The Interactive Fly
Genes involved in tissue and organ development
There is emerging evidence that microtubules in nondividing cells can be employed to remodel the intracellular space. This study demonstrates an essential role for microtubules in dorsal closure (DC), which occurs toward the end of Drosophila melanogaster embryogenesis. Dorsal closure is a morphogenetic process similar to wound healing, whereby a gap in the epithelium is closed through the coordinated action of different cell types. Surprisingly, this complex process requires microtubule function exclusively in epithelial cells and only for the last step, the zippering, which seals the gap. Preceding zippering, the epithelial microtubules reorganize to attain an unusual spatial distribution, which is described with subcellular resolution in the intact, living organism. This study provides a clearly defined example where cells of a developing organism transiently reorganize their microtubules to fulfill a specialized morphogenetic task (Jankovics, 2006).
Using time-lapse imaging of DC-stage embryos expressing GFP-tagged forms of tubulin or the plus end tracking protein EB1, it is shown that during DC, antiparallel MTs form stable bundles that align parallel to the D/V cell axis at the apical cell cortex. Within bundles, the MTs remain highly dynamic, which allows them to grow into the cellular protrusions that form at the dorsal surface of the dorsal-most row of epithelial cells (DME) cells. Surprisingly, elimination of these MTs by injection of MT depolymerizing drugs into the embryo or by expressing an MT-severing protein Spastin in a subset of epithelial cells inhibited exclusively the zippering process that completes DC. All other essential processes, the convergence of the two lateral epithelial cell layers, D/V cell polarization of the DMEs, or their actin-based dorsal constriction were not altered (Jankovics, 2006).
How could MT function be linked to zippering at the molecular level? One obvious scenario is that MTs are required for the local delivery of adhesion proteins. MT-based, localized delivery of factors was already shown to be crucial for proper morphogenesis in fission yeast cells and for a number of processes during early Drosophila development. However, zippering is not a simple one-step process. It is proposed to start with the interdigitation of the cell protrusions that form at the dorsal side of the DME cells and that establish the first contacts between equivalent cells of the two opposing epithelial cell layers. Consistent with this, the protrusions are essential for zippering. The initial cell-cell contacts subsequently develop into the known cell-adhesion structures. The possibility for initial interdigitation occurs at the anterior and posterior ends of the dorsal opening where the two cell layers meet. As this possibility also exists in embryos that cannot zipper due to a lack of MTs, it is conceivable that MTs are required for the interdigitation of protrusions. Intriguingly, the absence of MTs considerably affects the number and appearance of cellular protrusions known to be essential for zippering, which provides another possible explanation for the inability of these cells to interact with each other. An MT-mediated increase in protrusion formation could provide DME cells with sufficient interactive surface or interaction time to enable interdigitation. Consistent with this, the stripes of cells lacking MTs in Spastin-overexpression experiments were unable to zipper on their own but eventually managed to establish cell adhesion when forced into close proximity by zippering of the neighboring wild-type cells. To understand MT function during zippering, one may therefore need to ask how MTs modify cell protrusions. As protrusions can still form in the absence of MTs, these do not seem to control the on/off activity of the protrusion-forming machinery but may rather modulate its activity. MTs were previously shown to affect protrusion formation in several cultured cell types but the molecular mechanisms are not clear. It was speculated that MTs may modulate the actin machinery by delivering regulatory factors such as guanine nucleotide exchange factors or GTPase-activating proteins that modulate the actin organizing activities of the Rac1, Cdc42, and Rho GTPases. It is also possible that growing MTs produce pushing forces that support protrusion growth (Jankovics, 2006).
Why do MTs reorganize in such a specific way? It was not possible to answer this question. If delivery of adhesion factors or promoting protrusion formation were indeed the critical functions of MTs, then their orientation parallel to the D/V cell axis would certainly improve delivery to the relevant site. However, because of the antiparallel arrangement, transport of factors is bidirectional, and therefore the factors would also be delivered to the wrong cell ends. In addition, MTs reorganize in all epithelial cells, although most of them are not involved in zippering and therefore do not need delivery of the proposed factors. It is possible that MTs reorganize to fulfill additional, nonessential functions that optimize the DC process. For example, the MTs are required for proper epithelial cell morphology. During convergence, these cells gradually elongate along the D/V axis while thinning out in the apical-basal direction. Elongation coincides with the D/V alignment of the MTs, implying that MT reorganization may be the consequence of cell shape changes. However, cells lacking MTs cannot maintain their shape after an initial elongation phase, suggesting that proper cell morphology is dependent on MT function. Notably, this is not the consequence of defects in polarization, since cell polarity is not affected in the absence of MTs. The role of epithelial cell shape changes in DC is not clear. Their dorsalward stretching may contribute to gap closure, but recent data indicated that it is not essential. The finding that the shape abnormalities resulting from MT depletion did not affect convergence of epithelial cell layers is consistent with this view (Jankovics, 2006).
