RNA expression studies indicate that the three Foxo isoforms differ with respect to tissue localization, with Foxo1 representing the predominant mRNA isoform in liver (
17), lung, and spleen, and Foxo4 in heart, skeletal muscle, and kidney (
13). Foxo3 mRNA distribution mirrored that of Foxo1, albeit at lower levels (Figure a). Foxo1 is also the main member of the Foxo subfamily in cultured β cells (βTC-3 line) (Figure b, lane 2) and murine islets. Its levels decline over the first 6 months of life, as do Irs2 and Pdx1 levels. Foxo3 is expressed at lower levels and Foxo4 is undetectable in islets (not shown). Although a decrease in Pdx1 expression with age has been reported in rat islets (
18), the present observation suggests that the downregulation of Pdx1 mRNA occurs earlier than previously thought. It re-mains to be seen, however, whether this is a specific difference between rats and mice or a reflection of interstrain variability in mice. Immunohistochemistry of pancreatic islets with anti-Foxo1 and anti-insulin antisera demonstrates colocalization of Foxo1 and insulin to β cells. The subcellular localization of Foxo1 in β cells is heterogeneous, with some cells showing exclusive cytoplasmic or nuclear immunoreactivity, and some cells showing diffuse immunoreactivity (Figure d).
To address whether Foxo1 participates in β cell function, we tested the ability of a loss-of-function Foxo1 mutation to rescue β cell failure in
Irs2–/– mice by crossing
Irs2
–/– and
Foxo1+/– mice (
12). In
Irs2–/– mice, insulin-immunoreactive β cell area was about 70% smaller than in the wild- type at 8 weeks of age (Figure , a and b), with only a slight decrease in glucagon-immunoreactive α cell area (Figure b). No changes were observed in
Foxo1+/– mice (
12). In contrast, in
Irs2–/–Foxo1+/– mice, β cell area was restored to about 80% of wild-type values.
Irs2–/–Foxo1+/– mice have a normal life span and do not develop diabetes (Table ).
| Table 1Metabolic characteristics of 8-week-old mice |
Akt-dependent phosphorylation inhibits Foxo1 activity. When Foxo1 was expressed in islets from
Irs2–/– mice by adenoviral transduction, phosphorylation of the “gatekeeper” Akt site at serine 253 was decreased by approximately 40% compared with wild-type islets (Figure b), suggesting that Foxo1 is in the Irs2 signaling pathway. Since insulin receptor signaling inhibits Foxo1, we tested the effect of a loss-of-function
Insr mutation on diabetes in
Irs2–/– mice. We generated recombinant congenic mice carrying
Irs2 and
Insr targeted null alleles on the same chromosome (the two genes are about 4 Mb apart near the centromeric end of chromosome 8; ref.
19), and intercrossed them to produce
Irs2–/–Insr+/– mice.
Insr haploinsufficiency increased the severity and accelerated the onset of diabetes in
Irs2–/– mice.
Irs2–/–Insr+/– mice developed diabetes at 6–8 weeks (Table ) and invariably died by 10 weeks of age. Pancreatic islets were virtually undetectable by 8 weeks (Figure a). Withers and colleagues have reported a similar phenotype in
Irs2–/–Igf1r+/– mice (
20).
To distinguish between increased cell proliferation and decreased apoptosis as mechanisms of β cell restoration in
Irs2–/–Foxo1+/– mice, we measured BrdU incorporation and DNA fragmentation. BrdU incorporation was reduced by about 85% in islets of 2-week-old
Irs2
–/– mice and was restored to approximately 67% of wild-type in
Irs2–/–Foxo1+/– mice (
P < 0.05 by ANOVA). We observed no changes in exocrine acinar tissue (Figure c). In contrast to proliferation, we failed to detect apoptotic cells in any of the genotypes examined using TUNEL staining at ages 2, 3, and 4 weeks (data not shown). These data indi-cate that restoration of β cell mass in
Irs2–/–Foxo1+/– mice is due to increased proliferation, rather than decreased apoptosis. Nevertheless, given that apoptosis in β cells is difficult to document (
21), we cannot rule out its contribution to the observed phenotype.
