The absence of fushi tarazu and even-skipped, due to the absence of prospero produces abnormal axon pathfinding by neurons (Doe, 1991 and Vaessin, 1991).
In the absence of the Drosophila Abl oncogene protein-tyrosine kinase (PTK), loss-of-function mutations in either
Disabled or prospero have dominant phenotypic effects on embryonic development. Molecular and
genetic characterizations indicate that the products of these genes interact with the Abl PTK by different mechanisms. Prospero encodes a cytoplasmic and nuclear protein required for correct axonal outgrowth. The product of disabled may be a substrate for the Abl PTK. The Disabled protein is colocalized with Abl in axons, its predicted amino acid sequence contains 10 motifs similar to the major autophosphorylation site of Abl, and the protein is recognized by antibodies to phosphotyrosine (Gertler, 1993).
Given the mild phenotypes of abl mutant animals, it is possible to design genetic screens to identify mutations in genes that enhance or suppress the abl mutant phenotypes. It has been hypothesized that in a genetic background sensitized by abl mutations, a 50% reduction in the level of a protein that is regulated by Abl might be sufficiently detrimental to shift the lethal phase from the pharate adult stage to an embryonic or early larval stage. This effect is called haploinsufficiency dependent on an abl mutant background (HDA). The genes identified are not haploinsufficient themselves but manifest their effects when the fly is also mutant for abl. disabled and prospero are two of the genes identified by this strategy. Although abl mutants exhibit no visible defects in the embryonic central nervous system (CNS), animals that are doubly mutant for abl die as embryos and fail to form proper axonal connections in the CNS. Heterozygous deletions of pros in the absence of abl cause embryonic and larval lethality. Examination of these embryos reveals, for the most part, normal axonal architecture in the CNS and peripheral nervous system, with variably penetrant subtle defects in the CNS, including fusion of the anterior and posterior commissural axon bundles. prosM4 homozygous mutant embryos display a segmentally repeated pattern of disrupted axon bundles in each neuromere. The longitudinal axons, which extend to the anterior and posterior between segments, are absent. The midline space between the two halves of the nervous system is wider than normal, with a loss of some midline cells of unknown identity. The anterior and posterior commissural axon bundles that cross the midline in each segment are replaced by a single axon bundle (Gertler, 1993).
The longitudinal glia (LG), progeny of a single glioblast, form a scaffold that presages the formation of longitudinal tracts in the ventral nerve cord (VNC) of the Drosophila embryo. The LG are used as a substrate during the extension of the first axons of the longitudinal tract. The differentiation of the LG has been examined in six mutations in which the longitudinal tracts are absent, displaced, or interrupted to determine whether the axon tract malformations may be attributable to disruptions in the LG scaffold. Embryos mutant for the gene prospero have no longitudinal tracts, and glial differentiation remains arrested at a preaxonogenic state. Two mutants of the Polycomb group also lacked longitudinal tracts; here the glia fail to form an oriented scaffold, but cytological differentiation of the LG is unperturbed. The longitudinal tracts in embryos mutant for slit fuse at the VNC midline and scaffold formation is normal, except that it is medially displaced. Longitudinal tracts have intersegmental interruptions in embryos mutant for hindsight and midline. In hindsight, there are intersegmental gaps in the glial scaffold. In midline, the glial scaffold retracts after initial extension. LG morphogenesis during axonogenesis is abnormal in midline. Commitment to glial identity and glial differentiation also occurs before scaffold formation. In all mutants examined, the early distribution of the glycoprotein Neuroglian is perturbed. This is indicative of early alterations in VNC pattern present before LG scaffold formation begins. Therefore, some changes in scaffold formation may reflect changes in the placement and differentiation of other cells of the VNC. In all mutants, alterations in scaffold formation precedes longitudinal axon tract formation (Jacobs, 1993).
Signaling between neurons requires highly specialized subcellular structures, including dendrites and axons. Dendrites exhibit diverse
morphologies yet little is known about the mechanisms controlling dendrite formation in vivo. Methods have been developed to visualize
the stereotyped dendritic morphogenesis in living Drosophila embryos. Dendrite development is altered in prospero mutants and in
transgenic embryos expressing a constitutively active form of the small GTPase cdc42. From a genetic screen, several
genes have been identified that control different aspects of dendrite development including dendritic outgrowth, branching, and routing. These genes include
kakapo, a large cytoskeletal protein related to plectin and dystrophin; flamingo, a seven-transmembrane protein containing cadherin-like repeats; enabled, a
substrate of the tyrosine kinase Abl; and nine potentially novel loci. These findings begin to reveal the molecular mechanisms controlling dendritic morphogenesis (Gao, 1999).
The peripheral neurons in each hemisegment of the Drosophila embryo are grouped into dorsal, lateral, and ventral clusters. The neurons within each cluster can be further
classified on the basis of their dendritic morphology; these categories are external sensory (es) neurons and chordotonal (ch) neurons, each containing a single dendrite; bipolar dendrite
(bd) neurons, each with two simple unbranched dendritic projections; and multiple dendrite (md) neurons with extensive dendritic arborizations. The md neurons are
thought to function as touch receptors or proprioceptors to sense body surface tension or deformation. The dendritic branching of md
neurons does not begin until 16 hr after egg laying (AEL) and continues until and beyond hatching. Because impermeable cuticle already forms at 16 hr AEL, md
neuron dendrites can not be visualized by standard antibody staining of whole mount embryos. It is possible to manually dissect individual embryos to allow antibody
access; however, this technique is too laborious to be useful for a large-scale mutant screen. To circumvent these technical problems,
an assay system was developed on the basis of expression of GFP in living embryos. First, a panel of Gal4 enhancer trap lines was screened to identify those that allow high levels of UAS-driven GFP expression in a subset of PNS neurons at the appropriate developmental stages. Of these, the
Gal4 line 109(2)80 was chosen. Recombination was performed to create a second chromosome harboring both the Gal4 109(2) 80 transgene and a
UAS-GFP transgene, but no background lethal mutations. A fly line homozygous for the Gal4 109(2) 80/GFP chromosome (denoted as Gal4 80/GFP) was then introduced. In the dorsal clusters of abdominal segments A1-A7, GFP expression labels both axons and dendrites of all six md neurons, one bd neuron, and
one tracheal innervating neuron, but not the es neurons. In addition, high levels of GFP expression are detected in the lateral and ventral clusters, and in the
antennomaxillary complex. Low levels of GFP fluorescence are also observed in a small subset of neurons in the central nervous system (CNS). The dendrites of dorsal cluster md neurons elaborate just underneath the epidermal layer. In larvae, these dendrites as revealed by Gal4 80/GFP are in tight
association with a layer of epidermal cells labeled by Kruppel-Gal4/GFP. It is thus possible to visualize the md neuron dendrites in the dorsal cluster in living animals.
A focus was placed on the development of these md neuron dendrites in wild-type as well as mutant embryos. To simplify this description, two types of
easily detectable dendrites were defined: dorsal branches grow toward the dorsal midline and lateral branches grow along the approximate anterior-posterior axis toward
segment boundaries (Gao, 1999).
The projection pattern of md neuron dendrites in a specific
hemisegment is largely invariant from embryo to embryo, on the basis of
observations on over thousands of embryos. The major characteristics of dendritic morphogenesis are summarized here. By
12-13 hr AEL, ch and es neurons have already sent out their initial
dendritic projections. At this stage, bd neurons have also extended
their dendrites. The primary dendrites of md neurons emerge at 13-14
hr AEL, 2 hr after the axons of PNS neurons have reached the CNS. The location of initial dendritic outgrowth and the orientation of this outgrowth are fairly invariant for md neurons. At 13 hr AEL, a dorsal
dendrite first emerges from one md neuron in the anterior of the dorsal
cluster; shortly after, a second dorsal dendrite emerges from a
posterior md neuron of the same cluster. Both dorsal dendrites extend
perpendicular to the anterior-posterior axis towards the dorsal
midline. Each md neuron (in the dorsal cluster only) sends out one
dorsally oriented primary dendrite; however, some md neurons have
additional primary lateral dendrites. The dorsal extension essentially
stops between 15 and 16 hr AEL, before the lateral branches start to
develop. Between 15 and 17 hr AEL, numerous transient lateral branches
extend and retract. These
branches undergo constant remodeling. Only a subset is
eventually stabilized between 18 and 20 hr AEL to become the final
lateral branches. At this stage, dorsal and lateral
branches are clearly distinguishable. The number of lateral branches in
a particular segment is similar from embryo to embryo. In addition, the
anterior and posterior dorsal branches within a hemisegment are clearly
separated by an area devoid of dendrites. Before hatching (23-24 hr
AEL), most lateral branches further elaborate tertiary branches before
and after they reach the segment boundary, but only a small number of
branches cross over into neighboring segments. At hatching, the dorsal branches have not yet reached the
dorsal midline so there is a clear dendrite-free zone near the dorsal
midline. After hatching, the dorsal branches resume elongation and
reach the dorsal midline by the second instar stage. The length and the
thickness of dendritic processes continue to increase with increasing
larval body size (Gao, 1999).
Before hatching, the lateral branches are regularly spaced and project toward the segment boundaries. This pattern is relatively invariant from embryo to embryo for a specific hemisegment. To investigate how the dendritic patterning develops, dendrite formation was monitored in living embryos from 15 to 16 hr AEL and time-lapse analysis was carried
out. Numerous lateral growth buds emerge
anterior or posterior to the dorsal branches and then retract.
Only a subset of these lateral branches elongates toward the segment
boundaries and becomes stabilized. During this process, the length and
orientation of dorsal branches remains largely unchanged. Numerous thin
processes at the tips of the lateral branches undergo rapid extension
and retraction. These thin processes are not labeled
by a Tau-GFP fusion protein, indicating that they might
not contain microtubules. This analysis reveals that dendritic
development is a dynamic process (Gao, 1999).
Two approaches were used to identify genes involved in dendritic
morphogenesis: (1) an investigation of the effects of previously isolated
mutations, and (2) a systematic mutant screen. It was reasoned
that dendrite development might share some common molecular mechanisms
with axon and tracheal development, because all of these processes
exhibit subcellular outgrowth and branching. Among the mutants that were
examined, prospero mutants and embryos expressing a constitutively active form of Dcdc42 showed detectable dendrite phenotypes. prospero encodes a nuclear
protein with multiple homopolymeric amino acid stretches and is
expressed in neuronal precursor cells. It has been suggested that prospero controls the
expression of neuronal precursor genes and is required for proper
neuronal differentiation. Two different alleles
of prospero were used in this study: pros17
and prosjo13. The prospero mutant embryos do not show any obvious
cell fate change in the embryo PNS on the basis of available cell
type-specific markers, instead they exhibit abnormal outgrowth and
misrouting of axons from dorsal clusters of sensory neurons. In
addition, abnormal dendritic patterning is observed in these mutant
embryos. The anterior and posterior dorsal branches in wild-type
embryos are roughly parallel to one another. However, in
~70% of pros17 embryos, these branches make
dramatic turns and occasionally criss-cross each other. A
similar phenotype is observed in ~10% of
prosjo13 embryos. These studies indicate that proper
development of both dendrites and axons requires the function of
prospero (Gao, 1999).
During development of the Drosophila central nervous
system, neuroblast 6-4 in the thoracic segment (NB6-4T)
divides asymmetrically into a medially located glial
precursor cell and a laterally located neuronal precursor
cell. To understand the molecular basis for this
glia-neuron cell-fate decision, the effects of
some known mutations on the NB6-4T lineage were examined. prospero mutations lead to a loss of
expression of Glial cells missing; this is essential to
trigger glial differentiation in the NB6-4T lineage. In wild-type
embryos, Pros protein is localized at the medial cell
cortex of dividing NB6-4T and segregates to the nucleus of
the glial precursor cell. miranda and inscuteable mutations
alter the behavior of Pros, resulting in failure to correctly
switch the glial and neuronal fates. These results suggest
that NB6-4T uses the same molecular machinery in the
asymmetric cell division as other neuroblasts in cell
divisions producing ganglion mother cells. Furthermore,
outside the NB6-4T lineage most glial cells
appear independently of Pros (Akiyama-Oda, 2000).
