|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| Home Help Feedback Subscriptions Archive Search Table of Contents | |||||
First published online 28 March 2006
doi: 10.1242/jcs.02873
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Research Article |
BioMarCell, Laboratoire de Biologie de Developpement, UMR 7009 CNRS, University Pierre and Marie Curie, Observatoire, Villefranche-sur-mer 06230, France
Author for correspondence (e-mail: chenevert{at}obs-vlfr.fr)
Accepted 4 January 2006
 |
Summary |
|---|
 Top Summary IntroductionResultsDiscussionMaterials and MethodsReferences |
|---|
Key words: Cell polarity, Unequal cleavage, PAR proteins, Ascidian embryo, Cytoskeleton, Cortex
|
Introduction |
|---|
|
TopSummaryIntroductionResultsDiscussionMaterials and MethodsReferences |
|---|
; Betschinger and Knoblich, 2004; Horvitz and Herskowitz, 1992). A conserved set of polarity regulators, the PAR proteins, have been described as key actors controlling cell polarity and asymmetric divisions in worms, flies and mammals (Macara, 2004; Ohno, 2001). PAR proteins appear to function by creating specialized cortical domains, which in turn control spindle positioning and determinant localization (Cheeks et al., 2004; Munro et al., 2004). Three of these polarity proteins, the kinase aPKC, and PDZ domain-containing proteins PAR-6 and PAR-3, can form a complex which is activated by the small G protein CDC42 (Betschinger and Knoblich, 2004; Etienne-Manneville and Hall, 2003). The aPKC–PAR-6–PAR-3 complex localizes asymmetrically along the cell periphery and regulates cell polarity in a wide range of cell types, including C. elegans zygotes, Drosophila oocytes and neuroblasts, and Xenopus eggs (Macara, 2004; Ohno, 2001). In mammalian epithelial cells the aPKC–PAR-6–PAR-3 complex associates with tight junctions where it functions to establish apical-basolateral polarity, but the specific structures that anchor the PAR complex at the cortex in early embryos are not well understood.
In ascidian embryos, two posterior blastomeres undergo a series of asymmetric divisions that separate muscle cell fate from germline precursors, beginning at the 8-cell stage (Nishida, 2002; Nishida, 2005) (Fig. 1). These three successive asymmetric divisions are directed by a macroscopic cortical structure, the centrosome attracting body (CAB) situated in the posterior cortex of B4.1 blastomeres and of the smaller daughter cells produced by each unequal cleavage (red patch in Fig. 1). The role of the CAB in unequal cleavage has been demonstrated by elegant micromanipulation experiments using the large Halocynthia zygote (Hibino et al., 1998; Nishida, 1994; Nishikata et al., 1999): when posterior fragments of the embryo are removed no CAB is formed and the B4.1 cells cleave equally, whereas fusion of posterior fragments to an anterior position causes extra CAB formation and ectopic unequal cleavage. The CAB also has an important function in mRNA localization. Over two dozen maternal mRNAs collectively called postplasmic/PEM mRNAs have been found to localize to the CAB and segregate with it into the smaller cells (Nakamura et al., 2003; Sardet et al., 2005; Sasakura et al., 2000; Yamada et al., 2005; Yoshida et al., 1996). Postplasmic/PEM mRNAs encode a variety of proteins and include the muscle determinant macho1, the germline marker Vasa, and an mRNA encoding a G protein exchange factor (Fujimura and Takamura, 2000; Nishida and Sawada, 2001; Satou and Satoh, 1997).
|
The precise structure of the CAB and how it functions to attract the centrosome and localize mRNA determinants are not well understood. It is primarily composed of a tightly packed mass of cortical endoplasmic reticulum (cER) which adheres strongly to the plasma membrane and encases an electron dense matrix (EDM) reminiscent of germ plasm (Iseto and Nishida, 1999; Prodon et al., 2005; Sardet et al., 2003). At least some of the postplasmic/PEM RNAs are bound to the network of cortical ER, so that this region is called the cER-mRNA domain (Nakamura et al., 2005; Prodon et al., 2005; Sardet et al., 2003). The cER-mRNA domain is inherited from the oocyte, acquires a posterior position during reorganizations of the first cell cycle, and is partitioned into B4.1 blastomeres of the 8-cell stage embryo, at which point it forms part of the CAB (Nishida, 2005; Roegiers et al., 1999; Sardet et al., 2005; Sardet et al., 2003; Yoshida et al., 1996). The mechanism by which the CAB causes unequal cleavage in B4.1, B5.2 and B6.3 cells is thought to involve capture of plus ends of microtubules emanating from one centrosome. This model is supported by the observations that a conspicuous bundle of microtubules extends from the nucleus to the region of the CAB (Hibino et al., 1998) and that the migration of the nucleus toward the posterior cortex requires microtubules but not actin (Nishikata et al., 1999). An antibody to vertebrate kinesin labels the CAB region (Nishikata et al., 1999), but no other proteins localized specifically to the CAB, which could provide clues to how it functions, have been reported.
