1 Massagué, J. TGF-beta signal transduction. Annu Rev Biochem 67, 753-791, doi:10.1146/annurev.biochem.67.1.753 (1998).
2 Chen, X., Rubock, M. J. & Whitman, M. A transcriptional partner for MAD proteins in TGF-beta signalling. Nature 383, 691-696, doi:10.1038/383691a0 (1996).
3 Macias, M. J., Martin-Malpartida, P. & Massagué, J. Structural determinants of Smad function in TGF-beta signaling. Trends Biochem Sci 40, 296-308, doi:10.1016/j.tibs.2015.03.012 (2015).
4 Bogdanovic, O., van Heeringen, S. J. & Veenstra, G. J. The epigenome in early vertebrate development. Genesis 50, 192-206, doi:10.1002/dvg.20831 (2012).
5 Charney, R. M. et al. Foxh1 Occupies cis-Regulatory Modules Prior to Dynamic Transcription Factor Interactions Controlling the Mesendoderm Gene Program. Dev Cell 40, 595-607 e594, doi:10.1016/j.devcel.2017.02.017 (2017).
6 Landsberger, N. & Wolffe, A. P. Remodeling of regulatory nucleoprotein complexes on the Xenopus hsp70 promoter during meiotic maturation of the Xenopus oocyte. EMBO J 16, 4361-4373, doi:10.1093/emboj/16.14.4361 (1997).
7 Vastenhouw, N. L., Cao, W. X. & Lipshitz, H. D. The maternal-to-zygotic transition revisited. Development 146, doi:10.1242/dev.161471 (2019).
8 Muller, P., Rogers, K. W., Yu, S. R., Brand, M. & Schier, A. F. Morphogen transport. Development 140, 1621-1638, doi:10.1242/dev.083519 (2013).
9 Aragon, E. et al. Structural basis for distinct roles of SMAD2 and SMAD3 in FOXH1 pioneer-directed TGF-beta signaling. Genes Dev 33, 1506-1524, doi:10.1101/gad.330837.119 (2019).
10 Blitz, I. L. & Cho, K. W. Y. Control of zygotic genome activation in Xenopus. Curr Top Dev Biol 145, 167-204, doi:10.1016/bs.ctdb.2021.03.003 (2021).
11 Gao, P. et al. Transcriptional regulatory network controlling the ontogeny of hematopoietic stem cells. Genes Dev 34, 950-964, doi:10.1101/gad.338202.120 (2020).
12 Gentsch, G. E., Owens, N. D. L. & Smith, J. C. The Spatiotemporal Control of Zygotic Genome Activation. iScience 16, 485-498, doi:10.1016/j.isci.2019.06.013 (2019).
13 Joseph, S. R. et al. Competition between histone and transcription factor binding regulates the onset of transcription in zebrafish embryos. Elife 6, doi:10.7554/eLife.23326 (2017).
14 Larson, E. D., Marsh, A. J. & Harrison, M. M. Pioneering the developmental frontier. Mol Cell 81, 1640-1650, doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2021.02.020 (2021).
15 Michael, A. K. et al. Mechanisms of OCT4-SOX2 motif readout on nucleosomes. Science 368, 1460-1465, doi:10.1126/science.abb0074 (2020).
16 Massagué, J. How cells read TGF-beta signals. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 1, 169-178, doi:10.1038/35043051 (2000).
17 Massagué, J. TGFbeta signalling in context. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 13, 616-630, doi:10.1038/nrm3434 (2012).
18 Afouda, B. A. et al. Foxh1/Nodal Defines Context-Specific Direct Maternal Wnt/beta-Catenin Target Gene Regulation in Early Development. iScience 23, 101314, doi:10.1016/j.isci.2020.101314 (2020).
19 Attisano, L. & Lee-Hoeflich, S. T. The Smads. Genome Biol 2, 3010.3011-3018 (2001).
20 Hoodless, P. A. et al. MADR1, a MAD-related protein that functions in BMP2 signaling pathways. Cell 85, 489-500 (1996).
21 von Both, I. et al. Foxh1 is essential for development of the anterior heart field. Dev Cell 7, 331-345, doi:10.1016/j.devcel.2004.07.023 (2004).
