 8 :239-242 - 67.
Follette PJ, Duronio RJ, O’Farrell PH. Fluctuations in cyclin E levels are required for multiple rounds of endocycle S phase in Drosophila . Current Biology. 1998;8 :235-238 - 68.
Bates S et al. p14ARF links the tumour suppressors RB and p53. Nature. 1998; 395 :124-125 - 69.
Lissy NA et al. A common E2F-1 and p73 pathway mediates cell death induced by TCR activation. Nature. 2000; 407 :642-645 - 70.
Irwin M et al. Role for the p53 homologue p73 in E2F-1-induced apoptosis. Nature. 2000; 407 :645-648 - 71.
de Stanchina E et al. E1A signaling to p53 involves the p19ARF tumor suppressor. Genes & Development. 1998; 12 :2434-2442 - 72.
Lowe SW, Ruley HE. Stabilization of the p53 tumor suppressor is induced by adenovirus 5 E1A and accompanies apoptosis. Genes & Development. 1993; 7 :535-545 - 73.
Samuelson AV et al. p400 is required for E1A to promote apoptosis. The Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2005; 280 :21915-21923 - 74.
Hallstrom TC, Nevins JR. Specificity in the activation and control of transcription factor E2F-dependent apoptosis. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2003; 100 :10848-10853 - 75.
Hallstrom TC, Mori S, Nevins JR. An E2F1-dependent gene expression program that determines the balance between proliferation and cell death. Cancer Cell. 2008; 13 :11-22 - 76.
Kurayoshi K et al. The phosphatidyl inositol 3 kinase pathway does not suppress activation of the ARF andBIM genes by deregulated E2F1 activity. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications. 2017;482 :784-790 - 77.
Hallstrom TC, Nevins JR. Jab1 is a specificity factor for E2F1-induced apoptosis. Genes & Development. 2006; 20 :613-623 - 78.
Lu H et al. Jab1/CSN5 mediates E2F dependent expression of mitotic and apoptotic but not DNA replication targets. Cell Cycle. 2011; 10 :3317-3326 - 79.
Jacks T et al. Effects of an Rb mutation in the mouse. Nature. 1992;359 :295-300 - 80.
Tsai KY et al. Mutation of E2f-1 suppresses apoptosis and inappropriate S phase entry and extends survival ofRb -deficient mouse embryos. Molecular Cell. 1998;2 :293-304 - 81.
Tsai KY et al. ARF mutation accelerates pituitary tumor development inRb +/− mice. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2002;99 :16865-16870 - 82.
Yamasaki L et al. Loss of E2F-1 reduces tumorigenesis and extends the lifespan of Rb1+/− mice. Nature Genetics. 1998;18 :360-364 - 83.
Moon NS, Di Stefano L, Dyson N. A gradient of epidermal growth factor receptor signaling determines the sensitivity of rbf1 mutant cells to E2F-dependent apoptosis. Molecular and Cellular Biology. 2006; 26 :7601-7615 - 84.
Myster DL, Bonnette PC, Duronio RJ. A role for the DP subunit of the E2F transcription factor in axis determination during Drosophila oogenesis. Development. 2000;127 :3249-3261 - 85.
Du W, Xie JE, Dyson N. Ectopic expression of dE2F and dDP induces cell proliferation and death in the drosophila eye. The EMBO Journal. 1996; 15 :3684-3692 - 86.
Moon NS et al. E2F and p53 induce apoptosis independently during Drosophila development but intersect in the context of DNA damage. PLoS Genetics. 2008;4 :e1000153 - 87.
Kent LN et al. E2f8 mediates tumor suppression in postnatal liver development. The Journal of Clinical Investigation. 2016;126 :2955-2969 - 88.
Thurlings I et al. Synergistic functions of E2F7 and E2F8 are critical to suppress stress-induced skin cancer. Oncogene. 2017; 36 :829-839 - 89.
Takahashi K, Yamanaka S. Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult fibroblast cultures by defined factors. Cell. 2006; 126 :663-676 - 90.
Marion RM et al. A p53-mediated DNA damage response limits reprogramming to ensure iPS cell genomic integrity. Nature. 2009; 460 :1149-1153 - 91.
Hong H et al. Suppression of induced pluripotent stem cell generation by the p53-p21 pathway. Nature. 2009; 460 :1132-1135 - 92.
Pajcini KV et al. Transient inactivation of Rb andARF yields regenerative cells from postmitotic mammalian muscle. Cell Stem Cell. 2010;7 :198-213