In a null allele of pros no cells express Gcm or Repo in the NB6-4T lineage. In contrast, in a null allele of miranda all cells of the lineage express the glial proteins. The double mutant pros;mira produces no glial cells in the NB6-4T lineage, the same result obtained with the pros mutation. These results indicated that both pros and mira are involved in a pathway leading to the glia-neuron cell-fate switch, and that pros is epistatic to mira in this pathway. The effects of the insc mutation on the glia-neuron cell-fate switch in the NB6-4T lineage are slightly different from those of the pros or mira mutations. In insc mutants, both glial and non-glial cells are generated from NB6-4T in many of the hemisegments examined, but glial fate arises randomly from either of the daughter cells. These involvements of pros, mira and insc suggest an analogy between the first cell division of NB6-4T and NB cell divisions that produce GMCs and no glia. Pros, Mira and Insc proteins behave similarly during the first division of NB6-4T to the usual NB divisions producing GMCs. In the analyses of wild-type and mutant embryos, the
high levels of expression of the earliest glial protein Gcm, and of the later glial protein Repo, are correlated with the nuclear localization of Pros in NB6-4T
daughter cells. Consistent with this, in a pros mutant in which the mutant Pros protein does not enter the nucleus even after cell division, no glial cells are observed in the NB6-4T lineage. These observations suggest an important role for Pros in the onset of glial differentiation in the NB6-4T lineage (Akiyama-Oda, 2000).
Asymmetric cell divisions and segregation of fate determinants are crucial events in the generation of cell diversity. Fly neuroblasts, the precursors that self-reproduce and generate neurons, represent a clear example of asymmetrically dividing cells. Less is known about how neurons and glial cells are generated by multipotent precursors. Flies provide the ideal model system to study this process. Indeed, neuroglioblasts (NGBs) can be specifically identified and have been shown to require the gcm fate determinant to produce glial cells, which otherwise would become neurons. The division of a specific NGB (NGB6-4T), which produces a neuroblast (NB) and a glioblast (GB), has been followed. To generate the glioblast, gcm RNA becomes progressively unequally distributed during NGB division and preferentially segregates. Subsequently, a GB-specific factor is required to maintain gcm expression. Both processes are necessary for gliogenesis,
showing that the glial vs. neuronal fate choice is a two-step process. This feature, together with gcm subcellular RNA distribution and the behavior of the NGB mitotic apparatus identify a novel type of division generating cell diversity (Ragone, 2001).
The present study shows that Pros transcription factor is
necessary to maintain gcm expression and thereby
activate the glial program in the glioblast. Indeed, in the
absence of Pros, gcm RNA progressively disappears
from the GB. The gain-of-function phenotype also demonstrates
that Pros is not sufficient to initiate gcm
expression nor to induce the glial fate on its own. Pros
protein and RNA most likely form a complex with Staufen
and Miranda. In the absence of Miranda, which is necessary
to localize them, both daughter cells inherit the RNA and the protein.
In addition, they both inherit gcm RNA. As a consequence,
the two daughter cells adopt the GB fate. It is speculated that Pros is required for both gcm-independent and gcm-dependent maintenance, since
in its absence the levels of gcm expression are even
lower than in the absence of autoregulation. The gcm
promoter contains, indeed, several binding sites for the Pros
protein. Finally, Pros does not affect all glial cells, therefore it is likely that
specific factors will be required in other lineages (Ragone, 2001).
gcm displays several differences with respect to
pros with regard to RNA localization. (1) asymmetric distribution is not evident before metaphase; (2) asymmetry occurs progressively during cell division rather than being sharply apical at interphase and basal at metaphase; (3) gcm
transcripts are present at the cortex and in the cytoplasm. These differences suggest the existence of different RNA localization pathways in asymmetrically dividing cells.
That Stau and Mira may participate to the process is
suggested by the mislocalization of gcm RNA in stau
and mira mutants. In addition, the gcm 3'UTR displays a
stem-loop secondary structure, a conformation that is necessary for the interaction
of Staufen with Bicoid 3'UTR. However, this mechanism is
not sufficient to ensure a correct fate choice. Moreover,
mira and stau are not fully penetrant with respect to
gcm RNA distribution. Finally, and more importantly,
the cytoplasmic localization of some gcm
transcripts as well as the kinetics of asymmetry calls for a
cortical microfilament independent mechanism. Thus, the
same RNA may be the target of two localization pathways: this complements the observation that the same RNA binding protein may localize transcripts using pathways with different cytoskeletal requirements (Ragone, 2001).
In the embryonic epidermis, dacapo expression starts during G2 of the final division cycle and is required for the arrest of cell cycle progression in G1 after the final mitosis. The onset of dacapo transcription is the earliest event known to be required for the
epidermal cell proliferation arrest. To advance an understanding of the regulatory mechanisms that terminate cell proliferation at the appropriate stage, the control of dacapo transcription has been analyzed.
dacapo transcription is not coupled to cell cycle progression. It is not affected in mutants where proliferation is
arrested either too early or too late. Moreover, upregulation of dacapo expression is not an obligatory event of the cell cycle
exit process. During early development of the central nervous system, Dacapo cannot be detected during the final division
cycle of ganglion mother cells, while it is expressed at later stages. The control of dacapo expression therefore varies in
different stages and tissues. The dacapo regulatory region includes many independent cis-regulatory elements. The elements
that control epidermal expression integrate developmental cues that time the arrest of cell proliferation (Meyer, 2002).
p27DAP expression is detected in the Prospero-positive MP2 neuroblast. MP2 is an exceptional neuroblast that accumulates Prospero in the nucleus. Moreover, MP2 divides just once to produce two postmitotic neurons. The final division of this unusual neuroblast therefore is preceded by dap expression, as in the epidermis. However, anti-p27DAP labeling of prospero mutant embryos, indicates that dap expression in MP2 is not the result of Prospero translocation into the nucleus. At later stages, the pattern of anti-p27DAP labeling observed in the CNS is complex and highly dynamic. Anti-p27DAP signals of non-uniform intensity were detected in both Prospero-positive as well as Prospero-negative cells (Meyer, 2002).
Limited analyses of dap expression during CNS development in wild-type embryos demonstrates that cell cycle exit is not always preceded by dap expression. When the first GMCs are generated during embryonic CNS development and progress through their terminal division cycle, p27DAP cannot be detected in these cells, while expression in the unusual MP2 neuroblast is readily observed. This dap expression in the MP2 neuroblast occurs also in prospero mutant embryos. All the findings therefore argue against the suggestion favored by previous studies, which argues that the timely arrest of cell proliferation in GMC progeny might depend on the induction of dap expression by the transcription factor Prospero. The idea that nuclear Prospero might trigger dap expression in GMCs to bring about the G1 arrest observed in the two MP2 neurons generated by GMC division appeared very attractive. Moreover, in principle this hypothesis is also suggested by the correlation that MP2, an exceptional neuroblast that behaves like a GMC in that it divides just once to produce two postmitotic neurons, accumulates Prospero in the nucleus and expresses dap (Meyer, 2002).
The findings argue against a mechanism that operates generally in all GMCs to prevent further cell cycle progression after the terminal division by Prospero-mediated induction of dap expression; more complex mechanisms might have to be considered that might even vary in different neuroblast lineages. The regulation of dap expression in the nervous system certainly entails such complexity. This work does not exclude a dap-independent, general cell cycle arrest mechanism that operates in all GMCs and is perhaps even triggered by nuclear Prospero (Meyer, 2002).
The PGal4 transposon inserted upstream of the pan-neural gene prospero causes several neural and behavioral defects in the Voila1 strain. The precise excision of the transposon simultaneously rescued all these defects whereas its unprecise excision created new prosV alleles, including the null allele prosV17. The relationship between the genetic structure of pros locus, larval locomotion, and larval gustatory response were studied. These two behaviors showed varying degrees of variation depending upon the pros allele. A good relation was found between behavioral alteration, the level of Pros protein in the embryo, and the degree of disorganization in the larval neuromuscular junction. These data suggest that the complete development of the nervous system requires a full complement of Pros, and that a gradual decrease in the levels of this protein can proportionally alter the development and the function of the nervous system (Grosjean, 2003).
The adult external sense organ precursor (SOP) lineage is
a model system for studying asymmetric cell division. Adult
SOPs divide asymmetrically to produce IIa and IIb
daughter cells; IIa generates the external socket (tormogen)
and hair (trichogen) cells, while IIb generates the internal
neuron and sheath (thecogen) cells. The
expression and function of prospero has been examined in the adult SOP
lineage. Although Prospero is asymmetrically localized in
embryonic SOP lineage, this is not observed in the adult
SOP lineage: Prospero is first detected in the IIb nucleus; during IIb division, it is cytoplasmic and inherited by
both neuron and sheath cells. Subsequently, Prospero is
downregulated in the neuron but maintained in the sheath
cell. Loss of prospero function leads to double bristle sense
organs (reflecting a IIb-to-IIa transformation) or single
bristle sense organs with abnormal neuronal
differentiation (reflecting defective IIb development).
Conversely, ectopic prospero expression results in duplicate
neurons and sheath cells and a complete absence of
hair/socket cells (reflecting a IIa-to-IIb transformation).
It is concluded that (1) despite the absence of asymmetric
protein localization, prospero expression is restricted to the
IIb cell but not its IIa sibling; (2) prospero promotes IIb cell
fate and inhibits IIa cell fate, and (3) prospero is required
for proper axon and dendrite morphology of the neuron
derived from the IIb cell. Thus, prospero plays a
fundamental role in establishing binary IIa/IIb sibling cell
fates without being asymmetrically localized during SOP
division. Finally, in contrast to previous studies, the IIb cell is found to divide prior to the IIa cell in the SOP lineage (Manning, 1999).
What mechanisms lead to prospero expression in the IIb
cell but not in the IIa cell? Specification of IIa/IIb cell fates
is determined by the relative activity of Notch signaling.
Productive Notch signaling results in IIa cell fate;
asymmetric localization of Numb protein into the IIb cell
blocks Notch signaling and results in the IIb cell fate. It is proposed that
productive Notch signaling prevents prospero expression in
the IIa cell, whereas lack of Notch signaling allows
prospero expression in the IIb cell. Consistent with this
model, SOP lineages with unregulated Notch signaling
produce a pair of IIa cells that both fail to express prospero,
while SOP lineages lacking Notch function produce two IIb
cells that both express prospero (Reddy,
1999a). One effector of Notch signaling in the IIa cell is the
zinc-finger transcriptional repressor Tramtrack, which may
directly or indirectly repress prospero expression. Interestingly, prospero is expressed in the R7 neuron
during eye development and tramtrack mutants have supernumerary R7
neurons, while tramtrack misexpression reduces R7
differentiation. Thus, a
similar Notch-, tramtrack-dependent pathway may repress
prospero expression in both the R7 photoreceptor neuron and
the IIa cell. It should be noted that a somewhat different
mechanism must be involved in repressing prospero in the
neuron but not the sheath cell; in this case, Notch signaling is
required for sheath cell fate, the cell that maintains prospero
expression. The lack of Notch-mediated repression of
prospero expression in the sheath cell may reflect the fact
that Notch signaling is SuH-dependent in the IIa cell, but
SuH-independent in the sheath cell.
prospero is essential for distinguishing IIa and IIb
cell fates (Manning, 1999 and references).