22 Yamamoto, M. et al. The transcription factor FoxH1 (FAST) mediates Nodal signaling during anterior-posterior patterning and node formation in the mouse. Genes Dev 15, 1242-1256, doi:10.1101/gad. 883901 (2001).
23 Lam, E. W., Brosens, J. J., Gomes, A. R. & Koo, C. Y. Forkhead box proteins: tuning forks for transcriptional harmony. Nat Rev Cancer 13, 482-495, doi:10.1038/nrc3539 (2013).
24 Lambert, S. A. et al. The Human Transcription Factors. Cell 172, 650-665, doi:10.1016/j.cell.2018.01.029 (2018).
25 Dai, S., Qu, L., Li, J. & Chen, Y. Toward a mechanistic understanding of DNA binding by forkhead transcription factors and its perturbation by pathogenic mutations. Nucleic Acids Res 49, 10235-10249, doi:10.1093/nar/gkab807 (2021).
26 Chen, X. et al. Smad4 and FAST-1 in the assembly of activin-responsive factor. Nature 389, 85-89, doi:10.1038/38008 (1997).
27 Labbe, E., Silvestri, C., Hoodless, P. A., Wrana, J. L. & Attisano, L. Smad2 and Smad3 positively and negatively regulate TGF beta-dependent transcription through the forkhead DNA-binding protein FAST2. Mol Cell 2, 109-120 (1998).
28 Martin-Malpartida, P. et al. Structural basis for genome wide recognition of 5-bp GC motifs by SMAD transcription factors. Nat Commun 8, 2070, doi:10.1038/s41467-017-02054-6 (2017).
29 Zhou, S., Zawel, L., Lengauer, C., Kinzler, K. W. & Vogelstein, B. Characterization of human FAST-1, a TGF beta and activin signal transducer. Mol Cell 2, 121-127, doi:10.1016/s1097-2765(00)80120-3 (1998).
30 Zhang, Y. et al. High throughput determination of TGFbeta1/SMAD3 targets in A549 lung epithelial cells. PLoS One 6, e20319, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0020319 (2011).
31 Zhang, J. et al. FOXH1 promotes lung cancer progression by activating the Wnt/beta-catenin signaling pathway. Cancer Cell Int 21, 293, doi:10.1186/s12935-021-01995-9 (2021).
32 Loizou, E. et al. A Gain-of-Function p53-Mutant Oncogene Promotes Cell Fate Plasticity and Myeloid Leukemia through the Pluripotency Factor FOXH1. Cancer Discov 9, 962-979, doi:10.1158/2159-8290.CD-18-1391 (2019).
33 Jimenez, G., Verrijzer, C. P. & Ish-Horowicz, D. A conserved motif in goosecoid mediates groucho-dependent repression in Drosophila embryos. Mol Cell Biol 19, 2080-2087, doi:10.1128/MCB.19.3.2080 (1999).
34 Miyazono, K. I. et al. Hydrophobic patches on SMAD2 and SMAD3 determine selective binding to cofactors. Sci Signal 11, doi:10.1126/scisignal.aao7227 (2018).
35 Jennings, B. H. et al. Molecular recognition of transcriptional repressor motifs by the WD domain of the Groucho/TLE corepressor. Mol Cell 22, 645-655, doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2006.04.024 (2006).
36 Drozdetskiy, A., Cole, C., Procter, J. & Barton, G. J. JPred4: a protein secondary structure prediction server. Nucleic Acids Res 43, W389-394, doi:10.1093/nar/gkv332 (2015).
37 Zheng, H. et al. Validation of metal-binding sites in macromolecular structures with the CheckMyMetal web server. Nat Protoc 9, 156-170, doi:10.1038/nprot.2013.172 (2014).
38 Chen, X. et al. Structural basis for DNA recognition by FOXC2. Nucleic Acids Res 47, 3752-3764, doi:10.1093/nar/gkz077 (2019).
39 Li, J. et al. Structure of the Forkhead Domain of FOXA2 Bound to a Complete DNA Consensus Site. Biochemistry 56, 3745-3753, doi:10.1021/acs.biochem.7b00211 (2017).
40 Bandukwala, H. S. et al. Structure of a domain-swapped FOXP3 dimer on DNA and its function in regulatory T cells. Immunity 34, 479-491, doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2011.02.017 (2011).
