|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| Home Help Feedback Subscriptions Archive Search Table of Contents | |||||
First published online April 3, 2008
doi: 10.1242/10.1242/jcs.022269
Research Article |
1 Fachbereich Biologie, Entwicklungsbiologie, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Karl-von-Frisch Str. 8, D-35043 Marburg, Germany
2 Institut für Allgemeine und Spezielle Zoologie, Stephanstr. 24, Justus-Liebig-Universität Giessen, D-35390 Giessen, Germany
3 UCMP, Umeå University, Building 6L, 90187 Umeå, Sweden
4 Fachbereich Biologie, Spezielle Zoologie, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Karl-von-Frisch Str. 8, D-35043 Marburg, Germany
5 Institut für Neurobiologie, Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster, Badestr. 9, D-48149 Münster, Germany
Author for correspondence (e-mail: oenel{at}staff.uni-marburg.de)
Accepted 21 January 2008
 |
Summary |
|---|
 Top Summary IntroductionResultsDiscussionMaterials and MethodsReferences |
|---|
Key words: Drosophila, Myogenesis, F-actin, Arp3, FuRMAS, Actin cytoskeleton, kette
|
Introduction |
|---|
|
TopSummaryIntroductionResultsDiscussionMaterials and MethodsReferences |
|---|
). Additionally, in vertebrates, muscle growth after birth requires continuous fusion of myoblasts arising from satellite cells, the stem cells of vertebrate muscles. The somatic musculature of Drosophila melanogaster is well-characterized and can serve as a model in which to study and unravel the underlying molecular mechanisms involved in myoblast fusion.
In Drosophila, myoblast fusion results from a dynamic relationship between founder cells (FCs) and fusion-competent myoblasts (FCMs) (Bate, 1990). The FCs seed the fusion process and are thus responsible for the unique identity of each muscle fiber. The larger population of FCMs migrate towards, recognize and adhere to the FCs (for reviews, see Abmayr et al., 2005; Baylies et al., 1998; Chen and Olson, 2004; Taylor, 2000). Following these cellular interaction steps, an FC then fuses with one or two FCMs, giving rise to a precursor cell, which in turn merges with additional myoblasts in a second fusion step until the appropriate muscle size is reached (Bate, 1990; Rau et al., 2001). Studies on mammalian cell cultures have revealed that there are strong parallels to this model in vertebrates at the molecular level (Horsley and Pavlath, 2004).
Recently, several essential molecules required for the fusion of FCs and FCMs have been reported. For example, during cell adhesion, membrane-spanning Immunoglobulin (Ig)-molecules are involved in establishing a ring-shaped fusion-restricted myogenic-adhesive structure (FuRMAS) (Kesper et al., 2007). The Ig-domain molecule Dumbfounded [Duf, also known as Kin of Irre (Kirre) (see FlyBase)] (Ruiz-Gomez et al., 2000; Strünkelnberg et al., 2001) forms the ring at cell-contact points in FCs, whereas the Ig-domain protein Sticks and Stones (Sns) (Bour et al., 2000) forms a corresponding structure in FCMs. Both proteins interact heterotypically to initiate the process of myoblast fusion. The progress of fusion is manifested in the expansion of the FuRMAS at the contact sites between FCs and FCMs from 1 µm to 5 µm (Kesper et al., 2007). Interestingly, the Ig-domain protein Duf was recently identified in zebrafish, suggesting a conserved molecular pathway in insects and vertebrates (Srinivas et al., 2007).
Other known components of the FuRMAS include the adaptor protein Rolling pebbles7 [Rols7, also known as Antisocial (Ants)] (Chen and Olson, 2001; Menon and Chia, 2001; Rau et al., 2001) in FCs and Blown fuse (Blow) (Doberstein et al., 1997; Schröter et al., 2006) in FCMs. Rols7 induces the second fusion step (Rau et al., 2001) and is expressed as a ring in FCs, similar to Duf, and delivers the signal from the FC membrane into the cytosol by interacting with the intracellular domain of Duf via its tetratricopeptide (TPR) repeats (Kreisköther et al., 2006). Blow, by contrast, is concentrated as a plug in the center of the ring formed by Sns (Kesper et al., 2007).