These results provide further evidence that MT reorganization is not only crucial when cells change from an interphase to a mitotic state but also when they change behavior during development. It is important to understand how such rearrangements are controlled at the molecular level and also how cell-type-specific differences are achieved. DC in Drosophila provides an excellent experimental system in which the molecular mechanisms controlling MT organization can be studied in vivo by live imaging with appropriate subcellular resolution in combination with classical genetics (Jankovics, 2006).
Dorsal closure is a paradigm epithelial fusion episode that occurs late in Drosophila embryogenesis and leads to sealing of a midline hole by
bonding of two opposing epithelial sheets. The leading edge epithelial cells
express filopodia and fusion is dependent on interdigitation of these
filopodia to prime formation of adhesions. Since the opposing epithelia are
molecularly patterned there must exist some mechanism for accurately aligning
the two sheets across this fusion seam. To address this, a fly was generated in
which RFP-Moesin and GFP-Moesin are expressed in mutually exclusive stripes
within each segment using the engrailed and patched
promoters. Mutually exclusive interactions were observed between the filopodia of
engrailed and patched cells. Interactions between filopodia
from matching cells leads to formation of tethers between them, and these
tethers can pull misaligned epithelial sheets into alignment. Filopodial
matching also occurs during repair of laser wounds in the ventral epithelium,
and so this behaviour is not restricted to leading edge cells during dorsal
closure. Finally, the behaviour was characterised of a patched-expressing cell that was observed within the engrailed region of segments A1-A5; evidence is provided that this cell contributes to cell matching (Millard, 2008).
What is the molecular basis of cell matching? The data are consistent with matching being based on just two sets of molecular interactions, one allowing anterior (A) compartment cells to recognise one another and the other performing the same function for posterior (P) compartment cells. An obvious possibility is that the molecules that mediate cell matching during DC are the same as those that maintain the integrity of these compartments throughout the epithelium. Alternatively, there could be a different set of recognition molecules present exclusively at the leading edge to mediate cell-cell matching. Filopodia are also observed during the healing of wounds in the ventral epithelium and it was reasoned that these wound filopodia should exhibit matching behaviour if the molecules that mediate matching are present throughout the epithelium. Laser wounds were made to the ventral epithelium across en stripes such that the wound edge consisted of both en-RFP-Moesin and ptc-GFP-Moesin cells. On healing of these wounds, repeated interactions were observed between the filopodia of matching cells, but not between mismatching cells. In an example, a number of filopodial tethers formed between ptc cells on opposite sides of the wound as closure proceeded. Near the end of closure, a filopodial tether formed between en cells on opposite sides of the wound, leading to fusion of these cells and regeneration of the en stripe. This sequence of events was observed in six out of ten similar wounds. In the remaining wounds, the tethers between ptc cells became permanent adhesions before the en cells were close enough to form tethers and hence the en stripe was not regenerated. These data suggest that both A and P compartment cells away from the leading edge can carry out filopodial matching analogous to that occurring during DC, and hence the adhesion molecules that mediate the process are not leading edge specific (Millard, 2008).
The data demonstrate that specific recognition events ensure the accuracy of fusion during DC. Filopodia facilitate matching by allowing a cell to search for its match and also to pull misaligned sheets into alignment. This explains why genetic interventions that abolish filopodia lead to an increase in mismatching. It appears that at least two recognition processes act during DC, one for P compartments and one for A compartment cells, but these recognition events are not segment-specific, since fusions can occur between matching compartments from different segments. Filopodial matching is also observed during healing of wounds in the ventral epithelium, suggesting that the molecules mediating recognition are found throughout the epithelium. These data are consistent with the notion that the adhesion molecules that mediate filopodial matching during DC are the same as those that ensure compartment integrity throughout the epithelium; however, the identity of these molecules is currently unknown. Experimental and modelling studies have shown that cells can sort based on differential levels of just one adhesion molecule, and it has been hypothesised that a single adhesion molecule might be responsible for compartmental segregation. The data suggest that, at least during filopodial matching, this is not the case, since observe specific recognition events were observed for both A and P compartments and neither compartment is obviously dominant in the matching process. It is of course possible that multiple mechanisms contribute to cell matching and segregation, perhaps with different adhesion molecules governing the rapid, transient associations between filopodia and the long-lived adhesions that hold cells together permanently. Whereas segregation between leading edge A and P compartment cells is absolute at the parasegment boundary, reproducibly a single A compartment ptc cell is seen to move into the P compartment at the segment boundary. This might suggest that differences in adhesive properties between cells either side of the segment boundary are small, permitting a degree of mixing. However, during DC, the misplaced ptc cells are consistently able to recognise and specifically fuse with matching cells in the opposing epithelial sheet, indicating adhesive properties distinct from their neighbours. When the arrangement of the misplaced ptc cells is disrupted, it can result in severe mismatches; therefore, correct positioning of these cells is clearly important in epithelial sheet alignment. These cells occupy a unique and defined position in each segment and might assist the matching process by acting as a 'keystone' that helps to ensure precise alignment within the segment (Millard, 2008).