We have examined the distribution of the PAR polarity complex in the ascidian embryo. We demonstrate that aPKC, PAR-6 and PAR-3 accumulate in the CAB, forming a thin cortical layer sandwiched between the plasma membrane and the cER-mRNA domain. Astral microtubules connect the nucleus to the PAR domain. The polarized distribution of the aPKC, PAR-6 and PAR-3 proteins correlates with the onset of unequal cleavages, suggesting that the aPKC–PAR-6–PAR-3 complex plays an important role during asymmetric divisions in the ascidian embryo.
|
Results |
|---|
|
TopSummaryIntroductionResultsDiscussionMaterials and MethodsReferences |
|---|
; Satoh, 1994). The presence of the CAB appears to be an additional conserved feature of ascidian embryos. The term CAB was first employed to designate a refractive spot that persists in the posterior of Halocynthia roretzi embryos following detergent extraction (Hibino et al., 1998) and it was recognized that this peripheral domain corresponds to the site of localization of PEM transcripts (Sardet et al., 2005; Yoshida et al., 1996). The CAB has since been documented in embryos of Halocynthia roretzi, Ciona intestinalis and Phallusia mammillata by a variety of methods including electron microscopy, in situ hybridization to postplasmic/PEM mRNA probes, or labelling of ER on isolated cortices (Iseto and Nishida, 1999; Nishikata et al., 1999; Prodon et al., 2005; Sardet et al., 2003). This cortical structure of distinct composition had also been observed in the original description of ascidian embryonic development as a `notch of clear protoplasm' beneath the myoplasm in the highly pigmented Styela embryo (Conklin, 1905).
|
).
Ascidian aPKC protein sequences define a distinct group
The search for polarity proteins in the Ciona intestinalis genome has revealed one coding sequence each for aPKC, PAR-6 and PAR-3 (Sasakura et al., 2003), but the localization and function of the corresponding proteins have not yet been addressed in ascidian embryos.
We cloned the cDNA encoding Phallusia mammillata aPKC and found its deduced protein sequence to be highly similar to aPKCs from ascidian species for which sequence information is available (Ciona intestinalis, Ciona savigny and Halocynthia roretzi) (Fig. 3). Alignment of protein sequences demonstrates that ascidian aPKCs contain characteristic PB1 and kinase domains, but interestingly aPKCs from the four ascidian species examined all lack a central region, which includes the cysteine-rich C1 domain. The function of the C1 domain in aPKC appears to be to bind phosphatidylinositol (3,4,5)-trisphosphate PtdIns(3,4,5)P3, which causes an activating conformation change, and this domain is also proposed to interact with distinct activating and inhibitory partners (Diaz-Meco et al., 1996; Suzuki et al., 2003). All other known aPKC proteins contain this cysteine-rich motif, including those from nematodes, insects, echinoderms, hemichordates and vertebrates. This indicates that the C1 domain was specifically lost in urochordates during evolution, and that ascidians may have developed a distinct mechanism for regulating aPKCs independent of the PtdIns(3,4,5)P3 pathway. In place of the cysteine-rich domain, ascidian aPKCs possess a short conserved sequence not found in other aPKCs (boxed in Fig. 3), which may define a site for interaction with ascidian-specific partners.
|
|
High magnification surface views showed that the aPKC protein is present in large particles (approximately 1 µm diameter) near the cell surface, and that these particles are densely packed at the position of the CAB (Fig. 4I, and z series in Movie 2 in supplementary material). Like the CAB itself, the patch of localized aPKC protein changed size and shape during the cell cycle (Fig. 4J). In B4.1 cells of 8-cell stage Phallusia embryos (cell diameter 85 µm) the surface dimensions of the aPKC-rich disc measured on average 25x15 µm (lengthxwidth) during interphase and compacted to 15x11 µm at anaphase. In 16- and 32-cell stage embryos, the CAB continued to cycle between a widespread state in interphase and a compacted form in mitosis. In B5.2 cells (diameter 40 µm) the aPKC-rich disc measured on average 20x14 µm in interphase, compacting to 11x7 µm at anaphase. In addition to this cycle of relaxation/condensation, the overall size of the CAB diminished with each unequal cleavage, as the posterior-most cells become smaller.
If aPKC mRNA were a postplasmic/PEM type of mRNA localized in the CAB, then translation of the localized mRNA could account for the polarized distribution of aPKC protein. In order to address this possibility, we examined the presence and distribution of the aPKC mRNA. Northern blotting shows a single band for aPKC which is maternal and persists throughout embryonic development (Fig. 4K). The aPKC mRNA is equally present in all cell lineages and is distributed ubiquitously throughout the cytoplasm of all blastomeres (Fig. 4L-N). aPKC mRNA is not enriched in the CAB (arrowhead in Fig. 4N). Thus the polarized accumulation of aPKC protein at the CAB is not a consequence of localized mRNA; rather it is probably due to active redistribution of aPKC protein located elsewhere in the cortex or in the cytoplasm.
PAR-6 and PAR-3 proteins colocalize with aPKC at the CAB
To determine whether in ascidian embryos aPKC protein might act in a complex with PAR-6 and PAR-3 proteins, we examined the distribution of PAR-6 and PAR-3 proteins during asymmetric divisions.
We first cloned the cDNA encoding Phallusia PAR-6 and found it to encode a protein of predicted molecular mass 45 kDa, highly similar to Ciona PAR-6 (Fig. 5B). Antibodies produced against an N-terminal PAR-6 peptide and affinity-purified against either the immunogenic peptide or against the entire PAR-6 fusion protein detected a single major band of the expected size on immunoblots of Phallusia protein extracts (Fig. 5C). The N-terminal PAR-6 antibody principally labelled the posterior vegetal blastomere surfaces at the position where the CAB is situated (Fig. 5D). A second PAR-6 antibody produced against a C-terminal peptide gave an identical staining pattern (Fig. 5E). Similar to the mRNA encoding aPKC, PAR-6 mRNA was found to be maternal, ubiquitously distributed, and present in a constant amount throughout embryonic development (not shown).