During the fusion process, the actin cytoskeleton of myoblasts is dynamically organized. Consistent with this, the center of the adhesion ring in FCs and FCMs contains filamentous actin (F-actin) (Kesper et al., 2007). Recently, we reported that the actin regulators kette (Schröter et al., 2004) and wasp (Schäfer et al., 2007) are essential for myoblast fusion. Kette is the Drosophila homolog of HEM2 (NAP1), and can be found in a complex with SCAR (homolog of the mammalian WAVE) and is a member of the Wiskott-Aldrich-syndrome protein (WASP) family (reviewed by Ibarra et al., 2005). Moreover, kette was shown to interact genetically with blow during myoblast fusion (Schröter et al., 2004). WASP family members possess a conserved VCA (verprolin homologous, cofilin homologous and acidic) domain, which is involved in the binding of G-actin and Arp2/3 (Rohatgi et al., 1999; Miki and Takenawa, 1998; Machesky et al., 1999). The wasp3D3-035 allele lacks the CA domain of the VCA domain and thus neutralizes the function of maternal WASP (Schäfer et al., 2007). Furthermore, genetic data indicate that Kette antagonizes the function of WASP (Schäfer et al., 2007). The WASP-interacting partner Verprolin1 [Vrp1, also known as Solitary (Sltr) and Wip; the Drosophila homolog of the mammalian WIP], however, acts in a complex with WASP to ensure successful myoblast fusion (Kim et al., 2007; Massarwa et al., 2007).
The branching of F-actin is initiated by the de novo nucleation of actin, triggered through the activity of the Arp2/3 complex (reviewed by Takenawa and Miki, 2001). Alone, the Arp2/3 complex is inactive and requires a set of binding partners, including members of the WASP family, to become active (Machesky and Insall, 1998). The binding of these proteins has been proposed to lead to a conformational change in the position of the seven subunits of the Arp2/3 complex, especially in the relative position of the subunits Arp2 and Arp3 (Robinson et al., 2001; Volkmann et al., 2001).
Here, we describe for the first time an EMS-induced Arp3-null allele, Arp3schwächling, having an abnormal myoblast-fusion phenotype. Ultrastructural analysis of Arp3schwächling and wasp3D3-035 revealed the formation of a fusion pore in both mutants. Whereas in Arp3schwächling mutants the membrane between fusing myoblasts is removed, in wasp3D3-035 embryos, membrane breakdown is not completed. The finding that fusion in Arp3schwächling embryos is disrupted despite the formation of a fusion pore indicates that the pore does not expand in Arp3schwächling mutants. Therefore, to gain a deeper insight into the F-actin regulation of myoblast fusion, we examined Arp3 wasp double-mutant embryos, which show a complete block of myoblast fusion. This phenotype suggests that WASP is not the only actin regulator controlling F-actin polymerization during fusion. Indeed, our studies on scar single mutants and scar vrp1 double mutants strongly imply that the first and the second fusion steps require a different set of F-actin nucleation factors.
|
Results |
|---|
|
TopSummaryIntroductionResultsDiscussionMaterials and MethodsReferences |
|---|
; Schäfer et al., 2007). Upon analysis of the muscle pattern of the ethyl methane sulphonate (EMS)-induced pointed allele pnt3D2-26 with the anti-β3-tubulin antibody, we observed an arrest in myoblast fusion. To address whether the mutation in pnt is responsible for the fusion defect, we examined the embryonic muscle pattern of the loss-of-function mutant pnt
88. However, pnt-null mutants did not show a myoblast-fusion phenotype (data not shown), indicating that the mutation in pnt is not responsible for the observed phenotype. Therefore, it is highly likely that the fusion phenotype is caused by a further mutation on the pnt3D2-26-containing chromosome. Complementation tests demonstrated that the additional mutation was not allelic to known mutations in genes required for myoblast fusion, thereby revealing a new fusion-relevant component, which we have named schwächling. To characterize the schwächling mutant phenotype in detail, we separated the pnt locus from the schwächling mutation by using meiotic recombination. Homozygous schwächling mutants display a severe defect in myoblast fusion (Fig. 1B, arrow).