41 Clark, K. L., Halay, E. D., Lai, E. & Burley, S. K. Co-crystal structure of the HNF-3/fork head DNA-recognition motif resembles histone H5. Nature 364, 412-420, doi:10.1038/364412a0 (1993).
42 Li, J. et al. Mechanism of forkhead transcription factors binding to a novel palindromic DNA site. Nucleic Acids Res 49, 3573-3583, doi:10.1093/nar/gkab086 (2021).
43 Rogers, J. M. et al. Bispecific Forkhead Transcription Factor FoxN3 Recognizes Two Distinct Motifs with Different DNA Shapes. Mol Cell 74, 245-253 e246, doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2019.01.019 (2019).
44 Blanchet, C., Pasi, M., Zakrzewska, K. & Lavery, R. CURVES+ web server for analyzing and visualizing the helical, backbone and groove parameters of nucleic acid structures. Nucleic Acids Res 39, W68-73, doi:10.1093/nar/gkr316 (2011).
45 Nikolova, E. N. et al. Transient Hoogsteen base pairs in canonical duplex DNA. Nature 470, 498-502, doi:10.1038/nature09775 (2011).
46 Xu, Y. et al. Hoogsteen base pairs increase the susceptibility of double-stranded DNA to cytotoxic damage. J Biol Chem 295, 15933-15947, doi:10.1074/jbc.RA120.014530 (2020).
47 Widom, J. Chromatin structure: linking structure to function with histone H1. Curr Biol 8, R788-791, doi:10.1016/s0960-9822(07)00500-3 (1998).
48 Ramakrishnan, V., Finch, J. T., Graziano, V., Lee, P. L. & Sweet, R. M. Crystal structure of globular domain of histone H5 and its implications for nucleosome binding. Nature 362, 219-223, doi:10.1038/362219a0 (1993).
49 Zaret, K. S. Pioneer Transcription Factors Initiating Gene Network Changes. Annu Rev Genet 54, 367-385, doi:10.1146/annurev-genet-030220-015007 (2020).
50 Wang, S. et al. Linker histone defines structure and self-association behaviour of the 177 bp human chromatosome. Sci Rep 11, 380, doi:10.1038/s41598-020-79654-8 (2021).
51 Lowary, P. T. & Widom, J. New DNA sequence rules for high affinity binding to histone octamer and sequence-directed nucleosome positioning. J Mol Biol 276, 19-42, doi:10.1006/jmbi.1997.1494 (1998).
52 Meers, M. P., Janssens, D. H. & Henikoff, S. Pioneer Factor-Nucleosome Binding Events during Differentiation Are Motif Encoded. Mol Cell 75, 562-575 e565, doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2019.05.025 (2019).
53 Pogoda, H. M., Solnica-Krezel, L., Driever, W. & Meyer, D. The zebrafish forkhead transcription factor FoxH1/Fast1 is a modulator of nodal signaling required for organizer formation. Curr Biol 10, 1041-1049, doi:10.1016/s0960-9822(00)00669-2 (2000).
54 Sirotkin, H. I., Gates, M. A., Kelly, P. D., Schier, A. F. & Talbot, W. S. Fast1 is required for the development of dorsal axial structures in zebrafish. Curr Biol 10, 1051-1054, doi:10.1016/s0960-9822(00)00679-5 (2000).
55 Tate, J. G. et al. COSMIC: the Catalogue Of Somatic Mutations In Cancer. Nucleic Acids Res 47, D941-D947, doi:10.1093/nar/gky1015 (2019).
56 Chiu, W. T. et al. Genome-wide view of TGFbeta/Foxh1 regulation of the early mesendoderm program. Development 141, 4537-4547, doi:10.1242/dev.107227 (2014).
57 Benabou, S., Mazzini, S., Avino, A., Eritja, R. & Gargallo, R. A pH-dependent bolt involving cytosine bases located in the lateral loops of antiparallel G-quadruplex structures within the SMARCA4 gene promotor. Sci Rep 9, 15807, doi:10.1038/s41598-019-52311-5 (2019).
58 Corona, R. I. & Guo, J. T. Statistical analysis of structural determinants for protein-DNA-binding specificity. Proteins 84, 1147-1161, doi:10.1002/prot.25061 (2016).