|
), a region which precedes the three PDZ domains and contains several well conserved elements. A coding sequence highly homologous to the first 80 amino acids of this region was detected by analyzing the raw sequence data of the Ciona genome (Fig. 6A). This N-terminal PAR-3 homology domain lies just upstream of the reported Ciona PAR-3 coding sequence (Sasakura et al., 2003) and probably corresponds to the true amino terminus of ascidian PAR-3 (Fig. 6B). On immunoblots of Phallusia extracts, the PAR-3 antibody reacted with a protein of approximately 120 kDa, a size characteristic of PAR-3 proteins (Fig. 6C). The PAR-3 antibody labelled the cortex of posterior vegetal blastomeres at the position of the CAB strongly and exclusively in 8- to 64-cell stage embryos (Fig. 6D,E). No other membrane or cytoplasmic labelling was detected.
|
This colocalization of aPKC, PAR-6 and PAR-3 in addition to the sequence conservation in the PDZ and PB1 protein interaction motifs strongly suggest that these three proteins form a complex in the CAB. We hereafter use the term `PAR domain' to refer to the cortical zone containing aPKC, PAR-6 and PAR-3 at the posterior of the ascidian embryo.
The ascidian CAB is a multilayered structure
In order better to define the structure of the CAB, we analyzed the relationship between the polarized PAR domain, visualized using the aPKC antibody, and mitochondria, ER, microfilaments or microtubules. The cytoplasmic boundary of the CAB can be visualized by labelling mitochondria (Fig. 7A) since the myoplasm closely surrounds but does not penetrate the cER-mRNA domain. Double labelling of B5.2 blastomeres in prophase or metaphase revealed the presence of a 7-10 µm thick space between the myoplasm and the aPKC-rich domain (Fig. 7B,C and Movie 3 in supplementary material). High resolution analysis of embryos double-labelled for actin and aPKC demonstrated that the aPKC-rich domain occupies the same level as the layer of cortical microfilaments underlying the plasma membrane (Fig. 7D). Measurements on confocal images showed that the aPKC-rich layer is 1-2 µm thick, and it remains so throughout the cell cycle. These results show that aPKC protein is present in the cortical-most side of the CAB but absent from the bulk of the CAB which is occupied by the cER-mRNA domain and the electron dense matrix (Hibino et al., 1998; Iseto and Nishida, 1999; Nakamura et al., 2005; Prodon et al., 2005; Sardet et al., 2003) and reveal for the first time two separate layers in the CAB.
|
The degree of cortical association of the PAR domain with the plasma membrane was tested by examining isolated cortices labelled for aPKC and ER. Ascidian embryos can be attached to coverslips and the cytoplasm sheared away so that only the plasma membrane and structures which adhere tightly to it remain (Nakamura et al., 2005; Prodon et al., 2005; Sardet et al., 2003). In such cortical preparations made from the posterior vegetal blastomeres of 8-cell stage Phallusia embryos, the aPKC-rich zone was retained together with the cER-mRNA domain that characterizes the CAB (Fig. 7E-G), reflecting a tight association of the aPKC-rich layer with the plasma membrane at this location. The aPKC protein retained on cortices is in the form of particles with a size similar to those (approximately 1 µm diameter) observed by immunolabelling of whole embryos (Fig. 4D,I and Movie 2 in supplementary material). When very thin confocal sections acquired at <0.2-µm intervals were examined, the sections closest to the plasma membrane were found to contain mostly aPKC but very little ER (Fig. 7F,G), indicating that the PAR domain is sandwiched between the plasma membrane and the cER-mRNA domain.
Embryos were double labelled for aPKC and tubulin in order to evaluate the relationship of the CAB to centrosomes and microtubules. In B5.2 cells in interphase, the period during which the nucleus migrates towards the cortex (as visible in Fig. 2A,D), a distinct mass of microtubules connecting the nucleus to the CAB was observed (Fig. 7H-J). In some cells the bundle was easily detectable (Fig. 7H); in others a population of long and straight microtubules (arrowheads in Fig. 7I) connecting the centrosome to the aPKC-rich domain could be discerned among a background of astral microtubules emanating in all directions. The duplicated centrosomes cannot always be distinguished since a brightly staining mass of microtubules connects them. In blastomeres where the two centrosomes could be clearly identified, they always aligned between the nucleus and the CAB (Fig. 7J). In the example in Fig. 7J one centrosome can be observed near to the interphase nucleus, and the other is situated up to 10 µm away from the nucleus in the precise direction of the cortical patch of aPKC. These interphase microtubule configurations probably correspond to the thick bundles of microtubules observed to project toward the CAB in extracted Halocynthia embryos (Hibino et al., 1998; Nishikata et al., 1999). In blastomeres fixed during prophase and prometaphase, it is rare to observe discrete bundles of microtubules connecting a centrosome to the CAB. Astral microtubules emanating from the centrosome closest to the CAB can be seen to contact the posterior surface of the blastomere at both the aPKC-rich domain and the cell cortex adjacent to the CAB (Fig. 7K,L and Movie 4 in supplementary material). In metaphase and anaphase, one spindle pole appears flattened against the thickened mass of the CAB (Fig. 7M), and few astral microtubules contact the aPKC-rich cortical domain. The eccentric position of the mitotic spindle leads to unequal cleavage, the smaller cell inheriting the CAB with its patch of aPKC, PAR-6 and PAR-3.