|
Molecular characterization of Arp3schwächling
To investigate the molecular basis of the EMS mutation in Arp3schwächling, we determined the sequence of Arp3 in Arp3schwächling homozygous-mutant embryos. Fig. 1J shows the gene structure of Arp3. In Arp3schwächling embryos, the Arp3 gene contains a G
A nucleotide transition at the splice acceptor site of the first intron (Fig. 1J). This point mutation possibly leads to an aberrantly spliced transcript, retaining the first intron, that becomes translated into a truncated protein of 15 amino acids (aa) and can be thus considered as a null allele. To test this notion, RNA was isolated from wild-type, Arp3schwächling heterozygous and homozygous embryos, and used as template in reverse transcriptase-PCR (RT-PCR) assays. We amplified a 509-bp fragment representing the spliced mRNA form of exons 1 and 3 (Fig. 1I, lower arrowhead). In Arp3schwächling heterozygous and homozygous embryos, we additionally obtained a 674-bp product containing the first intron (Fig. 1I, upper arrowhead). However, because this product was present in low amounts, it is highly likely that the spliced form of the product was still present, probably because of the maternal contribution of Arp3 mRNA.
Fusion in Arp3schwächling is disrupted after precursor formation
Further analysis revealed that the determination of FCs and FCMs in Arp3schwächling mutant embryos occurs normally (data not shown). Consequently, the phenotype in Arp3schwächling embryos is due to a failure of myoblasts to fuse. Myoblast fusion in vertebrates and Drosophila proceeds in two distinct steps (Bate, 1990; Beckett and Baylies, 2007; Horsley and Pavlath, 2004; Rau et al., 2001). During the first step, a bi- to tri-nucleated precursor cell forms, which undergoes additional rounds of fusion until the final size of the mature myofiber is reached. The transcription factor Even skipped (Eve) marks the 14 nuclei of the segmentally repeated dorsal muscle DA1 as well as the pericardial cells. To estimate at which stage of fusion Arp3schwächling mutant embryos are arrested, we counted the nuclei of the DA1 muscle marked by anti-Eve (Fig. 2B,D). The DA1 muscles in Arp3schwächling embryos were found to contain, on average, three nuclei, indicating that the first fusion step, forming a bi- to trinucleated precursor cell, had completed.
|
Ultrastructural analysis of Arp3schwächling and wasp3D3-035 mutant embryos
Arp3 is an actin-related protein that is one of the seven proteins forming the Arp2/3 complex, which is involved in creating new branching actin filaments. The activation of the Arp2/3 complex requires the binding of the WASP family members. In Drosophila, there are two members of this family – WASP and SCAR. Both proteins share a common C-terminal Verprolin homologous (V), Cofilin homologous (C) and acidic (A) domain (also known as the VCA domain). The V domain binds monomeric G-actin and the CA domain binds the Arp2/3 complex (Machesky and Insall, 1998; Miki and Takenawa, 1998; Rohatgi et al., 1999). Previously, we reported that the lack of the CA and A domain of WASP blocks myoblast fusion after precursor formation (Schäfer et al., 2007). Thus, in both Arp3schwächling and wasp3D3-035 mutants, myoblasts complete the first fusion step, but fail to undergo the second one.
|
; Schröter et al., 2004). First, electron-dense vesicles appear on adjacent myoblast membranes. This structure is known as the pre-fusion complex (Fig. 2E, arrow). The vesicles are thought to disintegrate and give rise to the so-called electron-dense plaques (Fig. 2F, arrow). At the contact area between a precursor cell and an FCM (Fig. 3A,A', between the arrows), membranes start to vesiculate, initiating the breakdown of the membrane (Fig. 3A', arrowheads). In ultrathin sections of Arp3schwächling embryos, we observed the formation of a fusion pore between a growing myotube and an FCM (Fig. 3C, overview; Fig.3C', arrows). However, we did not observe any plasma membrane remnants between the cells, as seen in wild-type embryos (Fig. 3A', next to the arrowheads). We therefore conclude that Arp3schwächling embryos stop fusion after membrane breakdown, when a fusion pore has been formed. By contrast, ultrathin sections of wasp3D3-035 embryos revealed that membrane breakdown fails to complete in these mutants (Fig. 3B; Fig. 3B', between arrowheads). Hence, wasp is required for the creation of a fusion pore, whereas Arp3 is required to integrate FCMs into the growing myotube after fusion-pore formation.