Unlike β cell mass, Foxo1 haploinsufficiency did not affect glucose-stimulated insulin secretion from islets of Irs2–/–Foxo1+/– mice, nor did overexpression of wild-type or mutant Foxo1 affect insulin secretion in cultured βTC-3 cells (data not shown).
To examine the mechanism by which
Foxo1 haploinsufficiency prevents diabetes in
Irs2–/– mice, we analyzed expression of
Foxo1 target genes. They include the cell cycle inhibitor
p27kip (
22) and the proapoptotic genes
FasL (
23) and
BimL (
24). For these experiments we used islets of similar size derived from 4-week-old mice to exclude artifacts due to loss of β cells. However, real-time RT-PCR analysis of islet RNA failed to detect differences in Bad, BimL, and FasL, while p27
kip was decreased by 40% in
Irs2–/– mice and by 30% in
Irs2–/–Foxo+/– mice (Figure ), which is inconsistent with the possibility that Foxo1 inhibits β cell replication by increasing p27
kip. Thus, changes in the expression of these genes do not appear to play a role in the observed phenotype. These data were confirmed by experiments in βTC-3 cells, in which a dominant-negative (δ 256) Foxo1 adenovirus failed to inhibit
p27kip,
FasL, and
BimL expression (data not shown).
In contrast, real-time RT-PCR demonstrated a greater than 80% decrease in the expression of
Pdx1 and its target gene
Slc2a2 (glucose transporter
Glut2) in
Irs2–/– mice. The decrease was also observed in islets of transgenic mice bearing a phosphorylation-defective Foxo1
S253A mutant in β cells (
12), and was partially reversed in
Irs2–/–Foxo1+/– mice to about 50% of wild-type. Lesser changes (~50%) were observed in
Gck levels, consistent with two recent studies showing that
Gck is less sensitive than
Slc2a2 to reduction of
Pdx1 expression (
25,
26). In contrast,
Gck expression was increased about twofold in Foxo1
S253A transgenics (Figure ). The reasons for the differential regulation of
Gck and
Slc2a2 in
Irs2–/– and Foxo1
S253A mice are unclear.
Foxa2 expression was also decreased by about 50% in
Irs2–/– and Foxo1
S253A mice, but was not restored in
Irs2–/–Foxo1+/– islets.
We next compared Pdx1 expression by immunohistochemistry. In wild-type islets, more than 95% of insulin-immunoreactive cells scored (793 of 827) were Pdx1-positive (Figure a, green). In Irs2–/– mice, the percentage of Pdx1-positive cells decreased to 38.7% (245 of 632); moreover, Pdx1 was frequently mislocalized to the cytoplasm. In Irs2–/–Foxo1+/– mice, the percentage of Pdx1-positive cells was restored to greater than 90% (678 of 730) (P < 0.001 by ANOVA). These data support the real-time PCR analysis and suggest a negative correlation between Foxo1 activity and Pdx1 expression levels.
To investigate this relationship further, we analyzed the subcellular distribution of Foxo1 in Pdx1-positive and Pdx1-negative β cells. Because the anti-Foxo1 and anti-Pdx1 antisera available for immunohistochemistry have been raised in rabbits, we could not perform double staining on the same tissue section. Therefore, we stained adjacent sections with anti-Foxo1 and anti-insulin, or anti-Pdx1 and anti-insulin antisera and carefully matched the position of β cells using insulin immunostaining to outline the nuclear margins (Figure b). On average, approximately 30% of cells showed matching nuclear “ghosts” in two adjacent 5-μm sections, consistent with the fact that the average β cell diameter is 10 μm and the nucleus occupies about 70% of the cell surface (
6). In the vast majority of this subset of cells, Pdx1 and Foxo1 showed mutually exclusive nuclear localization. Thus, in approximately 80% of Pdx1-positive cells examined, Foxo1 localized to the cytoplasm (Figure b, cells 1, 2, 7, and 8). By contrast, in about 80% of Pdx1-negative cells, Foxo1 localized to the nucleus (Figure b, cells 3, 4, 6, and 9). In addition, the occasional double-positive cells (such as cell 10 in Figure b) showed very weak Pdx1 immunoreactivity. These correlative findings were investi-gated further by expressing wild-type or a phosphorylation-defective Foxo1 mutant (ADA-Foxo1) that is constitutively nuclear (
13) in βTC-3 cells. Wild-type Foxo1 was basally phosphorylated (data not shown) and was localized to the cytoplasm of Pdx1-expressing cells. In contrast, cells expressing the ADA-Foxo1 mutant in the nucleus were Pdx1-negative (Figure a). Moreover, we have previously shown that expression of a similar constitutively nuclear Foxo1 mutant in islets of transgenic mice results in greatly decreased Pdx1 levels (
12).