Cytoskeletal dependence of the PAR domain
The dependence of the formation of the PAR domain on cytoskeletal elements was tested by labelling embryos for aPKC, following incubation with agents that depolymerise actin microfilaments (cytochalasin and latrunculin) or microtubules (nocodazole). Two-cell stage embryos were treated with cytoskeletal inhibitors and then fixed after 90 minutes, when control embryos reached the 16-cell stage. In the presence of actin depolymerising agents, no CAB-like domains were formed on the cell surface (Fig. 8A,B right images): aPKC protein was spread uniformly over the cortex or in a few randomly distributed clumps. Nocodazole-arrested embryos however always contained two brightly staining cortical patches of aPKC protein precisely resembling those associated with normal CABs (Fig. 8C,D, arrowheads). Thus these results show that the formation of the PAR-rich domain requires actin but not microtubules and further demonstrate that in Phallusia embryos the CAB can form autonomously in the absence of cell division, as had been observed previously in Halocynthia (Nishikata et al., 1999).
|
In order to determine whether actin microfilaments are also required for the maintenance of the aPKC domain once it has formed, 16-cell stage embryos that had already undergone one asymmetric cleavage were treated with cytoskeletal inhibitors for 30 minutes, then fixed and labelled with the aPKC antibody. In B5.2 cells of embryos treated with cytochalasin or latrunculin for 30 minutes, aPKC was no longer found concentrated in the characteristic posterior moustache pattern in most cases (Fig. 8E,F). Instead aPKC protein was observed to distribute homogeneously throughout the cortex and also to concentrate in small cortical clumps at random positions in all blastomeres. In nocodazole-arrested 16-cell stage embryos, however, aPKC protein remained concentrated in the CAB beneath the myoplasm, as in untreated embryos (Fig. 8G). Similar results were obtained when 8-cell stage embryos were treated with cytoskeletal inhibitors for 30 minutes (not shown). Thus actin is required for the maintenance of the aPKC-rich cortical patch in the position of the CAB. These data indicate that the intimate association between the PAR domain and the actin cortex, suggested by colocalization and retention on isolated cortices (Fig. 7), is functionally significant.
|
Discussion |
|---|
|
TopSummaryIntroductionResultsDiscussionMaterials and MethodsReferences |
|---|
; Nakamura et al., 2005; Prodon et al., 2005; Sardet et al., 2003) lead us to propose a model for the structure of the CAB, depicted in Fig. 9. The aPKC–PAR-6–PAR-3 complex concentrates into a thin ellipse-shaped patch contiguous with the layer of actin microfilaments, which is sandwiched between the cER-mRNA domain and the plasma membrane. Both the PAR and cER-mRNA layers are widespread during interphase and compact during mitosis (Fig. 9A), when the cER-mRNA domain forms a dome-shaped protrusion into the mitochondria-rich myoplasm. Because of the centrosome-attracting activity of the CAB, the aPKC–PAR-6–PAR-3 domain is inherited by the smaller daughter cell produced by unequal cleavage, and the entire process is repeated twice.
|
The localization of the PAR polarity complex to the CAB is probably due to active redistribution of the proteins from an unpolarized protein pool rather than to localized translation, since we observed that mRNAs encoding aPKC and PAR-6 are not localized in the CAB. The cER-mRNA domain, which acquires its posterior position during the first mitotic cell cycle after fertilization, may serve as a spatial landmark providing a localized signal to promote the formation of the polarized PAR domain. Intriguingly, one of the postplasmic/PEM RNAs concentrated in the cER-mRNA domain, PEM2, encodes the GTP exchange factor specific for CDC42 (Philips et al., 2003; Satou and Satoh, 1997), the G protein which binds to PAR-6 and causes activation of the aPKC–PAR-6–PAR-3 complex (Etienne-Manneville and Hall, 2003; Macara, 2004). Translation of at least some of the postplasmic/PEM RNAs is thought to take place before the 8-cell stage (Nishida and Sawada, 2001; Satou, 1999). Thus we hypothesize that translation of PEM2 RNA localized in the cER-mRNA domain could cause local activation of the CDC42 protein and thus favour the assembly of the aPKC–PAR-6–PAR-3 complex at the proper cortical site.
The punctate distribution of the aPKC protein (Fig. 4I, Fig. 7E and Movie 2 in supplementary material) and the requirement for actin microfilaments (Fig. 8) suggest that accumulation of aPKC in the CAB results from aggregation of aPKC-rich elementary units that are spread beneath the blastomere surface. Similarly, in Halocynthia embryos there is evidence for an actin-dependent mechanism that drives posterior accumulation of surface particles to the cortical location of the CAB gradually between the 2-cell and 8-cell stages (Hibino et al., 1998). A recent study has demonstrated that this process is dependent on POPK-1, a postplasmic/PEM mRNA which encodes a homolog of the SAD kinase implicated in clustering of membrane vesicles (Nakamura et al., 2005). The roles of POPK-1 or of PEM2 in the formation of the PAR domain remain to be tested.
Possible functions of the PAR domain in the CAB
The principal functions of the CAB correspond to the two features of asymmetric division: eccentric spindle positioning and segregation of localized determinants. It seems unlikely that aPKC, PAR-6 and PAR-3 are involved in the initial localization of mRNAs to the CAB, since the cER-mRNA domain forms well before the PAR domain (this study) (Prodon et al., 2005; Sardet et al., 2003), but they may play a role in the partitioning of mRNA determinants during the series of asymmetric divisions.
The localization of aPKC, PAR-6 and PAR-3 proteins to the CAB occurs prior to and during the series of unequal cleavages. This correlation and the interaction of microtubules with the PAR domain (Fig. 7) suggest that the PAR complex is involved in the mechanism of centrosome attraction. The PAR complex plays a role in controlling spindle position in a number of diverse models including flies, worms and vertebrates (Ahringer, 2003; Betschinger and Knoblich, 2004; Roegiers and Jan, 2004). Studies on polarized mammalian cells are beginning to uncover clear molecular connections between centrosome orientation and localized members of the PAR complex. In astrocytes and neurons it is proposed that phosphorylation of the kinase GSK3 by aPKC leads to a polarized redistribution of the microtubule plus end-binding protein APC (Etienne-Manneville and Hall, 2003; Shi et al., 2004), whereas in epithelial cells it appears that LGN/Pins links the PAR complex to the microtubule-associated protein NuMA (Du and Macara, 2004; Lechler and Fuchs, 2005). It will be interesting to determine whether similar mechanisms operate in the CAB and in other cortical capture sites enriched in aPKC, PAR-6 and PAR-3 proteins.