A role for prospero in establishing different
IIa/IIb cell fates has been demonstrated based on both loss-of-function and
misexpression experiments. A significant fraction of the SOP
lineages lacking prospero function show a duplication of the
external bristle (a progeny of the IIa cell) and
a loss of the neuron (a progeny of the IIb cell) (Reddy, 1999a). Socket
cell fate could not be adequately scored, because multiple socket cells can generate a single,
fused socket structure. The simplest interpretation of the
double bristle prospero minus sense organs is that the IIb cell has
become partially or fully transformed into a IIa cell, resulting
in duplicate hair/sockets and loss of neuron/sheath cell. It is unlikely, but it cannot be rule out, that the
neuron is transformed into a duplicate hair cell and the sheath
cell is unaffected. In both notum and eye, however, there are
still many single bristle sense organs that have an associated
neuron and, in these sense organs, the IIb cell must have been
specified relatively normally. Thus prospero is not strictly
necessary for IIb cell specification, but its function is important
for the high-fidelity specification of IIb cell fate.
While the presence of prospero in the IIb cell is important
for reliable IIb cell specification, the absence of prospero
from the IIa cell is absolutely essential for IIa cell
specification. Misexpression of prospero in the IIa cell and
its progeny results in a fully penetrant loss of a socket cell
marker (SuH) as well as the morphological external socket
and hair structures; there is a corresponding increase in the
internal Elav+ neurons and BarH1+ sheath cells. The
misexpression experiments show that absence of Prospero in
the IIa cell is required for normal IIa development, and that the
presence of Prospero in the IIa transforms it partially or fully
to the IIb cell fate. Thus, differential expression of prospero
between IIa and IIb siblings is essential for normal SOP
development. Similar results were observed using transient
heat-shock-induced misexpression of prospero, although in
these experiments a very low frequency of
double and triple bristle sense organs at the borders of the
bald areas was observer. The cell lineage of these rare sense organs is
unknown (Manning, 1999).
It is interesting to consider the different mechanisms by which
prospero acts to distinguish sibling cell fate. During embryonic
neuroblast cell division, localization of Prospero into the
daughter GMC is necessary for GMC development, but
exclusion of Prospero from the neuroblast is relatively
unimportant for neuroblast development (this is because neuroblast
development is fairly normal in miranda mutants where
Prospero remains in the neuroblast; Chris Doe, unpublished
results cited in Manning, 1999). In contrast, during the adult SOP lineage, it appears
equally important to remove Prospero from the IIa cell as well
as provide it to the IIb cell. Another key difference between
the adult SOP lineage and the embryonic SOP and neuroblast
lineages is the timing of cell divisions. There are several hours
between each cell division in the adult SOP lineage,
considerably longer than the 40-60 minutes cell cycle of
embryonic neuroblasts and SOPs. The shorter cell cycles of the
embryonic lineages may require asymmetric localization of
Prospero for efficient specification of sibling cell fate, whereas
the longer adult SOP cell cycles may provide time for the
action of other regulatory mechanisms (e.g. Notch-mediated
repression of prospero expression) (Manning, 1999).
In single bristle prospero minus sense organs, a single
neuron was observed with profound defects in neurite outgrowth. The
defects in axon and dendrite outgrowth and connectivity
could be due to lack of prospero function in the IIb cell, a
non-autonomous effect due to lack of prospero function in
the sheath cell, or the absence of prospero function in the
neuron itself. The first possibility is unlikely
because axon outgrowth defects can be observed in R7
neurons, which do not arise from a Prospero+ precursor cell.
The second possibility is unlikely because lack of
sheath cells (in glial cells missing embryos) does not
generate similar axon outgrowth defects.
A third model is favored, in which prospero has a direct
function in the neuron, because many neurons with different
origins (CNS, PNS, eye) transiently express prospero and all
show a similar prospero mutant phenotype: stunted and
misrouted axons (Manning, 1999).
Subcellular distribution of the Prospero protein is
dynamically regulated during Drosophila embryonic
nervous system development. Prospero is first detected in
neuroblasts where it becomes cortically localized and
tethered by the adapter protein, Miranda. After division,
Prospero enters the nucleus of daughter ganglion mother
cells where it functions as a transcription factor. A mutation has been isolated that removes the C-terminal 30 amino
acids from the highly conserved 100 amino acid Prospero
domain. Molecular dissection of the homeo- and Prospero
domains, and expression of chimeric Prospero proteins
in mammalian and insect cultured cells indicates that
Prospero contains a nuclear export signal that is masked
by the Prospero domain. Nuclear export of Prospero, which
is sensitive to the drug leptomycin B (LMB), is mediated by
Exportin. Mutation of the nuclear export signal-mask in
Drosophila embryos prevents Prospero nuclear localization
in ganglion mother cells. It is proposed that a combination of
cortical tethering and regulated nuclear export controls
Prospero subcellular distribution and function in all higher
eukaryotes (Demidenko, 2001).
The l(3R)S8 locus was originally recovered during a selection
for suppressors of a conditional lethal mutation in the largest
subunit of RNA polymerase II, RpII215K1.
A single nucleotide transformation was found in the prospero locus in l(3R)S8
mutants. The transformation is located near the 3' end of
the pros gene, converting the tryptophan codon at amino acid
1378 into a stop codon (TGG->TGA). The resulting
mutant Prospero protein lacks its C-terminal 30 amino acids,
which reside in a 100 amino acid motif, known as the
Prospero domain. This domain is highly conserved among
Prospero proteins from Drosophila to mammals. This
is the first reported mutation in the Prospero domain (PD) and has allowed its function to be determined (Demidenko, 2001).
The PD alone does not activate transcription. However, although the PD does not
appear to contain transcription-stimulating activity, it does play
a crucial role in the functioning of Prospero. Deletion of the
C-terminal 30 amino acids always abrogates activation by
Prospero when both the HD and the remainder of the PD are
present in the protein. It is postulated that the PD might regulate
either the subcellular localization or stability of the Prospero
protein. To examine this, constructs were transfected into a
mammalian cell and assayed for the subcellular localization and abundance of the fusion proteins. All of the constructs that contain an intact C terminus are expressed highly and are nuclear localized. In contrast, after deletion of the C-terminal 30 amino acids, the fusion proteins become restricted primarily to the
cytoplasm (Demidenko, 2001).
The changes in subcellular distribution of Prospero caused
by progressive C-terminal deletions were informative. They
indicated that two previously undescribed domains, which
regulate Prospero subcellular distribution, are present in the C
terminus. One corresponds to a NES and/or cytoplasmic
tether, and the second to a region that inhibits or masks this
export signal/tether. The initial deletion derivatives allow the
export signal/tether to be mapped roughly to the Prospero HD
and the N-terminal 70 amino acids of the PD. This signal can
overcome a functional NLS and cause Prospero derivatives to be restricted to the cytoplasm as long as the C-terminal 30 amino acids of the PD are
removed. The C-terminal 30 amino acids include the second
domain: the regulatory or masking region that blocks the
nuclear export and/or tethering signal (Demidenko, 2001).
Additional deletion constructs were tested to delimit more
precisely the NES and its mask. Internal deletions of
the PD show that the entire domain is required for masking.
Constructs lacking amino acids 1378/1407, 1340/78 or 1308/39 are all localized to the cytoplasm. To define the NES more precisely a further series
of terminal deletions of Prospero are constructed. Each of these deletion constructs is exported from the nucleus. However, both the short and long isoforms of the
terminal deletion IIIC are nuclear, demonstrating that
the NES requires at least some of the amino acids between
1248 and 1281. An internal deletion removing helix two of the
homeodomain, from amino acids 1266/81, has no effect on
export. However, removal of amino acids 1252/65 abrogates
nuclear export. This deletion removes helix one of
the homeodomain. It is concluded that the region from 1252 to
1265 is necessary for functional nuclear export (Demidenko, 2001).
To demonstrate that this region is sufficient to act as an NES,
a short peptide covering this region was fused to GFP. Alone,
GFP expression is ubiquitous in CV1 cells. Addition of 28
amino acids from Prospero to GFP causes the fusion protein
to be excluded from the nucleus. Note that the
peptide used is derived from the short isoform of Prospero. By
convention, amino acids of the short isoform are numbered
relative to the long form; therefore, amino acids 1215/1271
lack 29 amino acids from the N terminus of the homeodomain
and the NES is delimited to just 28 amino acids. It is
concluded that amino acids 1215/1271 are sufficient to function
as a nuclear export signal. Furthermore, nuclear export is
blocked by LMB, demonstrating that this NES acts
through the Exportin pathway. The PD was able to mask nuclear export of the GFP fusion
protein. Addition of the region 1215/1407 to
GFP restores the ubiquitous distribution observed using GFP
alone. Thus the PD is sufficient to act as an NES mask in
isolation from other regions of Prospero (Demidenko, 2001).
At least two mechanisms could account for the masking of
the Prospero NES by the PD -- the masking region may
interact directly with the NES to block association with the
nuclear export receptor; alternatively, the PD may serve to
recruit a co-factor analogous to Hth. As the motif is able to
block nuclear export in both mammalian and Drosophila cells,
it must be highly conserved and is likely to represent a
regulatory mechanism common to all higher eukaryotes.
The ability of the PD to inhibit the Prospero NES does not
of itself indicate how differential nuclear export of Prospero is
achieved. It does, however, indicate that alterations in export
occur by regulating activity of the PD. The PD masking
region contains numerous potential phosphorylation sites.
Biochemical analysis has revealed that Prospero is more highly
phosphorylated when cytoplasmic than nuclear. Phosphorylation status has been implicated in the function of the NESs found in other proteins such as Cyclin D1, Hdac5, Net, ternary
complex factor and the yeast protein
Far1p. The transition in Prospero subcellular distribution may be driven by similar kinase cascades acting to modify the masking domain.
By regulating the activity of the NES at different stages of
neuronal development it is possible to switch Prospero
distribution from cytoplasmic to nuclear and back. In
neuroblasts, an active NES will cause the rapid cycling of
Prospero protein, which escapes interaction with Miranda and
enters the nucleus, back into the cytoplasm. When the
neuroblast buds off a GMC, concomitant inactivation of the
Prospero NES and degradation of Miranda in the daughter
GMC, allows Prospero to localize to the nucleus. After division
of the GMC to produce two daughter neurons, reactivation of
the NES could allow Prospero to be exported. Thus, regulated
nuclear entry of the Prospero transcription factor could control
the transcription programs characteristic of each cell type (Demidenko, 2001).
Identifying the genes involved in polygenic traits has been difficult. In the 1950s and 1960s, laboratory selection experiments for extreme geotaxic behavior in fruit flies established for the first time that a complex behavioral trait has a genetic basis. But the specific genes responsible for the behavior have never been identified using this classical model. To identify the individual genes involved in geotaxic response, cDNA microarrays were used to identify candidate genes and fly lines mutant in these genes were assessed for behavioral confirmation. The identities of several genes that contribute to the complex, polygenic behavior of geotaxis have thus been determined (Toma, 2002).
Pioneering experiments on Drosophila melanogaster and Drosophila pseudoobscura investigated the nature of the genetic basis for extreme, selected geotaxic behavior. These experiments constituted the first attempt at the genetic analysis of a behavior. Selection and chromosomal substitution experiments successfully showed that there is a genetic basis for extreme geotaxic response in flies and, by implication, for behavior in general. These experiments also added to understanding of the role of variation in phenotypic evolution and selection. Despite their seminal contributions in behavioral genetics, population genetics and the study of selection, by their nature these experiments could not identify specific genes (Toma, 2002 and references therein).
These results highlight both the success and the limitation of behavioral selection experiments. Although selection results tend to be representative of the natural interactions of genes that produce behavior and can demonstrate that a trait has a genetic basis, they do not pinpoint specific genes that influence the trait. This is partly due to the involvement of many genes and the relatively minor role of each in complex polygenic phenotypes -- a problem that is especially acute for the intrinsically more variable phenotypes that are associated with behavior. The advent of cDNA microarray technology offers an easily generalized strategy for detecting gene expression differences and can complement other means of identifying the genes that underlie complex traits. An expression difference may occur in a gene that is not itself polymorphic, but that gene may contribute to the realization of the phenotypic difference (Toma, 2002).