Recently, two papers have described the identification of a WASP-interacting partner named Vrp1 as an essential component for myoblast fusion (Kim et al., 2007; Massarwa et al., 2007). To date, two vrp1 alleles, namely wipD30 and sltrS1946, are known to stop fusion after precursor formation. Because we observed that wasp3D3-035 mutants arrest fusion during membrane removal, but that a very different phenotype for vrp1 has recently been reported (Kim et al., 2007), we reinvestigated the phenotype of vrp1 mutant embryos by electron microscopy. For this purpose, we used the characterized wipD30 allele. Our analysis confirmed that wipD30 mutants (Fig. 3D,D') are arrested during membrane breakdown – a finding also reported by Massarwa et al. (Massarwa et al., 2007) – and that this arrested stage is the same as found in wasp3D3-035 mutants (Fig. 3B,B').
WASP is not the only essential activator of the Arp2/3 complex in myoblast fusion
To gain further insight into the relevance of F-actin regulation during myoblast fusion, we generated and investigated Arp3schwächling and wasp3D3-035 double-mutant embryos. As described previously, the wasp allele wasp3D3-035 carries a point mutation that leads to loss of the CA domain of the VCA module (Schäfer et al., 2007). wasp3D3-035 mutants show an unfused myoblast phenotype (Fig. 4B,B'). Because the CA domain is essential for binding of the Arp2/3 complex, we predicted that the phenotype of the double mutants would resemble that of wasp3D3-035 mutant embryos. Instead, we observed a strongly enhanced myoblast-fusion phenotype (Fig. 4C,C'). To analyze the Arp3schwächling wasp3D3-035 mutant phenotype more precisely, we examined the DA1 muscle with the nuclear marker anti-Eve. The DA1 muscle was found to only contain one nucleus per hemisegment (Fig. 2C,D), indicating that fusion is blocked completely in the double mutant. To examine the interaction of Arp3 and wasp during myoblast fusion more closely, we performed the double-mutant analysis with weaker alleles of Arp3 and wasp. This analysis revealed that, in Arp3schwächling wasp3 and Arp66BEP3640 wasp3D3-035 double mutants, fusion is also blocked completely (data not shown). wasp and Arp3 mRNA are maternally contributed. In the case of wasp, maternal wasp is sufficient to complete myoblast fusion (Schäfer et al., 2007). We therefore expected that fusion would not be blocked completely, but that the first fusion step, but possibly not the second, would take place in wasp Arp3 double-mutant embryos. The enhanced fusion defect observed in the double mutant led us to propose that wasp is only required during the second fusion step. As a consequence, a different Arp2/3 activator besides WASP must regulate the activity of the Arp2/3 complex during the first step of myoblast fusion.
|
In addition to the WASP-Vrp1 complex, SCAR also controls Arp2/3-regulated F-actin formation during myoblast fusion
The activity of the Arp2/3 complex is regulated by nucleation-promoting factors such as WASP and SCAR. To determine whether scar is required for myoblast fusion, we examined a hypomorphic and a null allele of Drosophila scar, and generated double mutants with scar and components of the WASP complex.