Another potential function of the PAR complex at the CAB is regulation of the actin cytoskeleton, which is one of its roles in Caenorhabditis elegans and in mammalian cells (Hurd and Margolis, 2005; Nance, 2005). The membrane rippling and transient protrusion we observed during nuclear migration (Fig. 2C) could be the consequence of a local alteration in contractility or stiffness of the cortical actin layer.
Centrosome attracting mechanism
The mechanism previously proposed for unequal cleavage in posterior blastomeres of ascidian embryos postulates that microtubule plus ends are captured by the CAB and that one centrosome is pulled via microtubule shortening and/or by microtubule motors concentrated in the CAB (Hibino et al., 1998; Nishikata et al., 1999). Our observations in fixed Phallusia embryos are essentially in agreement with this model: some astral microtubules emanating from the proximal centrosome appear to penetrate the CAB whereas others course along the surface of the cER-mRNA domain. When the CAB is in its most compacted state, during metaphase and anaphase, it appears that microtubules are excluded from the cER-mRNA domain (Fig. 7M) but the finding that microtubules remain associated with the CAB in isolated cortices (Prodon et al., 2005) indicates that microtubule plus ends are able to anchor in the cER-mRNA domain. Our observation that many microtubules contact the cell surface adjacent to the CAB (Fig. 7I,K,L and Movie 4 in supplementary material) further suggests that forces distributed throughout the posterior cortex may also contribute to centrosome attraction.
A particularly interesting alignment of duplicated centrosomes was observed in B5.2 cells during interphase (Fig. 7J). One centrosome appeared attached to the nucleus; the other was positioned away from the nucleus in the direction of the CAB, and the two centrosomes were connected to each other by a dense mass of microtubules. Such extreme separation of a centrosome from the nucleus is not common but has been reported in the early C. elegans embryo (Keating and White, 1998; Malone et al., 2003) and in mammalian epithelial cells (Reinsch and Karsenti, 1994). This configuration in the ascidian embryo suggests that the nucleus displaces toward the cortex by recapturing an errant centrosome that is tethered to a cortical site. The stretching of the nucleus toward a distant centrosome could also explain our observation in living embryos that the nucleus appears pinched in the direction of the CAB as it migrates toward the cortex (Fig. 2A and Movie 1 in supplementary material).
Specialized cortical sites that can capture plus ends of microtubules and influence spindle positioning exist in many types of polarized cells (Cowan and Hyman, 2004; Kodama et al., 2004). In the two cell C. elegans embryo for example, the anterior cortex of the P1 cell contains a structure which is proposed to attract one centrosome by anchoring and pulling on astral microtubules (Hyman, 1989; Hyman and White, 1987; Keating and White, 1998). Similarly, in the one cell C. elegans embryo, the alignment of the spindle appears influenced by pulling forces situated along the anterior cortex (Cowan and Hyman, 2004). aPKC, PAR-6, and PAR-3 proteins colocalize along the anterior surface of the zygote and of the P1 cell, although unlike in the CAB, they are distributed over a broader region than just the cortical attraction site. Cortical capture sites anchor the meiotic spindle to the cell surface in many oocytes, prior to the exaggerated case of unequal cleavage which results in the formation of polar bodies. In mouse oocytes, PAR-6 (Maro and Verlhac, 2002; Vinot et al., 2004) and PAR-3 (Duncan et al., 2005) proteins have been found to concentrate at the animal pole, which is the cortical site where the meiotic spindle attaches and which also influences spindle positioning during first mitosis (Plusa et al., 2002). As the CAB is a particularly accessible and well-defined cortical capture site, the ascidian embryo is likely to prove a favourable model in which to address the spatial dynamics and functions of PAR proteins during asymmetric divisions.
|
Materials and Methods |
|---|
|
TopSummaryIntroductionResultsDiscussionMaterials and MethodsReferences |
|---|
; Roegiers et al., 1999) and in methods on our web site http://biodev.obs-vlfr.fr/recherche/biomarcell/. Isolated cortices of 8-cell stage embryos were prepared and labelled as described previously (Prodon et al., 2005; Sardet et al., 2003).
Imaging of live and fixed embryos
Live embryos were washed several times in calcium-free sea water to flatten them, and mounted in microchambers made of gelatin-formaldehyde-coated coverslips. DIC images were acquired using a Zeiss Axiophot microscope equipped with a Newvicon camera (Lhesa). For vital labelling of mitochondria and endoplasmic reticulum, eggs were treated with 1 µM Mitotracker (Molecular Probes) and injected with a droplet of DiIC16(3) (Molecular Probes) before fertilization. Fluorescent images of live or fixed immunolabelled embryos were acquired with a Leica SP2 confocal microscope and processed using ImageJ (NIH), Photoshop (Adobe) or Metaview/Metamorph (Universal Imaging) software.