As a starting point for identifying genes that affect a complex trait, the selected, established Hi5 and Lo extreme geotaxic lines were examined for changes in gene expression between strains of Drosophila melanogaster subjected to long-term selection and isolation. A two-step approach was used: (1) the differential expression levels of mRNAs isolated from the heads of Hi5 and Lo flies was determined using cDNA microarrays and real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR); (2) a subset of the differentially expressed genes was independently tested for their influence on geotaxis behavior by running mutants for these genes through a geotaxis maze. It was reasoned that some of the differences in gene expression between strains might be related to phenotypic differences and that it should therefore be possible, at least in part, to reconstruct the phenotype with independently derived mutations in some of the differentially expressed genes (Toma, 2002).
The findings indicate that differences in gene expression can be used to identify phenotypically relevant genes, even when no large, single-gene effects are detectable by classical, quantitative genetic analysis. Three of the four genes implicated by microarray and qPCR measurements caused differences in geotaxis, whereas none of the six control genes had an effect. Only those genes that had larger differences in expression according to the microarrays, or that were significantly different according to qPCR results (cry, Pdf and Pen), significantly changed geotaxis scores. The converse was not true, because altered geotaxis behavior did not always accompany larger differences in mRNA levels, as shown by pros, although this might reflect the sensitivity of pros to aspects of the genetic context. All of the genes tested for which there was little or no difference in mRNA levels between the selected Hi5 and Lo lines also showed no influence on geotaxis behavior (Toma, 2002).
The directionality of behavioral and mRNA differences proved to be consistent with predictions that were based on expression levels. Homozygous null mutants of Pdf and cry showed a significant increase in geotaxis score, which is consistent with a lower level of expression of these genes in Hi5 relative to Lo. Similarly, the heterozygous Pen mutant showed a significant downward shift in geotaxis score, which is consistent with a lower level of Pen expression in Lo relative to Hi5. Thus, the change in behavior of the tested mutants corresponds to the direction predicted by differences in transcript level in the selected Hi5 and Lo lines (Toma, 2002).
Whereas the cry, Pen and female Pdf mutants produced the anticipated effect on behavior, the magnitude of behavioral effect was smaller than in the original selected lines. This probably reflects the difference between the aggregate effect of an ensemble of genes in the selected lines as opposed to the individual effect of a single mutant gene in a neutral background. In addition, their relatively small effects are exactly the results that one would predict in a polygenic system such as geotaxis behavior, in which many genes have small contributions to the overall phenotype. The three genes identified in this study would not have been predicted on the basis of their previously defined functions (Toma, 2002).
These results show that the two separate approaches to behavioral genetics -- the classical Hirschian quantitative analysis of genetic architecture and the modern Benzerian approach of single-gene mutant analysis -- are complementary and can be unified. This study used the results of a Hirschian approach of laboratory selection for natural variants to identify single gene differences, such as one would find in a Benzerian approach. The results are consistent with the suggestion that naturally occurring variants in behavior correspond to mild lesions in pleiotropic genes (Toma, 2002).
Finally, the results show that differences in gene expression identified by cDNA microarray analysis can be used as a starting point for narrowing down the numbers of candidate genes involved in complex genetic processes. Such an approach is analogous, as well as complementary, to the current method of mapping quantitative trait loci to large chromosomal intervals and then making educated guesses about which genes within those intervals may be involved in the trait (Toma, 2002).
The combination of selection, with its ability to exaggerate natural phenotypic variation, and global analysis of differences in gene expression by cDNA microarray analysis offers a promising approach to previously intractable molecular analyses of behavior. The geotaxis genes that were identified might have been the direct targets of selection, or they might be downstream of the direct targets. Additional studies using the Hi5 and Lo selected lines will be required to distinguish between these possibilities and to determine the causal role that these genes have in the context of the selected lines (Toma, 2002).
This study has gone from the selection of a 'laboratory-evolved' behavioral phenotype, to screening for mRNA differences, to partially reconstituting the phenotype using mutants. This shows the feasibility of combining genomic and classical genetic approaches for the breakdown and partial reassembly of an artificially selected behavioral trait (Toma, 2002).
The Drosophila antenna has a diversity of chemosensory organs within a single epidermal field. Three broad categories of sense-organs are known to be specified at the level of progenitor choice. However, little is known about how cell
fates within single sense-organs are specified. Selection of individual primary olfactory progenitors is followed by organization of groups
of secondary progenitors, which divide in a specific order to form a differentiated sensillum. The combinatorial expression of Prospero, Elav,
and Seven-up shows that there are three secondary progenitor fates. The lineages of these cells have been established by clonal analysis
and marker distribution following mitosis. High Notch signaling and the exclusion of these markers identifies PIIa; this cell gives rise to
the shaft and socket. The sheath/neuron lineage progenitor PIIb, expresses all three markers; upon division, Prospero asymmetrically
segregates to the sheath cell. In the coeloconica, PIIb undergoes an additional division to produce glia. PIIc is present in multiinnervated
sense-organs and divides to form neurons. An understanding of the lineage and development of olfactory sense-organs provides a handle
for the analysis of how olfactory neurons acquire distinct terminal fates (Sen, 2003).
Development of single sensory unit s have been traced by
using enhancer-trap insertions into the neurilized genes (neuA101 and neu-Gal4). Olfactory progenitor cells delaminate
from the epithelium as single isolated cells with
apically located nuclei and are arranged in distinct domains
in the early antennal disc. By 8 h APF, these progenitors begin association with one to three additional cells forming well-defined clusters. These cell clusters do not arise by
division of the olfactory progenitor since the first evidence
of cell division as seen by phosophohistone-3 (PH3) immunoreactivity
is after 12 h APF. The cells within the cluster are referred to as secondary progenitors, since their division gives rise to all the cells of an individual
sense-organ. Most of the clusters divide between 16 and 22 h APF (Sen, 2003).
This analysis was restricted to clusters of secondary progenitors
composed of three cells, although two and four cell
clusters can also be identified by expression of GFP
driven by neu-Gal4 (henceforth referred to as Neu-GFP). At 14 h APF, clusters are oriented in a single plane and have not yet begun cell division. Expression of
Pros and Elav was examined by using specific antibodies,
while Svp was monitored by following ß-galactosidase activity
in the enhancer-trap line svpP1725.
None of these markers express in primary olfactory progenitor
cells but appear shortly after formation of groups of
secondary progenitors. Double-labeling of 14-h APF discs
with anti-Pros and anti-Elav reveals that two of the three
cells within a cluster express both of these markers. Pros expression appears prior to that of Elav within the same cell. One of these cells also
expresses the Svp reporter (henceforth called Svp-lacZ). The combinatorial expression of genes allowed identification of three progenitor types. PIIa does not express
any of the markers and is recognized only by expression of
Neu-GFP; PIIb expresses Neu-GFP, Pros, Elav, and SvplacZ,
while PIIc expresses Neu-GFP, Pros, and Elav. Clusters composed of only two cells lack the PIIc progenitor and those with four cells contain two PIIc progenitors.
Hence, differential expression of genes could provide
cells within a single cluster the potential to exhibit
independent fates (Sen, 2003).
The distribution of Pros, Elav, and SvplacZ was examined
during division of the secondary progenitors. Staining
with phenylene-diamine allowed identification of interphase
nuclei, while entry and exit from mitosis was monitored by
changes in Neu-GFP distribution. During mitosis, only one
cell per cluster exhibits asymmetric cortical Pros crescents. The neighboring cell shows either compact or a uniform cytosolic localization. The failure to
observe two cortical Pros crescents per cluster even in
colcemid-arrested discs suggested either that PIIb and PIIc
divide at different times or that Pros is asymmetrically
segregated in only one of these cells (Sen, 2003).
By 36 h APF, postmitotic cells of the sensory units
occupy positions comparable to those in the adult; the shaft
and socket cells are identifiable by their external cuticular
projections. Pros is present in sheath and socket cells, while
Elav is exclusively neuronal. Clonal experiments have shown that the sheath
cell arises from PIIb lineage possibly inheriting Pros asymmetrically
from the progenitor. The socket, however, is derived from PIIa, which does not express Pros,
indicating de novo synthesis (Sen, 2003).
The majority of peripheral antennal glia arise during development of the coeloconic
sensilla. PIIb has been identified as the glial progenitor
in a number of gliogenic sense-organs. In
the olfactory sense-organs, PIIb can be unequivocally recognized
by expression of Pros, Elav, and Svp-lacZ (Sen, 2003).
Clusters in the region of the antenna populated
by coleoconic sense-organs were selected for detailed analysis. PIIb
divides to produce a large cell that remains within the
epithelial layer and a smaller basal cell. The basal cell
transiently expresses Pros and low levels of the
Svp reporter and also stains with antibodies
against the glial cell marker Reverse Polarity. The nascent glial cell loses Pros and Svp expression and rapidly migrates away to become associated with the
fasiculating sensory neurons (Sen, 2003).
The gliogenic lineage described above occurs only
within the coeloconica sensilla (i.e., ~70 out of 450 sensilla).
PIIIb, like PIIb in all other clusters, expresses Pros,
Svp, and Elav. Mitosis of all secondary progenitors is completed
by 22 h APF, and marker distribution in
progeny was examined at 25 h APF. At this time, sensory
cells orient along the apicobasal axis resembling positions
in the mature sensillum (Sen, 2003).
Pros expression is detected in two subepidermally located
accessory cells identified as sheath and socket. Upon division of PIIb, Svp-lacZ is
distributed equally to both progeny. One of these
is the sheath, which also expresses Pros, while the other stains with the
neuron-specific antibody mAb22C10. The
expression of ß-galactosidase fades from the sheath cell and
is not apparent by 36 h APF. The perdurance
of the reporter thus allows for the identification of sheath and
neuron as siblings derived from PIIb (Sen, 2003).
In the pros-Gal4;UAS-GFP strain, GFP
expression was observed in PIIb and PIIc but not PIIa. After division, all
neurons were labeled, despite the fact that they did not
express Pros protein, suggesting that all neurons
within a sensory unit are derived from progenitors that
express Pros (Sen, 2003).
Results from lineage experiments demonstrate that fates
of cells within a sense organ are determined by the secondary
progenitor from which they arise. What are the mechanisms
that regulate secondary progenitor identity? Previous
analysis in the mechanosensory lineage has shown that
binary choice between PIIa and PIIb is mediated by N
signaling. One of the effects of N activity is the downregulation
of pros in PIIa. The possible role of N in determination of
secondary progenitors of the antennal sense organs was tested using a
temperature sensitive loss-of-function allele. Nts-1 animals
pulsed at 32°C from 10 to 16 h APF show a significant
reduction in the number of external sensory structures on
the antennal surface. The
presence of glial cells and neurons was visualized by staining
36-h APF antennae with anti-Repo and mAb22C10,
respectively. The number of glial cells was increased over
that in control animals (Sen, 2003).
Sensory neurons leave the antenna in three well-defined
fascicles which are visualized by staining with mAb22C10. The diameter of the fascicles is somewhat increased
in Nts-1 animals, suggesting an increase in neurons. An increase in
internal cells (glia and neurons) concomitant with a reduction
in external cells (shafts and sockets) can be explained
by a switch of PIIa to PIIb/PIIc lineages (Sen, 2003).
In sibling cells, a bias in N signaling occurs because of
an asymmetric distribution of the membrane-associated protein
Numb (Nb), which binds the intracellular region of N
antagonizing its function. N signaling
can also be compromised by ectopic expression of a dominant
negative (DN-N) construct of the N receptor which
interferes with ligand-dependent signaling. The
sca-Gal4P309 insertion strain was used to drive UAS-mediated Nb or
DN-N activity in secondary progenitors. Expression of sca-Gal4P309-driven GFP is visualized in the proneural domains, the primary and secondary
progenitors, but is not detected in the majority of
sensory clusters after division (Sen, 2003).