First we examined the muscle pattern of homozygous scark13811 and scar37 mutants (Zallen et al., 2002) using the anti-β3-tubulin antibody. We observed a weak fusion defect in these embryos. The unfused myoblast phenotype in homozygous scar37 embryos was more severe than in homozygous scark13811 mutants (Fig. 5). Nevertheless, unfused myoblasts were visible in both scar mutants and muscles seemed to be reduced in size in scar37 mutants (Fig. 5E, arrowhead). We further noticed that dorsal closure is incomplete in both scar mutants. Similar to wasp and Arp3 mRNA, scar mRNA is maternally contributed (Zallen et al., 2002). This might explain why scar-null mutants still show considerable myoblast fusion. To investigate whether scar and wasp interact genetically during myoblast fusion, we performed a dosis experiment and generated scar wasp double mutants. We used the scark13811 and wasp3 alleles, which display only a very weak myoblast-fusion phenotype, for this experiment. Taking out one copy of wasp3 in a scark13811 mutant background intensified the appearance of unfused myoblasts (Fig. 5B, arrow). This phenotype became even more severe in scark13811 wasp3 double-mutant embryos (Fig. 5C, arrow). These findings support our notion that myoblast fusion in Drosophila is regulated via both members of the WASP family. WASP and its interacting partner Vrp1 are both essential for myoblast fusion. Thus, we next examined whether scar and vrp1 also interact genetically.
|
37 vrp1f06715 double mutants. Immunostainings of these double mutants with anti-β3-tubulin revealed a dramatically increased myoblast-fusion defect (Fig. 5G) similar to that observed in Arp3 and wasp double mutants.
|
Vrp1 becomes recruited to the tip of filopodia in FCMs, leading to increased F-actin content
To study whether Verprolin is distributed similarly to F-actin during myoblast fusion (Kesper et al., 2007), we generated an anti-Vpr1 antibody and analyzed the subcellular localization of Vrp1 in embryos carrying the rP298 enhancer-trap insertion. The enhancer-trap line rP298 expresses lacZ under the control of the Duf regulatory region, and thus marks all nuclei of the FCs and growing muscles (Nose et al., 1998; Ruiz-Gomez et al., 2000). Vrp1 was recently reported to localize to specific foci in FCMs (Kim et al., 2007); however, we observed that this is only the case in FCMs that have not yet formed a filopodia (Fig. 6A', asterisk). After filopodia formation, however, Vrp1 becomes localized to the tip of the filopodia. In Fig. 6A', the arrowhead points to a dinucleated myotube in which Vrp1 is faintly expressed. Thus, Vrp1 is concentrated like F-actin at the site of cell-cell contact in FCMs, but not at the site of the FCs. To clarify whether the localization of Vrp1 depends on cell contact, we examined the distribution of Vrp1 in an sns-null allele. Although we observed Vrp1 to be still present in sns20-23 (Paululat et al., 1995) embryos, the protein could only be found in discrete foci (Fig. 6B', asterisks). Accordingly, Vrp1 is restricted to the filopodia of FCMs, in which it attaches to an FC/growing myotube. We therefore assume that Vrp1 increases, together with WASP, the formation of F-actin at the tip of the filopodia. The localization of Vrp1 to the filopodia depends on cell-cell contact, as revealed by immunostainings with anti-Vrp1 on sns20-23 single mutants and on wasp3D3-035 Arpschwächling double mutants (Fig. 6B' asterisk; Fig.6C', asterisk and arrow). This further shows that the correct localization of Vrp1 in the double mutant is not disturbed because myoblasts are capable of recognition and adherence. When we applied the anti-Vrp1 antibody to vrpf06715 mutant embryos, no staining was detectable, indicating that no protein is generated in vrp1f06715 embryos. Taken together, we found that Vrp1 becomes restricted to the filopodia formed by the FCMs after successful cell-cell contact.