Cloning of aPKC and PAR-6 cDNAs and determination of PAR-3 sequence
Probes were generated by polymerase chain reaction on Phallusia egg cDNA using degenerate primers corresponding to conserved domains. A cDNA library synthesized from Phallusia egg mRNA in the 
ZAP vector (Stratagene) was screened to obtain clones encoding the full-length cDNAs of Phallusia aPKC (GenBank accession number AY987397) and Phallusia PAR-6 (GenBank accession number AY987398). The PAR-3 sequence was obtained by analysis of the unmasked assembly version 1.95 of the Ciona intestinalis genome in addition to predicted gene product models 159.16-159.21 and ci0100131546 provided by the Joint Genome Institute (http://genome.jgi-psf.org/ciona4/ciona4.download.ftp.html) and the Satoh Laboratory genome browser (http://hoya.zool.kyoto-u.ac.jp/cgi-bin/gbrowse/ci). To aid in exon definition, the Ciona intestinalis sequence was compared with the homologous region of the Ciona savigny genome (http://www2.bioinformatics.tll.org.sg:8082/Ciona_savignyi/, http://www.broad.mit.edu/annotation/ciona/) using Vista software (Frazer et al., 2004).
Antibodies
The following primary antibodies were used. Anti-aPKC: rabbit polyclonal C-20 (Santa Cruz Biotechnology SC216) dilution 1:200. Anti-PAR-3: rabbit polyclonal against Drosophila Bazooka (Wodarz et al., 1999), dilution 1:200. Anti-mitochondria: mouse monoclonal NN18 (ICN), dilution 1:200. Anti-tubulin: mouse monoclonal DM1A (Sigma), dilution 1:500. Anti-actin: mouse monoclonal N350 (ICN), dilution 1:100. For anti-PAR-6 antibodies, N-terminal (MDKTSSGQRAPSP) and C-terminal (RDSVKAKRSNEPQD) peptides were synthesized and used to immunize rabbits (Covalab). A PAR-6-GST fusion protein was prepared from the vector pGEX4T (Amersham Biosciences) and coupled to Affigel (Bio-Rad). Antisera were loaded onto affinity columns and purified. PAR-6 antibodies were eluted with 0.1 M glycine pH 2.5, neutralized with 1 M Tris pH 8.5, dialyzed and concentrated using Amicon filters (Millipore). Anti-mouse and anti-rabbit secondary antibodies coupled to FITC or to TRITC (Jackson Labs) were used at a dilution of 1:200.
Immunolabelling
For most antibodies, embryos were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde in PBS pH 7.5 containing 0.5 M NaCl for 2 hours at room temperature or overnight at 4°C, transferred to 95% ethanol, and stored at –20°C. For labelling with PAR-3 (Bazooka) or tubulin antibodies, embryos were fixed in cold methanol and placed immediately at –20°C. Fixed samples were rehydrated in PBS-Tween (0.1%), blocked in PBS-BSA (1%), and incubated with primary antibodies for 2 hours at room temperature or overnight at 4°C with gentle shaking. Embryos were then washed three times in PBS Tween, incubated with secondary antibodies, washed again in PBS Tween, treated with 5 µg/ml Hoechst 33342 (Sigma) to label DNA, and mounted in Citifluor (Chemlab).
Immunoblotting
Protein extracts were prepared by boiling dechorionated Phallusia eggs or embryos in Laemmli sample buffer. Immunoblots were prepared by standard SDS-PAGE followed by transfer to nitrocellulose membranes (Amersham), and incubated with primary antibodies at dilutions of 1:2000 (anti-aPKC), 1:4000 (anti-PAR-3), or 1:500 (anti-PAR-6). Membranes were then incubated with horseradish peroxidase (HRP)-conjugated anti-rabbit secondary antibody (Jackson Labs) at a dilution of 1:7500 followed by detection on ECL Hyperfilm using chemiluminescent substrates (Amersham).
Treatment with cytoskeletal inhibitors
Embryos were treated at the 2-cell, 8-cell or 16-cell stages with 10 µg/ml nocodazole, 2 µg/ml cytochalasin B, or 1 µg/ml latrunculin A (Molecular Probes). Since Phallusia embryonic cell cycles are not completely synchronous within a population, the phase of the cell cycle in which each embryo was treated could not be determined. All inhibitors caused cell divisions to arrest, and in the presence of actin inhibitors nuclear cycles continue as noted in the legend to Fig. 8. aPKC immunolabelling results were similar for cytochalasin and latrunculin treatment, but only latrunculin caused complete elimination of filamentous actin, as determined by labelling with phalloidin.
In situ hybridization and northern blot analysis
Embryos were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde in 0.1 M Mops pH 7.5 containing 0.5 M NaCl. RNA probes were prepared by in vitro transcription in the presence of digoxigenin-UTP (Roche). In situ hybridization was carried out in formamide and signal detection by NBT/BCIP (Roche) were essentially as described by Sardet et al. (Sardet et al., 2003) and on our website. For northern blot analysis, embryos were lysed in 4 M guanine thiocyanate, 0.1 M Tris-HCl, 0.5% sarcosine, 1% ß-mercaptoethanol and total RNA was recovered after phenol extraction. RNA was electrophoresed in formaldehyde-containing gels, transferred to nylon membranes (Amersham Biosciences) and hybridized to 32P-labelled probes according to the standard protocol.
|
Acknowledgments |
|---|
|
Footnotes |
|---|
* Present address: Center for Genomic Regulation, Passeig Maritim, Barcelona 08003, Spain 
|
References |
|---|
|
TopSummaryIntroductionResultsDiscussionMaterials and MethodsReferences |
|---|
Ahringer, J. (2003). Control of cell polarity and mitotic spindle positioning in animal cells. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 15, 73-81.[CrossRef][Medline]
Betschinger, J. and Knoblich, J. A. (2004). Dare to be different: asymmetric cell division in Drosophila, C. elegans and vertebrates. Curr. Biol. 14, R674-R685.[CrossRef][Medline]
Cheeks, R. J., Canman, J. C., Gabriel, W. N., Meyer, N., Strome, S. and Goldstein, B. (2004). C. elegans PAR proteins function by mobilizing and stabilizing asymmetrically localized protein complexes. Curr. Biol. 14, 851-862.[CrossRef][Medline]
Conklin, E. G. (1905). Organ-forming substances in the eggs of ascidians. Biol. Bull. 8, 205-230.