Animals of sca-Gal4P309/UAS-Nb show a strong
reduction in external structures on the adult antenna concomitant with an increase in glial cell numbers. The defect was also observed although significantly
weaker in sca-Gal4P309/UAS-DN-N. In both genotypes, there appears to be an
increase in neuronal number since the fascicles appeared
thicker than in the controls. It is proposed that
these phenotypes are caused by a transformation of PIIa to
PIIb; in the coeloconic lineages, this would result in an
increase of glial cells (Sen, 2003).
To test this hypothesis, pros-Gal4 was used to drive expression
of DN-N in PIIb/PIIIb and PIIc but not PIIa. The numbers of external cells (sensillar shafts) from
all three sense-organ types was counted and was found to be comparable to
normal controls. This is consistent with the findings
that tormogen and trichogen cells arise from the PIIa,
which is not being manipulated in this genotype. There was
also no change in glial cell number, even though N activity
is being lowered in the PIIb progenitors. While it
is possible that ectopically expressed DN-N is not sufficient
to compromise N signaling, the favored explanation is that N
is not required in PIIb/PIIIb. This would imply a PIIa-to-PIIb switch, which in the coeloconic lineages, results in
excess of glial cells (in addition to neurons) (Sen, 2003).
If indeed N signaling plays a role in the binary choice
between secondary progenitor types, then gain of N activity
would be expected to increase the external cells (socket and
shaft) that arise from the PIIa lineage. The truncated cytoplasmic
domain of the N receptor (N-intra) is constitutively
active, and its misexpression creates a dominant gain-of-function
condition. Expression of Nintra early during sense organ
development interfers with olfactory progenitor
choice and subsequent recruitment of secondary progenitors. These effects of N could be avoided by exploiting the thermosensitive nature of the Gal4/UAS system (Sen, 2003).
sca-Gal4P309; UAS-Nintra animals were reared at 16°C
until 10 h APF and then shifted to 28°C to activate N
specifically in secondary progenitors. The adult antennae show
a variety of defects affecting the external structures of the
sensory units. There were cases of multiple
sockets and sensilla with two shafts arising from
a socket. While, in principle, such phenotypes
could be explained by a role of N in binary choice between
shaft and socket cells, the appearance of sensilla with four
sockets or two shafts with a single socket can only
be explained by invoking conversion of PIIb/PIIc to PIIa (Sen, 2003).
The PIIa lineage differs from PIIb by the absence of both
Pros and Svp. Misexpression of Pros or Svp using sca-Gal4P309 results in a striking reduction in external cuticular structures on the antennal
surface. This is consistent with a lack
of PIIa identity. In order to test whether ectopic expression
of Pros or Svp could convert PIIa to PIIb/c, 36-h
APF antennae were stained with anti-Repo and mAb22C10. The numbers
of glia or neurons were not altered. Coexpression of both Pros
and Svp was achieved by heat-pulsing P(hs-Pros)/P(hs-Svp)
pupae at 32°C for 6 h starting at 10 h APF. This did not
result in an alteration in numbers of glia or neurons, although
the antennae show a reduction in the numbers of
external cuticular structures (Sen, 2003).
These data suggest that, while ectopic expression of
either Pros or Svp interfere with PIIa fate, this is insufficient
to convert cells to a PIIb identity. This means that N determines
secondary progenitors through mechanisms other
than and/or in addition to regulating the expression of Pros and
Svp (Sen, 2003).
Pros is expressed in PIIb and PIIc and subsequently in
the sheath and socket cells. The role of pros in
these cells was tested by generating clones of the null allele pros17
using the FLP/FRT system. It was
ascertained, in control clonal experiments, that the pwn
mutation, which was used to mark pros minus clones, did not
interfere with sensillar development. Several
different morphological phenotypes were observed within
the clones. The most abundant were sensillae with duplicated shafts or
sockets. There were a few examples of
three shafts arising from a single socket. The low
clonal frequency coupled with variable phenotypes in
clones made it difficult for examination of the fate of the
progenitors themselves (Sen, 2003).
One possible explanation for these phenotypes is a partial
conversion of PIIb/PIIc to a PIIa lineage, resulting in an
increase of external cells at the expense of internal cells. A
complete switch of PIIb and PIIc to PIIa would result in
sensillae with three shafts and three sockets; this was not
seen, suggesting that fate conversion is partial. These results
suggest that Pros expression is necessary to bias cells toward
a PIIb/PIIc fate; in pros minus secondary progenitors, the
fate shifts toward PIIa (Sen, 2003).
During central nervous system development, glial cells need to be in the
correct number and location, at the correct time, to enable axon guidance and
neuropile formation. Repair of the injured or diseased central nervous system
will require the manipulation of glial precursors, so that the number of glial
cells is adjusted to that of neurons, enabling axonal tracts to be rebuilt,
remyelinated and functional. To a large extent, the molecular mechanisms controlling
glial precursor proliferative potential are unknown. This study shows that glial
proliferation is regulated by interactions with axons and that the
Drosophila gene prospero is required to maintain the mitotic
potential of glia. During growth cone guidance, Prospero positively regulates
cycE promoting cell proliferation. Neuronal Vein activates the MAPKinase
signalling pathway in the glia with highest Prospero levels, coupling axon
extension with glial proliferation. Later on, Prospero maintains glial
precursors in an undifferentiated state by activating Notch and antagonising the
p27/p21 homologue Dacapo. This enables prospero-expressing cells alone to
divide further upon elimination of neurons and to adjust glial number to axons
during development (Griffiths, 2004).
The longitudinal glia (LG) of the Drosophila CNS share some features with
vertebrate oligodendrocyte precursors. Like oligodendrocytes, LG are also
produced in excess and the excess cells are eliminated through apoptosis. The
survival of both oligodendrocytes and at least some of the LG
depends on contact with axons and on Neuregulin/Vein.
There is also suggestive evidence that LG proliferation may be under
non-autonomous control. The LG originate from the segmentally repeated
longitudinal glioblasts (LGBs). DiI labelling of the LGB produces a clone of
variable number of progeny cells, resulting in between 7 and 10 progeny cells.
There is apoptosis in up to three cells in this lineage
in normal embryos, meaning that the resulting progeny of
the LG lineage if they were all to survive may be around 12 cells. This suggests
that the mitotic profile of the LGB lineage is not simply symmetrical and/or
perhaps LG precursor divisions are under non-autonomous control (Griffiths, 2004).
This study analyzed the mechanisms that regulate proliferation of the LG as they
interact with pioneer axons. Proliferation of the LG is shown to be regulated
by neurons and prospero (pros) is shown to play a key role in linking glial
proliferation and axon guidance. Early on, Pros enables glial proliferation in
response to pioneer neurons. Once the axonal bundles are formed, Pros maintains
glial precursors in an arrested, immature state, enabling pros-expressing
cells alone to divide further upon elimination of neurons (Griffiths, 2004).
This study has found novel roles of Pros in promoting cell proliferation and
preventing cell cycle exit. The glia reach the extending
growth cones in clusters of four cells, when cell division halts for some time.
Normally, two of these LG then divide, resulting in a total of six, which then
divide again, but since some LG die the real final number ranges between 8 and
11 cells. In pros mutants, the glia contact the pioneer neurons in
clusters of eight cells rather than the normal four, suggesting that LG divided
faster than normally in the presence of maternal CycE, skipping a G1 phase. The
division of four LG into six is also missed, thus changing the mitotic pattern
from its normal 4-6-12 to 4-8 (Griffiths, 2004).
Loss of
pros function causes a reduction in LG proliferation, which is manifested
in three ways. (1) In pros mutants, the first division of the two
anterior LG with highest Pros levels is missed, because there is no dpERK. (2)
LG do not divide at the normal times during axon guidance and fasiculation is not produced in
pros mutants, because of the absence of CycE.
Thus, although LG divided earlier in pros mutants, these divisions are
uncoupled from axon guidance. Thus, Pros changes the mitotic profile in the LG
from a simple symmetric pattern to a pattern in which the LG respond to incoming
axons. (3) In the absence of Pros, LG do not have the potential to
overproliferate when neurons are ablated (Griffiths, 2004).
Pros protein is
present in all dividing LG and in LG that retain mitotic potential. During
growth cone guidance and axonal fasciculation, Pros promotes LG proliferation of
the two LG that are able to respond to Vein and activate the MAP kinase pathway.
Vein induces LG cell division as well as cell survival of the two EGFR-positive
LG. Knock-down of Vein function with targeted RNAi exclusively directed to the the MP2 neurons is
sufficient to cause LG apoptosis. Loss of Vein function in genetic null embryos
reduces mitosis, also when apoptosis is blocked. Thus, the EGFR/MAPKinase
signalling pathway controls both cell survival and cell proliferation in these
two LG. The EGFR also controls both cell survival and cell proliferation in the
retina, in response to the ligand Spitz.
Later on, when the axonal fascicles are formed, Pros maintains the mitotic
potential in the LG by preventing them from exiting the cell cycle. In fact,
only Pros-positive LG can enter S phase upon ectopic expression of cycE.
In this way, at the end of embryogenesis, the LG are divided into Pros-positive
G1-arrested LG and Pros-negative LG, which have exited the cell cycle and are in
G0. Pros maintains the LG in the G1-arrested undifferentiated, immature
precursor state by positively regulating Notch and by antagonising Dacapo (Griffiths, 2004).
These findings on the roles of Pros in the LG during axon guidance
differ from Pros' neuroblast functions. In neuroblast lineages, Pros protein is
located in a crescent and it is distributed asymmetrically to the daughter cell
upon the division of the neuroblast. In the ganglion mother cell, Pros is
internalised into the nucleus, where it determines cell fate and it restricts
cell division. However, the progeny of
the LGlioblast [from the time in which they contact the pioneer axons (four-cell
stage)] divide apparently symmetrically, although asynchronously. During these
divisions, Pros is present in the nuclei of all dividing LG, and not in
crescents. Upon cell division, Pros is segregated symmetrically to the two
daughter cells and it is downregulated after cell division, at the time that the posterior LG migrate with the axons. Finally, during axon guidance, pros mutations
cause a reduction in LG proliferation rather than an excess, meaning that
pros is necessary for cell division to proceed (Griffiths, 2004).
Pros and its vertebrate homologue Prox1 can inhibit cell proliferation and promote cell cycle exit. In fact,
both in pros and Prox1 mutants, cell proliferation and the
expression of cyclin increase, and both Prox1 and Pros can promote
p27/dap expression. In the LG, Pros promotes cell
proliferation and it prevents cell cycle exit by antagonising Dap. Therefore,
Pros controls cell cycle genes in different ways in different cellular contexts.
Moreover, temporal regulation is crucial and Pros can both promote and antagonise dap
expression at different time points. Upon ectopic pros expression
the LG divide less and do
not express cycE. However, in the LG this may not be due to the promotion
of cell cycle exit but to the earlier halt of precursors in cell cycle
arrest (Griffiths, 2004).
These findings also contrast with the roles of Pros in
mixed neuro-glioblast lineages, where Pros is segregated asymmetrically to the
daughter cell that will become a glial cell. The LG is a glial-only lineage. In the
LG, Pros may control the fate of the two LG with higher Pros levels, which
signal through MAPKinase/dpERK. The results show that during axon guidance Pros
plays a primary role in the maintenance of the proliferative and undetermined
state (Griffiths, 2004).
The current findings on the non-autonomous regulation of
glial proliferation contrast with previous work that envisioned a
cell-autonomous proliferation profile determined by lineage identity.