59 Konig, P., Giraldo, R., Chapman, L. & Rhodes, D. The crystal structure of the DNA-binding domain of yeast RAP1 in complex with telomeric DNA. Cell 85, 125-136, doi:10.1016/s0092-8674(00)81088-0 (1996).
60 Jantz, D. & Berg, J. M. Probing the DNA-binding affinity and specificity of designed zinc finger proteins. Biophys J 98, 852-860, doi:10.1016/j.bpj.2009.11.021 (2010).
61 Gadea, F. C. & Nikolova, E. Nucleosome topology and DNA sequence modulate the engagement of pioneer factors SOX2 and OCT4. BioRxiv (2022).
62 Echigoya, K. et al. Nucleosome binding by the pioneer transcription factor OCT4. Sci Rep 10, 11832, doi:10.1038/s41598-020-68850-1 (2020).
63 Aragon, E. et al. A Smad action turnover switch operated by WW domain readers of a phosphoserine code. Genes Dev 25, 1275-1288, doi:10.1101/gad.2060811 (2011).
64 Martin-Malpartida, P. et al. HTSDSF explorer, a novel tool to analyze high-throughput DSF screenings. Journal of Molecular Biology, 167372, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmb.2021.167372 (2021).
65 Tickle, I. J. et al. STARANISO. Global Phasing Ltd., Cambridge, UK. (2018).
66 Diederichs, K. & Karplus, P. A. Better models by discarding data? Acta Cryst. D, 69 1215-1222 (2013).
67 McCoy, A. J. Solving structures of protein complexes by molecular replacement with Phaser. Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr 63, 32-41, doi:10.1107/S0907444906045975 (2007).
68 Medina, E. et al. Three-Dimensional Domain Swapping Changes the Folding Mechanism of the Forkhead Domain of FoxP1. Biophysical journal 110, 2349–2360, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpj.2016.04.043 (2016).
69 Murshudov, G. N., Vagin, A. A. & Dodson, E. J. Refinement of macromolecular structures by the maximum-likelihood method. Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr 53, 240-255, doi:10.1107/S0907444996012255 (1997).
70 Liebschner, D. et al. Macromolecular structure determination using X-rays, neutrons and electrons: recent developments in Phenix. Acta Crystallogr D Struct Biol 75, 861-877, doi:10.1107/S2059798319011471 (2019).
71 Smart, O. S. et al. Exploiting structure similarity in refinement: automated NCS and target-structure restraints in BUSTER. Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr 68, 368-380, doi:10.1107/S0907444911056058 (2012).
72 Joosten, R. P., Long, F., Murshudov, G. N. & Perrakis, A. The PDB_REDO server for macromolecular structure model optimization. IUCrJ 1, 213-220, doi:10.1107/S2052252514009324 (2014).
73 Pettersen et al. UCSF Chimera - a visualization system for exploratory research and analysis. J Comput Chem 25, 1605-1612, doi:10.1002/jcc.20084 (2004).
74 Castro-Mondragon, J. A. et al. JASPAR 2022: the 9th release of the open-access database of transcription factor binding profiles. Nucleic Acids Res 50, D165-D173, doi:10.1093/nar/gkab1113 (2022).
75 Bailey, T. L. & Grant, C. H. SEA: Simple Enrichment Analysis of motifs. biorxiv.org (2021).
76 Quinlan, A. R. & Hall, I. M. BEDTools: a flexible suite of utilities for comparing genomic features. Bioinformatics 26, 841-842, doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btq033 (2010).
77 Bailey, T. L. STREME: Accurate and versatile sequence motif discovery. Bioinformatics, doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btab203 (2021).
78 Katoh, K. & Standley, D. M. MAFFT multiple sequence alignment software version 7: improvements in performance and usability. Mol Biol Evol 30, 772-780, doi:10.1093/molbev/mst010 (2013).
79 Laskowski, R. A. & Swindells, M. B. LigPlot+: multiple ligand-protein interaction diagrams for drug discovery. J Chem Inf Model 51, 2778-2786, doi:10.1021/ci200227u (2011).
80 Vonrhein, C. et al. Data processing and analysis with the autoPROC toolbox. Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr 67, 293-302, doi:10.1107/S0907444911007773 (2011).