FCMs fail to fuse after adhesion
To test whether the initial step of recognition and adhesion between FCs and FCMs is indeed not disturbed in Arp3schwächling and wasp3D3-035 single mutants, or in the double mutants, we investigated the distribution of Duf in those mutants. In wild-type embryos, we observed the typical ring-like structure in which Duf is distributed (Fig. 7A, arrowhead). Furthermore, FCMs could be seen contacting growing muscles (Fig. 7A, asterisk). Fig. 7B shows that, in Arp3schwächling mutants, several FCMs successfully attached to a precursor cell, but did not become integrated into the precursor cell (asterisks). Also, in wasp3D3-035 mutants, FCMs were seen to adhere to a growing myotube (Fig. 7C). These findings are not surprising, because the characterization of the Arp3schwächling and wasp3D3-035 mutant phenotypes has already demonstrated that some fusion takes place in both mutants. However, can FCMs that fail to fuse completely in Arp3schwächling wasp3D3-035 double mutants attach to FCs or is the failure of fusion in the double mutant due to a secondary effect, e.g. cell migration? Fig. 7D shows that FCMs still find their target, thereby suggesting that no secondary effect is involved (asterisks).
|
|
Discussion |
|---|
|
TopSummaryIntroductionResultsDiscussionMaterials and MethodsReferences |
|---|
). Our analyses of Arp3, wasp and scar mutants indicate that branching F-actin is essential for myoblast fusion. Based on our double-mutant analyses, we postulate that the WASP-Vrp1 complex promotes branched F-actin formation positively during the second step of myoblast fusion, thereby allowing us to propose a new model for actin regulation during myoblast fusion (see below).
Cell-cell recognition and adhesion occur normally in mutants in which the actin cytoskeleton machinery is affected
This work emanated from the identification of an Arp3-null allele. Fusion is severely disrupted in Arp3schwächling mutants. However, stainings with anti-Duf clearly show that this is not due to a failure in cell-cell recognition and adhesion. For example, FCMs still attach to the site of the growing myotubes where Duf is expressed in Arp3schwächling and wasp3D3-035 mutant embryos. Interestingly, myoblasts also adhere successfully in Arp3schwächling wasp3D3-035 double mutants that fail to fuse completely (compare Fig. 1B and Fig. 4B with Fig. 4C). Duf serves to attract FCMs, which can migrate towards the Duf-expressing source (Ruiz-Gómez et al., 2000). Hence, the ability of FCMs to migrate is a prerequisite for myoblast fusion. The migration of cells, however, also depends on actin-cytoskeleton regulation. Our observations clearly show that the nature of the fusion arrest in Arp3schwächling and wasp3D3-035 single mutants, and Arp3schwächling wasp3D3-035 double mutants, is not due to either the inability of FCMs to migrate nor to a failure of FCs/myotubes and FCMs to recognize and adhere, but rather to a specific defect in cell-cell fusion.
WASP is required for the creation of an open fusion pore, whereas Arp3 promotes the integration of the FCMs into the growing myotube
Electron microscopy analyses on Arp3schwächling and wasp3D3-035 mutants further assisted us to dissect the process in which F-actin formation is required during myoblast fusion. The WASP-Vrp1 complex is involved in the formation of a fusion pore, as reported by Massarwa et al. (Massarwa et al., 2007). In line with their study, we observed that mutations in wasp3D3-035 and wipD30 stop fusion during membrane breakdown, but not after pre-fusion-complex formation, as reported by Kim et al. (Kim et al., 2007). We found that the pre-fusion complex, which has been described to consist of 1.4 vesicles per pre-fusion complex (Estrada et al., 2007), looks identical in both of the mutants as well as in wild-type embryos.
|
|
) and Massarwa et al. (Massarwa et al., 2007) have shown that the localization of WASP to the membrane depends on Vrp1 activity. Thus, the recruitment of WASP presumably leads to an increase of F-actin at the site of fusion. As a result, the formation of a fusion pore is initiated and expands until the FCM becomes finally pulled into the FC/growing myotube.