Accordingly, the LGB would divide in a straightforward symmetrical fashion, into
2-4-8 cells. This conclusion
was based on the finding that BrdU is incorporated in four Repo-positive cells.
The data show that the incorporation of BrdU into four LG represents a narrow
time window in the LG lineage, and not the final division. In fact,
mitosis is detected in up to five LG at the same stage (Griffiths, 2004).
The finding of a
different LG profile has important implications. It means that the final number
of LG is not fixed at eight cells, but variable between 8 and 11, depending on
how many LG die. A final fixed number of eight LG could be achieved faster
through simple symmetrical divisions without considerable influence on final
glial cell mass. In fact, in Pros mutants a final number of eight cells is
achieved at an earlier time point, and these eight cells stretch out to occupy
the whole length of the segmental neuropile. However, the sequential increase
and adjustment in LG number deploys a restricted number of LG at sequential
steps in axonal patterning. This enables glia to be in the correct number at
discrete time points to enable axon guidance and fasciculation (Griffiths, 2004).
The first event in growth cone guidance occurs at the four-cell
stage, when LG stop dividing for some time and wait for the pioneer growth cones
to extend. At this time, the LG are in the first G1 phase in the lineage. The G1
phase is a characteristic time in which cells respond to growth factors to
signal through ERK, and
in the retina axons approach selectively precursors that are in G1.
As the growth cones approach, the
two anterior LG (with higher Pros levels) of the four-cell clusters divide in
response to Vein. Vein is produced by the MP2 pioneer neurons, which require LG
for axon guidance. By regulating both cell survival
and cell proliferation, Vein ensures that LG are present in the correct number
to enable growth cone guidance. Pros regulates the zygotic expression of CycE in
LG, thus introducing the first G1-S transition, and the fate of the EGFR
signalling cells. In this way, Pros modulates the timing of the response of glia
to a neuronal signal to divide. Subsequently, the LG continue to divide at times
in which axons undergo fasciculation and defasciculation. In this way, LG are
deployed in restricted numbers to enable sorting out of axons through time (Griffiths, 2004).
Later on, neurons prevent further glial proliferation. Thus,
glial number is achieved by the dual response of glia to neuronal signals:
earlier on neurons promote glial proliferation and later on they prevent it. At
the later stages, Pros confers developmental plasticity by maintaining a subset
of the LG in an undifferentiated state, since G1-arrested LG enable cell number
adjustment. This confers robustness to the establishment of the axonal bundles
through development (Griffiths, 2004).
Pros promotes G1 arrest; it prevents both cell cycle exit and terminal
differentiation of LG precursors, and it maintains them in an immature state,
with mitotic potential. Pros-positive LG might be the only ones to divide
further during metamorphosis, in the restructuring of the neuropile to form the
adult CNS. Or perhaps, Pros-positive LG constitute a population of glial
precursors with the capacity to divide further if required, for instance upon
variations occurring during development, in response to different environmental
conditions or to limited damage (Griffiths, 2004).
The maintenance of a subset
of the LG in an immature state by Pros allows them to divide further when
neurons are ablated. The increase in LG
proliferation upon neuronal ablation resembles an in vivo repair-like
response in glia. In vertebrates, neuronal injury causes limited glial
overproliferation and spontaneous remyelination.
The therapeutic implementation of CNS repair will require the
manipulation of oligodendrocyte precursors, and the controlled adjustment of
their number relative to the regenerating axons. This requires knowledge of what
controls oligodendrocyte precursor differentiation and proliferation relative to
neuronal contact. The current results have demonstrated that Pros plays this role in
Drosophila, and it invites research into the role of Prox1 in
oligodendrocyte precursor proliferation and differentiation (Griffiths, 2004).
The adult mammalian brain has oligodendrocyte precursors,
and just like dap induces cell cycle exit and terminal
differentiation in the LG, p27 and p21 induce cell cycle exit and terminal
differentiation of oligodendrocyte precursors. In fact,
p27 is part of the cell cycle timer that restricts the number of times that
oligodendrocyte precursors can divide. Interestingly, Notch maintains the stem cell state in vertebrates, and in Drosophila,
Notch is restricted to the immature LG precursors. Remarkably, activation of Notch in
oligodendrocyte precursors by Jagged1 from optic nerve axons prevents
oligodendrocyte differentiation.
Perhaps Prox1 maintains oligodendrocyte precursors in an immature state by
regulating Notch and by antagonising p21 and p27. Upon injury or disease in the
CNS, Prox1 could be a key molecule coordinating glial cell number and the
re-establishment of axonal trajectories to enable repair (Griffiths, 2004).
This study has shown that Pros plays a fundamental role in adjusting glial cell number to
the extending axons during guidance and fasciculation, and in maintaining glial
precursors in an undifferentiated state that enables them to respond to neurons.
This interactive mechanism provides robustness to the formation of the axonal
trajectories, essential for the structural stability of the CNS during
development. The finding that Pros enables the glia to respond to neuronal
ablation by overproliferating provokes further research into the potential use of the Drosophila CNS for the study of repair (Griffiths, 2004).
Loss of cell polarity and cancer are tightly correlated, but proof for a causative relationship has remained elusive. In stem cells, loss of polarity and impairment of asymmetric cell division could alter cell fates and thereby render daughter cells unable to respond to the mechanisms that control proliferation. To test this hypothesis, Drosophila larval neuroblasts were generated containing mutations in various genes that control asymmetric cell division and then their proliferative potential was assayed after transplantation into adult hosts. It was found that larval brain tissue carrying neuroblasts with mutations in raps (also called pins), mira, numb or pros grew to more than 100 times their initial size, invading other tissues and killing the hosts in 2 weeks. These tumors became immortal and can be retransplanted into new hosts for years. Six weeks after the first implantation, genome instability and centrosome alterations, two traits of malignant carcinomas, appeared in these tumors. Increasing evidence suggests that some tumors may be of stem cell origin. These results show that loss of function of any of several genes that control the fate of a stem cell's daughters may result in hyperproliferation, triggering a chain of events that subverts cell homeostasis in a general sense and leads to cancer (Caussinus, 2005).
Malignant transformation and loss of cell polarity are tightly correlated in human carcinomas. Likewise, Drosophila larval tissues with mutations in dlg1, l(2)gl or scrib have impaired apicobasal polarity and neoplastic growth in the imaginal epithelia and nervous system. There are several hypotheses to explain how loss of polarity contributes to neoplastic transformation. Most of them involve models in which changes in cellular architecture impinge directly on the cell cycle either by inhibiting signals that restrain cell proliferation or by enhancing mitogenic pathways. An alternative hypothesis is that loss of polarity in stem cells that divide asymmetrically impairs the mechanisms that specify the fate of the resulting daughter cells. If these daughter cells are unable to follow their normal developmental program, they may not respond to the mechanisms that control proliferation in the wild-type lineage (Caussinus, 2005).
Drosophila neuroblasts are stem cells whose asymmetric cell-division machinery is fairly well characterized and thus provide a good model to test this hypothesis. In the embryo, Insc integrates into the apical cortex of two neuroblast protein complexes, Baz-DmPar6-aPKC and Gialpha-Raps, by associating with Baz and Raps. These two complexes mediate the basal localization of Mira and Pon and their interacting proteins, Pros and Numb, whose segregation into the ganglion mother cell (GMC) is required for the unequal fate of the two neuroblast daughter cells. The basal localization of Mira and Pros, as well as the spindle orientation and asymmetry of daughter-cell sizes, require the functions provided by dlg1, l(2)gl and scrib. Larval neuroblasts originate from quiescent embryonic neuroblasts, and their asymmetric division seems to be controlled by the same molecular complexes, although minor differences have been reported (Caussinus, 2005).
To assess the effect of disrupted stem-cell asymmetric division on cell proliferation, larval neuroblasts were generated with mutations in aPKC, raps, mira, pros or numb and their proliferation potential was assayed after transplantation into adult hosts. No substantial growth of 101 pieces of wild-type larval brains were observed 2 weeks after transplantation. Similar results were observed for 109 implants that carried homozygous aPKCk06403 clones, none of which grew to any noticeable extent. In contrast, pieces of brains from rapsP89/raps
P62 larvae or from larvae carrying homozygous numb03235, miraZZ176 or pros
17 clones grew to more than 100 times their original size, severely damaging and displacing the host's organs in the abdomen. Of the 103 flies studied in detail, 92% had one or more small tumor colonies derived from the implanted tissue but located at a long distance from the point of injection. The efficiency of tumor development ranged from 8% for numb03235 clones to 20% for rapsP89/rapsP62 tissue (Caussinus, 2005).
To assess further the growth potential of these tumors, they were cut into pieces and reimplanted into new hosts. More than 90% of these flies developed a tumor, even when they were implanted with numb 03235 tissue that had initially developed tumors in only 8% of implanted adults. This result suggests that the growing tumor mass adapts itself very rapidly to its new environment. Pieces of brain lobes from 9- to 12-d-old homozygous brat
k06028 and l(3)mbt
ts1 larvae, in which overgrowth was already apparent, developed tumors in 91% and 58%, respectively, of the implanted hosts (Caussinus, 2005).
All the tumors described here have been maintained in the laboratory, some for more than 2 years. This shows that the transformed cells became immortal and can proliferate without end, in contrast to cells of wild-type imaginal discs implanted into adult hosts, which remain alive after years of culture but very rarely proliferate. Among the established cell lines, substantial differences were observed in speed of growth, host lifespan or frequency or average number of additional tumor colonies, that could be attributed to the mutant background from which the tumors originated. Using the same criteria, these tumors were indistinguishable from dlg1, l(2)gl and scrib neuroblastomas (Caussinus, 2005).
Attempts were made to determine the kinds of cells that could be found in these tumors. Using green fluorescent protein as a clonal marker, it was observed that in tumors derived from tissue carrying numb
03235, miraZZ176 or pros17 clones induced by mitotic recombination, neither the wild-type twin nor the heterozygous background cells were able to proliferate upon implantation and were lost within 2 weeks. These cells accounted for most of the implanted mass, and so their inability to hyperproliferate provided a valuable internal control to substantiate the conclusion that tumor growth in this assay required the loss of the genes under study and was not just the result of dissection and transplantation into adult hosts. It also showed that the tumor growth induced by the loss of function of these genes was cell-autonomous (Caussinus, 2005).
Immunofluorescence staining for cell-specific markers identified the neuroblasts as relatively large cells, 8-12 microm in diameter, that expressed Mira. In miraZZ176 tumors, neuroblasts were identified by the expression of Wor. Ganglion cells were identified as small cells, 4-6 microm in diameter, that did not express Mira but did express Pros or, in pros
17-derived tumors, Numb. The intermediately sized cells that did not express Pros, some of which showed weak Mira staining, might be GMCs. Neuroblasts accounted for most of the mitotic activity observed in these tumors (86%). Daughter-cell size and Mira segregation during mitosis were symmetric in neuroblasts derived from rapsP89/rapsP62 tumors but asymmetric in those derived from numb03235 and pros
17 tumors. Daughter-cell size was also asymmetric in neuroblasts from miraZZ176 tumors (Caussinus, 2005).
Neither neuroblasts nor ganglion cells were markedly diluted or over-represented as the tumors aged from host to host. Therefore, like l(2)gl and dlg1 tumors, the tumors derived from numb03235, miraZZ176, pros17 and raps
P89/rapsP62 were neuroblastomas that resulted from the uncontrolled division of neuroblast stem cells and were largely composed of the undifferentiated cell types that belong to this lineage. The mechanism by which these tumors grew is not understood, but it must account for the observed continuous expansion of both the neuroblast and the ganglion cell populations. One plausible mechanism could be a low frequency of neuroblast divisions that generate two neuroblast daughters. Real-time analysis of cell proliferation in these tumors may provide an answer to this issue (Caussinus, 2005).