Cowan, C. R. and Hyman, A. A. (2004). Asymmetric cell division in C. elegans: cortical polarity and spindle positioning. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 20, 427-453.[CrossRef][Medline]
Diaz-Meco, M. T., Municio, M. M., Frutos, S., Sanchez, P., Lozano, J., Sanz, L. and Moscat, J. (1996). The product of par-4, a gene induced during apoptosis, interacts selectively with the atypical isoforms of protein kinase C. Cell 86, 777-786.[CrossRef][Medline]
Du, Q. and Macara, I. G. (2004). Mammalian Pins is a conformational switch that links NuMA to heterotrimeric G proteins. Cell 119, 503-516.[CrossRef][Medline]
Duncan, F. E., Moss, S. B., Schultz, R. M. and Williams, C. J. (2005). PAR-3 defines a central subdomain of the cortical actin cap in mouse eggs. Dev. Biol. 280, 38-47.[CrossRef][Medline]
Etienne-Manneville, S. and Hall, A. (2003). Cell polarity: Par6, aPKC and cytoskeletal crosstalk. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 15, 67-72.[CrossRef][Medline]
Frazer, K. A., Pachter, L., Poliakov, A., Rubin, E. M. and Dubchak, I. (2004). VISTA: computational tools for comparative genomics. Nucleic Acids Res. 32, W273-W279.
Fujimura, M. and Takamura, K. (2000). Characterization of an ascidian DEAD-box gene, Ci-DEAD1: specific expression in the germ cells and its mRNA localization in the posterior-most blastomeres in early embryos. Dev. Genes Evol. 210, 64-72.[CrossRef][Medline]
Hibino, T., Nishikata, T. and Nishida, H. (1998). Centrosome-attracting body: a novel structure closely related to unequal cleavages in the ascidian embryo. Dev. Growth Differ. 40, 85-95.[CrossRef][Medline]
Horvitz, H. R. and Herskowitz, I. (1992). Mechanisms of asymmetric cell division: two Bs or not two Bs, that is the question. Cell 68, 237-255.[CrossRef][Medline]
Hurd, T. W. and Margolis, B. (2005). Pars and polarity: taking control of Rac. Nat. Cell Biol. 7, 205-207.[Medline]
Hyman, A. A. (1989). Centrosome movement in the early divisions of Caenorhabditis elegans: a cortical site determining centrosome position. J. Cell Biol. 109, 1185-1193.
Hyman, A. A. and White, J. G. (1987). Determination of cell division axes in the early embryogenesis of Caenorhabditis elegans. J. Cell Biol. 105, 2123-2135.
Iseto, T. and Nishida, H. (1999). Ultrastructural studies on the centrosome-attracting body: electron-dense matrix and its role in unequal cleavages in ascidian embryos. Dev. Growth Differ. 41, 601-609.[CrossRef][Medline]
Keating, H. H. and White, J. G. (1998). Centrosome dynamics in early embryos of Caenorhabditis elegans. J. Cell Sci. 111, 3027-3033.[Abstract]
Kodama, A., Lechler, T. and Fuchs, E. (2004). Coordinating cytoskeletal tracks to polarize cellular movements. J. Cell Biol. 167, 203-207.
Lechler, T. and Fuchs, E. (2005). Asymmetric cell divisions promote stratification and differentiation of mammalian skin. Nature 437, 275-280.[CrossRef][Medline]
Macara, I. G. (2004). Parsing the polarity code. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 5, 220-231.[CrossRef][Medline]
Malone, C. J., Misner, L., Le Bot, N., Tsai, M. C., Campbell, J. M., Ahringer, J. and White, J. G. (2003). The C. elegans hook protein, ZYG-12, mediates the essential attachment between the centrosome and nucleus. Cell 115, 825-836.[CrossRef][Medline]
Maro, B. and Verlhac, M. H. (2002). Polar body formation: new rules for asymmetric divisions. Nat. Cell Biol. 4, E281-E283.[CrossRef][Medline]
Munro, E., Nance, J. and Priess, J. R. (2004). Cortical flows powered by asymmetrical contraction transport PAR proteins to establish and maintain anterior-posterior polarity in the early C. elegans embryo. Dev. Cell 7, 413-424.[CrossRef][Medline]
Nakamura, Y., Makabe, K. W. and Nishida, H. (2003). Localization and expression pattern of type I postplasmic mRNAs in embryos of the ascidian Halocynthia roretzi. Gene Expr. Patterns 3, 71-75.[CrossRef][Medline]
Nakamura, Y., Makabe, K. W. and Nishida, H. (2005). POPK-1/Sad-1 kinase is required for the proper translocation of maternal mRNAs and putative germ plasm at the posterior pole of the ascidian embryo. Development 132, 4731-4742.