Halfway through embryonic development, the epidermis of Drosophila exhibits a gap at the dorsal side covered by an extraembryonic epithelium, the amnioserosa (AS). Dorsal closure (DC) is the process whereby interactions between the two epithelia establish epidermal continuity. Although genetic and biomechanical analysis have identified the AS as a force-generating tissue, it is not known how individual cell behaviours are transformed into tissue movements. To approach this question a novel image-analysis method was applied to measure strain rates in local domains of cells, and a kinematic analysis of DC was performed. This study reveals spatial and temporal differences in the rate of apical constriction of AS cells. A slow phase of DC is found, during which apical contraction of cells at the posterior end predominates, and a subsequent fast phase, during which all the cells engage in the contraction, which correlates with the zippering process. There is a radial gradient of AS apical contraction, with marginal cells contracting earlier than more centrally located cells. Yhis analysis was applied to the study of mutant situations, and a particular genotype was associated with quantitative and reproducible changes in the rate of cell contraction and hence in the overall rate of the process. This mutant analysis reveals the contribution of mechanical elements to the rate and pattern of DC (Gorfinkiel, 2009).
The process of dorsal closure provides a good system to explore the
relationship between cell biology and tissue mechanics and the way this
informs morphogenesis. There are sound descriptions of the molecular and
cellular events underpinning the process, a large collection of mutants that interfere with the different stages, and some of the macroscopic forces underlying DC have been identified (Hutson, 2003; Kiehart, 2000; Toyama, 2008).
Notwithstanding this, most of the studies have focused on the consequence that
the loss of a gene has for the process. For this reason, an understanding of
how individual cell behaviours contribute to the global patterning in the wild
type is lacking. This study has begun to approach this problem by focusing on
the AS, a genetically homogeneous tissue, the contraction of which provides a
component of the force that drives closure (Gorfinkiel, 2009).
This study reveals that AS cell contraction is patterned in space and in
time. At present there are no reports of differences in gene expression
between different AS cells during DC, and therefore it is unlikely that the
complex dynamics that are observed can be related to patterned gene
activity. On the basis of these results, in particular the strong correlation
between the zippering speed and the rate of contraction of the AS,
the possibility is favoured that the behaviour of the AS during DC is governed by
mechanical interactions with its environment. Additional evidence for the role
of cell mechanics in the process comes from the AP differences in the rate of
contraction of AS cells and their patterns of shape changes, as well as the
timing of individual contractions in the ML and AP axes, which are indicative
of different stresses along the AP axis of the embryo. Thus, although AS cell
contraction is triggered by Dpp signalling (Fernández,
2007), the current work suggests that this might create a plastic state
that is patterned by the integration, at the single cell level, of global
mechanical cues. A role for mechanical cues in determining cell behaviour and
cell fate has been shown for different cell types in cell culture. The
morphogenetic alterations discussed above, together with quantitative changes
in the geometry of cell-cell contacts during DC suggest that
adhesive and cytoskeletal properties of AS cells are modulated during the
process through a combination of chemical and mechanical signals (Gorfinkiel, 2009).
The two phases of activity of the AS cells revealed by this analysis are
divided by the onset of epidermal zippering during which the filopodial
activity developed by dorsal-most epidermal cells makes a significant
contribution to the fusion and matching of the opposite epidermal flanks
(Jacinto, 2000; Jankovics, 2006; Millard, 2008). This analysis shows that perturbing the zippering process, through interference of
microtubule dynamics in the epidermis, affects the rate of contraction of AS
cells, and, reciprocally, that perturbing the dynamics of AS contraction
through inhibition of apoptosis-mediated extrusion affects the zippering rate.
These observations support an interdependence between these two processes that
is manifest in the correlation between the zippering rate and the dynamics of
the rate of apical AS cell contraction. Recent work from Edwards, Kiehart and
colleagues (Toyama,
2008) has also shown that inhibiting or enhancing apoptosis in the
AS changes the kinematic properties of the closure, i.e. the rate of closure,
the rate of zipping and the force produced by the AS. However, in contrast to
the current interpretation, the authors suggest a direct and causal relationship
between apoptosis and the force generation in the AS. In the light of the current
results, it is surmised that the changes in the force-generating capability of AS
cells observed in their experiments are a secondary consequence of the effects
of apoptosis on the zippering, which thus feeds back onto the AS. Cell
extrusion is indeed an important contributor to the normal rates of DC, but
this work suggests that it is an event that responds to, rather than directs,
the strains of the whole AS (Gorfinkiel, 2009).