In most solid human tumors, malignancy is very often correlated with genome instability, which is thought to contribute to multistage carcinogenesis. As in most animal cells, the frequency of natural cases of genome instability in wild-type Drosophila neuroblasts and GMCs is low (less than 10-3). This is also the case in numb03235, miraZZ176, pros
17 and rapsP89/raps
P62 tumors shortly after transplantation. In 40-d-old tumors, however, 10%-15% of the cells presented different kinds of karyotype defects. Of the 340 karyotypes obtained from numb, mira, pros and raps tumors, 62% included segmental aneuploid; 9% were monosomic, trisomic or tetrasomic with respect to one or more chromosomes; 6% were triploid or tetraploid; and the remaining 23% included cells that could not be karyotyped owing to very high levels of ploidy, chromosome fragmentation or chromosome condensation (Caussinus, 2005).
The karyotypes obtained from cells in a single tumor were as different from one another as they were from the karyotypes of cells from other tumors, and none of the tumor lines that were established presented a distinct set of chromosome aberrations. Therefore, no substantial differences were observed attributable to the mutant condition that originated the tumor. In most tumor lines, the frequency of cells that contained abnormal karyotypes did not change noticeably over time, with one exception: 3 months after the first implantation, genome instability affected more than 95% of the cells in mirTF, a tumor line derived from miraZZ176. The absence or very low incidence of genome instability during the first round of implantation suggests that genome instability did not cause tumor formation in these tumor lines. But the onset of genome instability correlates well with a marked increase in the frequency of hosts that developed a tumor in later transplantations. Therefore, the possible contribution of genome instability to the evolution of these tumors remains to be assessed. Genome instability has also been reported in l(2)gl neuroblastomas (Caussinus, 2005).
In mammalian carcinomas, genome instability is tightly correlated with severe alterations of the centrosome cycle that affect the number of centrosomes per cell as well as centrosome size and shape. Supernumerary centrosomes can result in multipolar spindles and contribute to the generation of aneuploidy. Like the DNA cycle, the centrosome cycle is tightly controlled in wild-type neuroblasts, so that cells that have an abnormal number of centrosomes are exceptionally rare in wild-type tissue. This was not the case in numb03235, mira
ZZ176, pros17 or raps
P89/rapsP62 tumors: forty days after the first implantation, 15%-20% of those cells had more than two centrosomes. Some of these centrosomes were irregularly shaped, and their size range was much wider than that of control cells. A fraction of these could be centriole-less aggregates of pericentriolar material. The cells that had supernumerary centrosomes seemed to be hyperploid (Caussinus, 2005).
None of the mutant conditions from which these tumors originated has been reported to affect chromosome segregation or the centrosome cycle, which were both unaffected in early tumors. In addition, the cells of wild-type imaginal discs that have been kept for years in adult hosts maintain a stable genome and can differentiate into adult structures. Therefore, genome instability and impaired centrosome cycles in numb
03235, miraZZ176, pros17 and rapsP89/rapsP62 tumors cannot be considered a consequence of the mutant background or long-term exposure to the adult abdomen environment. Rather, the onset of genome instability and centrosome alterations suggests that once the mechanisms that control cell proliferation have been over-ridden, hyperproliferation triggers a chain of events that subverts cell homeostasis in a very general sense, including the DNA and centrosome cycles (Caussinus, 2005).
In summary, neoplastic transformation of Drosophila larval neuroblasts can be triggered by perturbing several of the functions that mediate asymmetric stem-cell division. In terms of growth rate, cell types, metastatic activity and extent of genome and centrosome instability, the resulting tumors are essentially indistinguishable from one another, regardless of the mutant from which they derive. The main conclusion that can be drawn from these data is that these tumors might have a common etiology: perturbation of neuroblast polarity and the resulting impairment of cell-fate determination. This argument is strengthened by the case of the homeobox-containing transcription factor Pros, which lies downstream of the other genes required for neuroblast asymmetric division (Caussinus, 2005).
The tumors in this study are practically indistinguishable from the neuroblastomas that arise in adults implanted with pieces of dlg1, l(2)gl or scrib mutant larval brains. Because these three neoplastic tumor suppressors are required for multiple aspects of neuroblast asymmetric cell division, including the basal localization of Mira, Numb and Pros, mislocalization of these proteins might explain, at least partially, the uncontrolled cell proliferation produced by loss of dlg1, l(2)gl or scrib function in larval neuroblasts (Caussinus, 2005).
The unequal segregation of cell-fate determinants resulting from asymmetric cell division is a fundamental mechanism for generating cellular diversity during development, organ homeostasis and repair. If impaired segregation of cell-fate determinants can cause the hyperproliferation of larval neuroblasts of Drosophila, it may similarly affect tissue stem cells in other species. At the moment, however, any parallel to stem-cell models of human cancer remains purely speculative. Consistent with this hypothesis, the inactivation of both Numb and Numb-like in the mouse dorsal forebrain leads to impaired neuronal differentiation, hyperproliferation of neural progenitors and delayed cell-cycle exit. In addition, loss of Lgl1 (also called Mlgl or Hugl), one of the two L(2)gl homologs in the mouse, results in a failure to asymmetrically localize Numb and leads to severe brain dysplasia (Caussinus, 2005).
In most human tumors, the identity of the first carcinogenic cell remains elusive. Indirect but growing evidence suggests that in some cases, the founders may be stem cells. Stem cells are self-renewing, have limitless replicative potential and produce differentiating cells, three features found in many cancers. Carcinomas occur in tissues that are maintained by a continuous supply of differentiating daughter cells originating from stem-cell division. Moreover, some of the signaling pathways that control stem-cell self-renewal, like the Notch, Wnt-ß-catenin and Hedgehog pathways, are known to have a role in carcinogenesis in these tissues. The results show that inactivation of any of several molecular mechanisms that control the asymmetry of the segregation of cell-fate determinants during stem-cell division may result in hyperproliferation of the stem-cell compartment and could contribute to cancer (Caussinus, 2005).
How stem cells generate both differentiating and self-renewing daughter cells is unclear. This study shows that Drosophila larval neuroblasts - stem cell-like precursors of the adult brain - regulate proliferation by segregating the growth inhibitor Brat and the transcription factor Prospero into only one daughter cell. Like Prospero, Brat binds and cosegregates with the adaptor protein Miranda. In larval neuroblasts, both Brat and Prospero are required to inhibit self-renewal in one of the two daughter cells. While Prospero regulates cell-cycle gene transcription, Brat acts as a posttranscriptional inhibitor of dMyc. In brat or prospero mutants, both daughter cells grow and behave like neuroblasts leading to the formation of larval brain tumors. Similar defects are seen in lethal giant larvae (lgl) mutants where Brat and Prospero are not asymmetric. This study has identified a molecular mechanism that may control self-renewal and prevent tumor formation in other stem cells as well (Betschinger, 2006).
These data reveal a molecular mechanism that controls self-renewal in Drosophila larval neuroblasts. The growth regulator Brat segregates asymmetrically during neuroblast division and inhibits self-renewal in one of the two daughter cells. Together with the asymmetrically segregating transcription factor Prospero, Brat ensures that this daughter cell will stop growing, exit the cell cycle, and differentiate into neurons. In brat or prospero mutants, or in lgl mutants, where Brat and Prospero are not asymmetrically segregated, both daughter cells proliferate leading to the formation of a brain tumor and death of the animal. These tumors are neoplastic and can be transplanted into the abdomen of wild-type flies where they overgrow, invade other tissues, and eventually kill the host (Betschinger, 2006).
Asymmetric cell division has been studied in the Drosophila central and peripheral nervous systems. In the peripheral nervous system, the determinants Numb and Neuralized segregate into one of the two daughter cells, and in their absence, this cell is transformed into its sister cell. In the embryonic central nervous system, Prospero acts as a segregating determinant, but in prospero mutants, many GMCs are still correctly specified. The data suggest that this is because Prospero acts partially redundant with Brat. In embryos double mutant for prospero and brat, most GMCs expressing the marker Eve are missing and neuronal differentiation in the embryonic CNS is greatly impaired. These observations suggest that Brat and Prospero act together to specify GMC fate in Drosophila embryos (Betschinger, 2006).
Although cell-cycle markers are expressed longer and stronger in prospero and brat, prospero mutant embryos, uncontrolled overproliferation has not been described in Drosophila embryos so far. In larvae, however, both brat and prospero mutant neuroblasts can initiate tumor formation. It is proposed that this difference is due to distinct mechanisms of cell growth during the two stages. During embryogenesis, cell number increases dramatically but the total volume of the embryo remains constant. Embryonic neuroblasts therefore shrink with each division and they might exit the cell cycle simply because they become too small. Support for this model comes from mutations affecting cell size asymmetry during neuroblast divisions, like Gβ13F (Fuse, 2003) or Ric-8 (Hampoelz, 2005): in these mutants, GMCs are larger, neuroblasts shrink faster and, as a consequence, divide less often. In larval neuroblasts, the situation is quite different. Several results indicate that larval neuroblasts grow significantly while cell growth is inhibited in GMCs. First, the total volume of clones generated from individual neuroblasts is several times more than the initial volume of the neuroblast. Second, the size of 'old' and 'young' (earlier and more recently generated) GMCs is approximately the same, indicating that GMCs do not grow significantly during clone formation. Third, larval neuroblasts do not become progressively smaller during development indicating that the loss of cytoplasm from each division must be compensated for by growth. Taken together, these results suggest that larval neuroblasts might be more appropriate as a model for the control of self-renewal in stem cells (Betschinger, 2006).
These experiments show that the restriction of cell growth in the GMC requires the genes lgl, brat, and prospero. While lgl seems to be required indirectly due to its role in asymmetric protein segregation, Prospero and Brat act in the GMC to regulate several important events: They repress neuroblast fate, inhibit cell-cycle progression, and prevent cell growth. Prospero is a homeodomain transcription factor, and the cell-cycle genes Cyclin A, Cyclin E, and Dacapo (the fly homolog of the CDK inhibitor p21) were shown to be among its transcriptional targets. Similar to Drosophila Prospero, its vertebrate homolog Prox-1 has been shown to regulate cell-cycle genes, and loss of prox-1 leads to increased proliferation of retinal progenitor cells (Betschinger, 2006).
For Brat, two different functions have been described: First, it acts as a translational regulator of the gap-gene hunchback. Hunchback is expressed in the embryonic nervous system but is not present in wild-type or brat mutant larval neuroblasts and is unlikely to be relevant for the growth regulatory activity of Brat. More likely, Brat acts through its well-described inhibitory activity on ribosomal RNA synthesis. Cells mutant for brat or its C. elegans homolog ncl-1 have larger nucleoli, more ribosomal RNA, and higher rates of protein synthesis, and these activities have been made responsible for the cell size increase that is observed in C. elegans and Drosophila brat mutant cells. These data suggest that this second function of Brat is also linked to posttranscriptional gene regulation. It is proposed that Brat downregulates dMyc in one of the two daughter cells and thereby inhibits protein synthesis and cell growth. Whether Brat controls dMyc translation, protein stability, or RNA stability is unclear. Interestingly, the C. elegans Brat homolog ncl-1 has been identified as one of the genes required for RNAi (Kim, 2005). Since the microRNA pathway was shown to be involved in regulation of Drosophila stem cell proliferation (Hatfield, 2005), differential regulation of this pathway in neuroblasts and GMCs by Brat could provide another explanation for its mutant phenotype (Betschinger, 2006).
Brat is part of a protein family that is characterized by a C-terminal NHL domain, several zinc-finger like B boxes, and a coiled-coil region. While the vertebrate members of this family (TRIM-2, TRIM-3, and TRIM-32) are not well characterized, the mutant phenotype of the two other Drosophila members (Dappled and Mei-P26) suggests a common function as tumor suppressors. Mutations in dappled cause melanomic tumors of the fat body, and mei-P26 mutations lead to ovarian tumors. While dappled tumors have not been well characterized, the mei-P26 phenotype has been attributed to overproliferation of undifferentiated germ cells. It is similar to-and genetically interacts with-bag of marbles, a well-characterized repressor of proliferation in the daughter cells of germline stem cells. Thus, it is conceivable that proliferation control in stem cells is a common activity of NHL domain proteins (Betschinger, 2006).