Nance, J. (2005). PAR proteins and the establishment of cell polarity during C. elegans development. BioEssays 27, 126-135.[CrossRef][Medline]
Nishida, H. (1994). Localization of determinants for formation of the anterior-posterior axis in eggs of the ascidian Halocynthia roretzi. Development 120, 3093-3104.[Abstract]
Nishida, H. (2002). Specification of developmental fates in ascidian embryos: molecular approach to maternal determinants and signaling molecules. Int. Rev. Cytol. 217, 227-276.[Medline]
Nishida, H. (2005). Specification of embryonic axis and mosaic development in ascidians. Dev. Dyn. 233, 1177-1193.[CrossRef][Medline]
Nishida, H. and Sawada, K. (2001). macho-1 encodes a localized mRNA in ascidian eggs that specifies muscle fate during embryogenesis. Nature 409, 724-729.[CrossRef][Medline]
Nishikata, T., Hibino, T. and Nishida, H. (1999). The centrosome-attracting body, microtubule system, and posterior egg cytoplasm are involved in positioning of cleavage planes in the ascidian embryo. Dev. Biol. 209, 72-85.[CrossRef][Medline]
Ohno, S. (2001). Intercellular junctions and cellular polarity: the PAR-aPKC complex, a conserved core cassette playing fundamental roles in cell polarity. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 13, 641-648.[CrossRef][Medline]
Philips, A., Blein, M., Robert, A., Chambon, J. P., Baghdiguian, S., Weill, M. and Fort, P. (2003). Ascidians as a vertebrate-like model organism for physiological studies of Rho GTPase signaling. Biol. Cell 95, 295-302.[CrossRef][Medline]
Plusa, B., Grabarek, J. B., Piotrowska, K., Glover, D. M. and Zernicka-Goetz, M. (2002). Site of the previous meiotic division defines cleavage orientation in the mouse embryo. Nat. Cell Biol. 4, 811-815.[CrossRef][Medline]
Prodon, F., Dru, P., Roegiers, F. and Sardet, C. (2005). Polarity of the ascidian egg cortex and relocalization of cER and mRNAs in the early embryo. J. Cell Sci. 118, 2393-2404.
Reinsch, S. and Karsenti, E. (1994). Orientation of spindle axis and distribution of plasma membrane proteins during cell division in polarized MDCKII cells. J. Cell Biol. 126, 1509-1526.
Roegiers, F. and Jan, Y. N. (2004). Asymmetric cell division. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 16, 195-205.[CrossRef][Medline]
Roegiers, F., Djediat, C., Dumollard, R., Rouviere, C. and Sardet, C. (1999). Phases of cytoplasmic and cortical reorganizations of the ascidian zygote between fertilization and first division. Development 126, 3101-3117.[Abstract]
Sardet, C., Nishida, H., Prodon, F. and Sawada, K. (2003). Maternal mRNAs of PEM and macho 1, the ascidian muscle determinant, associate and move with a rough endoplasmic reticulum network in the egg cortex. Development 130, 5839-5849.
Sardet, C., Dru, P. and Prodon, F. (2005). Maternal determinants and mRNAs in the cortex of ascidian oocytes, zygotes and embryos. Biol. Cell 97, 35-49.[CrossRef][Medline]
Sasakura, Y., Ogasawara, M. and Makabe, K. W. (2000). Two pathways of maternal RNA localization at the posterior-vegetal cytoplasm in early ascidian embryos. Dev. Biol. 220, 365-378.[CrossRef][Medline]
Sasakura, Y., Yamada, L., Takatori, N., Satou, Y. and Satoh, N. (2003). A genomewide survey of developmentally relevant genes in Ciona intestinalis. VII. Molecules involved in the regulation of cell polarity and actin dynamics. Dev. Genes Evol. 213, 273-283.[Medline]
Satoh, N. (1994). Developmental Biology of Ascidians. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Satou, Y. (1999). posterior end mark 3 (pem-3), an ascidian maternally expressed gene with localized mRNA encodes a protein with Caenorhabditis elegans MEX-3-like KH domains. Dev. Biol. 212, 337-350.[CrossRef][Medline]
Satou, Y. and Satoh, N. (1997). Posterior end mark 2 (pem-2), pem-4, pem-5, and pem-6: maternal genes with localized mRNA in the ascidian embryo. Dev. Biol. 192, 467-481.[CrossRef][Medline]
Shi, S. H., Cheng, T., Jan, L. Y. and Jan, Y. N. (2004). APC and GSK-3beta are involved in mPar3 targeting to the nascent axon and establishment of neuronal polarity. Curr. Biol. 14, 2025-2032.[CrossRef][Medline]
Suzuki, A., Akimoto, K. and Ohno, S. (2003). Protein kinase C lambda/iota (PKClambda/iota): a PKC isotype essential for the development of multicellular organisms. J. Biochem. 133, 9-16.
Takamura, K., Fujimura, M. and Yamaguchi, Y. (2002). Primordial germ cells originate from the endodermal strand cells in the ascidian Ciona intestinalis. Dev. Genes Evol. 212, 11-18.[CrossRef][Medline]
Tomioka, M., Miya, T. and Nishida, H. (2002). Repression of zygotic gene expression in the putative germline cells in ascidian embryos. Zool. Sci. 19, 49-55.[CrossRef][Medline]
Vinot, S., Le, T., Maro, B. and Louvet-Vallee, S. (2004). Two PAR6 proteins become asymmetrically localized during establishment of polarity in mouse oocytes. Curr. Biol. 14, 520-525.[Medline]
Wodarz, A., Ramrath, A., Kuchinke, U. and Knust, E. (1999). Bazooka provides an apical cue for Inscuteable localization in Drosophila neuroblasts. Nature 402, 544-547.[CrossRef][Medline]
Yamada, L., Kobayashi, K., Satou, Y. and Satoh, N. (2005). Microarray analysis of localization of maternal transcripts in eggs and early embryos of the ascidian, Ciona intestinalis. Dev. Biol. 284, 536-550.[Medline]
Yoshida, S., Marikawa, Y. and Satoh, N. (1996). Posterior end mark, a novel maternal gene encoding a localized factor in the ascidian embryo. Development 122, 2005-2012.[Abstract]
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati 
Twitter What's this?
Related articles in JCS:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