This study also demonstrates that assigning functions to particular genes
during morphogenesis might be misleading. As is shown in this study, the phenotype of a mutant during dorsal closure is not a direct consequence of the loss of function of a particular gene but the outcome that this loss of function has on a series of related cellular activities. In higher-order processes, such as morphogenesis, the result of a mutation is an array of perturbations acting at
different levels of organization, which makes it difficult to infer a direct
causal relationship between the mutated gene and the terminal phenotype. Acknowledging this, the system-level analysis performed in this study shows a correlation of a particular genotype with a reproducible change in the dynamics of the process, revealing the contribution of each gene product to the overall
function (Gorfinkiel, 2009).
Morphogenetic processes require complex spatiotemporal integration of
cellular activities that results in patterns of activity at the tissue level.
The behaviour of the AS during DC provides a simple system in which to begin
to unravel the nature and levels of this integration and the manner in which
chemical, mechanical and genetic inputs pattern the behaviour of an
epithelium. To do a method is used that allows measurement of the
deformation of individual cells and of tissue domains
(Blanchard, 2009), and use was made of mutants to perturb the system in a defined and controlled manner. This study reveals that regular patterns of tissue behaviour emerge from the short-range coordinated behaviour of individual cells upon which chemical signals and mechanical constraints are impressed from surrounding tissues. These results highlight the importance of looking at the dynamics of cell populations, which cannot be obtained from the behaviour of individual cells (Gorfinkiel, 2009).
Physical models have recently been applied to recapitulate the appearance
of higher-order tissue architectures in different epithelia from the
mechanical properties of individual cells. Kinematic
quantitative analyses like the one presented in this study do provide the basis
on which to build computational simulations of morphogenetic processes that
will allow integration of the activity of genes, signals and mechanical
properties into the behaviour of tissues (Gorfinkiel, 2009).
Blanchard, G. B., Kabla, A. J., Schultz, N. L., Butler, L. C., Sanson, B., Gorfinkiel, N., Mahadevan, L. and Adams, R. J. (2009). Tissue tectonics: morphogenetic strain rates, cell shape change and intercalation. Nat. Methods 11(7): 859-64. PubMed Citation: 19503074
Fernández, B. G., Martinez Arias, A. and Jacinto, A. (2007). Dpp signalling orchestrates dorsal closure by regulating cell shape changes both in the amnioserosa and in the epidermis. Mech. Dev. 124: 884-897. PubMed Citation: 17950580
Gorfinkiel, N., Blanchard, G. B., Adams, R. J. and Martinez Arias, A. (2009). Mechanical control of global cell behaviour during dorsal closure in Drosophila.
Development 136(11): 1889-98. PubMed Citation: 19403661
Hutson, M. S., Tokutake, Y., Chang, M. S., Bloor, J. W., Venakides, S., Kiehart, D. P. and Edwards, G. S. (2003). Forces for morphogenesis investigated with laser microsurgery and quantitative modeling. Science 300: 145-149. PubMed Citation: 12574496
Jacinto, A., Wood, W., Balayo, T., Turmaine, M., Martinez-Arias, A. and Martin, P. (2000). Dynamic actin-based epithelial adhesion and cell matching during Drosophila dorsal closure. Curr. Biol. 10: 1420-1426. PubMed Citation: 11102803
Jankovics, F. and Brunner, D. (2006). Transiently reorganized microtubules are essential for zippering during dorsal closure in Drosophila melanogaster.
Dev. Cell 11(3): 375-85. Medline abstract: 16908221
Kiehart, D. P., Galbraith, C. G., Edwards, K. A., Rickoll, W. L. and Montague, R. A. (2000). Multiple forces contribute to cell sheet morphogenesis for dorsal closure in Drosophila. J. Cell Biol. 149: 471-490. PubMed Citation: 10769037
Millard, T. H. and Martin, P. (2008). Dynamic analysis of filopodial interactions during the zippering phase of Drosophila dorsal closure. Development 135: 621-626. PubMed Citation: 18184725
Toyama, Y., Peralta, X. G., Wells, A. R., Kiehart, D. P. and Edwards, G. S. (2008). Apoptotic force and tissue dynamics during Drosophila embryogenesis. Science 321: 1683-1686. PubMed Citation: 18802000
Genes involved in tissue development
Home page: The Interactive Fly © 1995, 1996 Thomas B. Brody, Ph.D.
The Interactive Fly resides on the
Society for Developmental Biology's Web server.