Recent evidence suggests that some human brain tumors contain stem cell-like neural progenitors that are responsible for tumor formation. Together with the identification of stem cell-like subpopulations in leukaemia, multiple myeloma, and breast cancer, this has led to the so-called cancer stem cell hypothesis which proposes that only a small population of cells in a tumor have the ability to proliferate and self-renew. This discovery suggests mechanisms for tumorigenesis other than the simple loss of proliferation control, in particular dedifferentiation of cells into additional stem cells and symmetric division of stem cells. Animal models for tumor stem cells are essential for developing new therapeutic approaches that target these mechanisms. Although Drosophila can only mimic some aspects of tumorigenesis, it might contribute to the identification of the molecular pathways operating in tumor stem cells. Human Lgl has already been implicated in tumor progression, and the characterization of Brat homologs will verify the relevance of Drosophila as a tumor stem cell model (Betschinger, 2006).
During neural lineage progression, differences in daughter cell proliferation can generate different lineage topologies. This is apparent in the Drosophila neuroblast 5-6 lineage (NB5-6T), which undergoes a daughter cell proliferation switch from generating daughter cells that divide once to generating neurons directly. Simultaneously, neural lineages, e.g. NB5-6T, undergo temporal changes in competence, as evidenced by the generation of different neural subtypes at distinct time points. When daughter proliferation is altered against a backdrop of temporal competence changes, it may create an integrative mechanism for simultaneously controlling cell fate and number. This study identified two independent pathways, Prospero and Notch, which act in concert to control the different daughter cell proliferation modes in NB5-6T. Altering daughter cell proliferation and temporal progression, individually and simultaneously, results in predictable changes in cell fate and number. This demonstrates that different daughter cell proliferation modes can be integrated with temporal competence changes, and suggests a novel mechanism for coordinately controlling neuronal subtype numbers (Ulvklo, 2012).
The NB5-6T lineage utilizes two distinct mechanisms
to control daughter cell proliferation. In the early part of the
lineage, pros limits daughter cell (GMC) proliferation, whereas in
the late part canonical Notch signaling in the neuroblast further
restricts daughter cell proliferation, resulting in a switch to the
generation of neurons directly. The switch in daughter cell proliferation is integrated with temporal lineage progression and enables the specification of different Ap neuron subtypes and the control of their numbers (Ulvklo, 2012).
The data on Notch activation in the NB5-6T lineage, using both
antibodies and reporters, indicate progressive activation in the
neuroblast: weak at St10-11 and more robust from St12 onward.
Thus, Notch activity coincides with the proliferation mode switch.
How is this gradual activation of Notch in the neuroblast controlled?
NB5-6T undergoes the typical progression of the temporal gene
cascade, with Cas expression preceding strong Notch activation.
Thus, one possible scenario is that the late temporal gene cas
activates the Notch pathway. However, analysis of the E(spl)m8-
EGFP reporter shows that this Notch target is still activated at the
proper stage in cas mutants. Although this does not rule out the
possibility that other, unknown, temporal factors might regulate
Notch signaling, it rules out one obvious player, cas. Alternatively,
as Notch signaling is off when neuroblasts are formed (a
prerequisite for neuroblast selection), Notch activation in the
neuroblast at later stages might simply reflect a gradual reactivation
of the pathway. Although such a reactivation might at a first glance
appear too imprecise, it is possible that the specificity of this
particular Notch output -- proliferation control -- might be
combinatorially achieved by the intersection of Notch signaling with
other, more tightly controlled, temporal changes (Ulvklo, 2012).
Pros and Notch control daughter proliferation in different parts of
NB5-6T, and no evidence of cross-regulation between these
pathways was found. The limited overproliferation of the lineage when each
pathway is separately mutated results not from redundant functions,
but rather stems from the biphasic nature of this lineage.
Specifically, in pros mutants, Notch signaling is likely to be on in
all 'A' type sibling daughter cells, as Numb continues to be
asymmetrically distributed between daughter cells. Thus, Notch
signaling in 'A' cells may preclude each 'A' cell from dividing even
once. This notion is in line with recent studies showing that postmitotic Notch activated cells ('A' cells) within the Drosophila bristle lineages are particularly resilient to overexpression of cell cycle genes. Similarly,
in Notch pathway mutants, as Ap cells now divide (in essence
becoming GMC-type cells), Pros will still play its normal role in
these 'GMCs' and limit their proliferation to a single extra cell
division. However, in kuz;pros double mutants, Ap cells are
relieved of both types of daughter cell proliferation control and can
thus divide for many additional rounds. This notion also applies to early parts of the NB5-6T lineage and probably to the majority of other VNC lineages, as indicated by the extensive overproliferation of the entire NB5-6T lineage, and to the general
overproliferation of the VNC. However, based on the findings that
neither the Notch pathway nor pros controls neuroblast identity or
its progression, it is postulated that these large clones contain a single, normally behaving NB5-6T neuroblast. In fact, the neuroblast is likely to exit the cell cycle and undergo apoptosis on schedule, as neither of these decisions depends upon pros or the Notch pathway. Of interest with respect to cancer biology is that the findings point to a novel mechanism whereby mutation in two tumor suppressors (e.g., Pros and Notch) cooperate to generate extensive overproliferation: not by acting in the same progenitor cell at the same time, but by playing complementary roles controlling daughter cell proliferation (Ulvklo, 2012).
As an effect of alternate daughter cell proliferation patterns, both vertebrates and invertebrates display variability in neural lineage topology. Similarly,
progenitors in these systems undergo temporal changes in
competence, as evident by changes in the types of neurons and glia
generated at different time points. Hence, the temporal-topology
interplay described in this study is likely to be extensively
used and to be conserved in mammals. As a proof of principle of
this novel developmental intersection, single and
double mutants were examined for kuz and nab, thereby independently versus combinatorially affecting temporal progression and daughter cell proliferation. Strikingly, these mutants show the predicted
combined effect, with the appearance of additional Ap1/Nplp1
neurons beyond those found in each individual mutant (Ulvklo, 2012).
If programmed proliferation switches are conserved, how might
such a topology-temporal interplay become utilized in mammals?
There are several examples in which different clusters/pools/nuclei
of neurons of distinct cell fate are generated from the same
progenitor domain in the developing mammalian nervous system.
Such pools often contain different numbers of cells, but the
underlying mechanisms controlling the precise numbers of each
subtype are poorly understood. Based on previous studies in a
number of models, at least three different mechanisms can be envisioned. Based on the current study, a novel fourth mechanism is proposed, whereby alteration of daughter cell proliferation is integrated with temporal progression to control subtype cell numbers. These four mechanisms are not mutually exclusive, and given the complexity of the mammalian nervous system it is tempting to speculate that all four mechanisms are utilized during development (Ulvklo, 2012).
Vertebrate Dlx genes have been implicated in the differentiation of multiple neuronal subtypes, including cortical GABAergic interneurons, and mutations in Dlx genes have been linked to clinical conditions such as epilepsy and autism. This study showed that the single Drosophila Dlx homolog, distal-less, is required both to specify chemosensory neurons and to regulate the morphologies of their axons and dendrites. distal-less was shown to be necessary for development of the mushroom body, a brain region that processes olfactory information. These are important examples of distal-less function in an invertebrate nervous system and demonstrate that the Drosophila larval olfactory system is a powerful model in which to understand distal-less functions during neurogenesis (Plavicki, 2012).
The phenotype exhibited by dll-null embryos is more severe than that of sc, amos, or ato single mutants or amos;ato double mutants, most closely resembling that of the sc;amos;ato triple mutants, indicating that dll might lie upstream of the proneural genes and regulate their expression in precursors of the Dorsal organ (DO), the larval olfactory organ (see Schematic of the larval chemosensory system). However, ato is expressed in the antennal segments of dll-null embryos, and dll is expressed in ato1 and amos1 mutants. Altogether, these data indicate that dll is likely to act in parallel with the proneural genes during DO development (Plavicki, 2012).
prospero (pros) is also required for DO development. pros encodes a homeodomain transcription factor that is asymmetrically distributed during SOP division. In other contexts, pros represses neuronal stem-cell proliferation while promoting neuronal differentiation. Mutations in pros result in gustatory behavioral deficits and disrupt axon and dendrite outgrowth from both DO and terminal organ (TO) neurons. The axon pathfinding defects exhibited by pros mutants resemble those seen in dll-null embryos, although it is unclear whether the same subsets of neurons are affected (Plavicki, 2012).
The axon scaffolding associated with the MBs in the embryonic brain is disrupted in dll-null embryos. Specifically, projections from the MB Kenyon cells across the supraesophageal commissure appear to be missing in late-stage embryos. MB defects also were observed in the brains of larvae in which postmitotic drivers such as elav-GAL4 and OR83b-GAL4 were used in conjunction with dll-RNAi to knock down activity. This finding indicates that dll also may be necessary for the later specification and/or differentiation of larval-born Kenyon cells. Because elav-GAL4 is not active until neurons are specified, the disruptions in the larval MBs observed in elav-GAL4;UAS-dll-RNAi animals are consistent with a role for dll in either axon guidance or viability of the postmitotic neurons (Plavicki, 2012).
The brain phenotypes detected in dll mutants resemble those of cephalic gap gene mutants. Specifically, loss of otd, ems, or btd results in embryonic brain segmentation defects and disrupts the formation of brain commissures and axon tracts. In otd mutants, protocerebral neuroblasts, including the MB precursors, are missing. In ems and/or btd mutants, subsets of neuroblasts are lacking in the deutocerebral neuromere, which harbors the larval antennal lobe (LAL), and the tritocerebral neuromere, which receives gustatory inputs. It therefore is possible that dll is a key effector of cephalic gap gene function during brain development (Plavicki, 2012).
pros mutants exhibit DO axon defects similar to those of dll. It therefore is possible that Dll and Pros collaborate to regulate other genes needed for axon pathfinding by DOG neurons. In the brain, but not in the DO Ganglion (DOG) or TO ganglion (TOG), mislocalization of Futsch protein was observed in dll mutants. Futsch is a microtubule-associated protein with functions in both axonogenesis and dendritogenesis. It therefore is possible that some of the defects observed in dll mutant MB lobes (which consist of axon tracts) and calyces (which contain Kenyon cell dendrites) are caused by misregulation of futsch. Other likely effectors of dll function during axon pathfinding in both DO and MB are Pak3 and Down syndrome cell adhesion molecule (Dscam). Both play important roles in axon guidance, including the targeting of adult Drosophila ORNs. Both also have been identified as putative downstream targets of vertebrate Dlx1/2. The loss-of-function Drosophila dll phenotypes in both DOG and MB are reminiscent of DSCAM phenotypes and consistent with dll regulation of DSCAM in multiple neuronal subtypes (Plavicki, 2012).
Given the dramatic reduction in Kenyon cell number in the dll hypomorphs, it might be expected that the peduncles and lobes would be even thinner than observed. However, a similar reduction in Kenyon cell number without concomitant thinning of the lobes has been observed in eyR mutants. In this case, ablation studies were used to demonstrate that, at late third instar, recently born Kenyon cells have not yet contributed to MB lobes. It is therefore anticipated that MB defects may be more pronounced in dll mutant adults (Plavicki, 2012).
Home page: The Interactive Fly © 1997 Thomas B. Brody, Ph.D.
The Interactive Fly resides on the
prospero:
Biological Overview
| Evolutionary Homologs
| Regulation
| Protein Interactions
| Developmental Biology
| References
Society for Developmental Biology's Web server.