In summary,
Pdx1 levels decreased in three models of increased Foxo1 activity:
Irs2–/– mice, in which Foxo1 phosphorylation is decreased (Figure b); transgenic mice expressing the phosphorylation-defective, constitutively nuclear Foxo1
S253A in β cells (
12); and βTC-3 cells transduced with ADA-Foxo1 adenovirus. Conversely,
Foxo1 haploinsufficiency partially reverses the decrease in
Pdx1 levels in
Irs2–/– mice. These data support the hypothesis that Foxo1 inhibits
Pdx1 and are consistent with the observation that overexpression of Pdx1 rescues diabetes in
Irs2–/– mice (
27).
To determine potential sites of interaction between Foxo1 and Pdx1, we surveyed pancreatic
Foxo1 expression. The targeting vector used to ablate
Foxo1 function contains a β-galactosidase (β-gal) cassette fused in-frame with
Foxo1 exon 1 to enable detection of
Foxo1 expression using X-gal reactivity (
12). Using this technique, we detected occasional Foxo1-positive cells in pancreatic ducts and exocrine acini, in addition to islets (Figure b, top row). In view of the potential role of duct-associated cells in β cell neogenesis, we investigated the colocalization of Foxo1 with insulin and Pdx1 in duct-associated cells. The majority of duct-associated Foxo1-positive cells did not display insulin or Pdx1 immunoreactivity (Figure b, red arrows). However, all the insulin/Pdx1-positive duct-associated cells were Foxo1-positive (Figure b, black arrows). These data are consistent with the possibility that Foxo1 regulates
Pdx1 expression in duct-associated cells.
Next, we used gel shift and reporter gene assays to test the hypothesis that Foxo1 binds directly to the
Pdx1 promoter and inhibits its transcription. A 6.5-kbp
Pdx1 promoter contains elements required for β cell–specific expression, including three potential forkhead binding sites (
15,
28,
29). Among the forkhead proteins, Foxa2 is a known activator of
Pdx1, and
Pdx1 expression is blunted in mice lacking Foxa2 in β cells (
30). We carried out gel shift assays using nuclear extracts from LLC (Figure a) and βTC-3 cells (Figure b). When we used a probe carrying the proximal consensus forkhead binding site of the
Pdx1 promoter (PH2 domain) (
15), we detected a gel retardation complex that could be competed for by excess cold probe, but not by a mutant probe (Figure a). In insulin-producing βTC-3 cells, we detected at least two gel retardation complexes, indicated as I and II. Addition of anti-Foxo1 antiserum caused a supershift to yield a distinct complex III. Addition of anti-Foxa2 monoclonal antibody caused a supershift of complex A to yield complex IV. Addition of nonimmune serum did not cause any supershift (Figure b).
We used cotransfection assays with a minimal Pdx1 promoter containing the proximal Foxa2 binding site to study the effect of Foxo1 in Pdx1 transcription. Expression of Foxa2 in-creased Pdx1/luciferase activity ap-proximately tenfold, whereas Foxo1 failed to do so (Figure c). Coexpression of constitutively active Foxo1 inhibited Foxa2-dependent Pdx1 transcription in a dose-dependent manner up to about 60%, consistent with the possibility that Foxo1 acts as a transrepressor of Foxa2-dependent Pdx1 transcription (Figure d). The ability of Foxo1 to inhibit Foxa2-dependent Pdx1 transcription was not due to the presence of an excess of Foxo1 protein, since we detected the inhibitory effect when Foxa2 levels exceeded those of Foxo1 (Figure e). We obtained similar data when we used the full-length Pdx1 promoter construct (data not shown). These data provide proof of principle that Foxo1 can act as a repressor of Pdx1 transcription in a transfection system. However, it is likely that the in vivo interaction between Foxo1 and Pdx1 is complex, and depends on the relative abundance of Foxo1, the contributions of coactivators and corepressors, and signals regulating Foxo1 localization.