The Arp2/3 activators WASP and SCAR control F-actin formation during the second step of myoblast fusion, whereas the first fusion step is independent of WASP
Our morphological and statistical analysis on the nuclei of the DA1 muscle suggested that no fusion takes place in Arp3 wasp double mutants. Because wasp3D3-035 mutants should lack the ability to promote F-actin formation and stop fusion, like Arp3schwächling mutants, after precursor formation, this was a surprising result. We therefore examined whether the actin regulator SCAR additionally controls F-actin branching during myoblast fusion. Double-mutant and epistasis experiments of scar and wasp revealed that this was indeed the case. The complete disruption of myoblast fusion in Arp3 wasp double-mutant embryos – despite the presence of maternal wasp and Arp3 – in conjunction with the finding that SCAR is required for myoblast fusion, led us to propose that SCAR and WASP control different steps of myoblast fusion (Fig. 8B). So far, our genetic data suggest that WASP is only required during the second fusion step. This is in line with previous data presented by Massarwa et al. (Massarwa et al., 2007). It further implies that SCAR is essential for the first fusion step. However, myoblast fusion is not disrupted completely in scar37-null mutant embryos. The maternally provided gene product of scar is probably able to compensate for the loss of zygotic scar during myoblast fusion. Nevertheless, scar germline clones with reduced levels of maternal and zygotic SCAR protein show an enhanced myoblast-fusion phenotype (Richardson et al., 2007). Because the loss of maternal scar disrupts oogenesis, it is not possible to eliminate the maternal component of scar completely (Zallen et al., 2002). Hence, further experiments are required to determine whether SCAR controls the first fusion step alone or acts in functional redundancy with an additional factor.
Myoblast fusion in scar vrp1 double mutants was blocked completely. This might indicate that SCAR regulates the first fusion step together with the WASP-interacting partner Vrp1. The Vrp1 protein is expressed from stage 10 onwards, shortly before the first fusion step is initiated. Members of the Verprolin/WIP family have been reported to influence actin polymerization in a WASP-independent manner (reviewed by Anton and Jones, 2006; Aspenström, 2005). It remains to be investigated whether this is also the case during Drosophila myoblast fusion.
In addition to regulating the first fusion step, the activity of SCAR might also be required for the second fusion step. Support for this notion comes from our previous findings that the vertebrate homolog of Kette, HEM2, which is present in a complex with SCAR, is essential for myoblast fusion (Schröter et al., 2004). Kette and WASP have antagonistic functions during myoblast fusion (Schäfer et al., 2007). Because we have previously shown that the expression of WASP in FCs failed to rescue the wasp mutant phenotype, one could assume that the activity of WASP is only required in FCMs (Schäfer et al., 2007). We therefore predict that the polymerization of branching actin filaments might be regulated in a myoblast-type-specific manner (Fig. 8B).
In summary, our observations suggests for the first time that the cellular machinery leading to the formation of F-actin is controlled by a different set of nucleation-promoting factors during the first and second fusion steps. Future studies should now focus on the mechanistical details to reveal how these factors become activated in FCs and FCMs.
|
Materials and Methods |
|---|
|
TopSummaryIntroductionResultsDiscussionMaterials and MethodsReferences |
|---|
), wasp3D3-035/TM3 (Schäfer et al., 2007), scar37/CyO and scark13811/CyO (Zallen et al., 2002). The vrp1f06715/CyO strain was ordered from the Drosophila Stock Collection at the Harvard Medical School. The wipD30 allele was obtained from Eyal Schejfer (Weizman Institute, Rehovot, Israel). We used genomic recombination to generate Arp3schwächling wasp3D3-035, Arp3schwächling wasp3, Arp66BEP3640 wasp3D3-035 and scar37 vrp1f06715 double mutants. The rP298 enhancer-trap line (Nose et al., 1998) was used to label founder cells. All crosses were performed at 25°C.
Immunohistochemistry
Embryos were collected on apple-juice plates and aged at 25°C/18°C. Most embryos were fixed as described previously (Hummel et al., 1997). To visualize the muscle pattern, we used the anti-β3-tubulin antibody (Buttgereit et al., 1996; Leiss et al., 1988) at a dilution of 1:12,000 (for DAB staining) and 1:5000 (for fluorescence staining). To distinguish between balancer (lacZ)-carrying and homozygous mutant embryos, we additionally used the anti-β-galactosidase antibody (Cappel: 1:5000 dilution). The anti-Eve (3C10: 1:30 dilution) antibody was obtained from the Hybridoma Bank. Anti-Duf stainings (1:1000 dilution) were performed as described previously (Kesper et al., 2007). Cy2- and Cy3-conjugated secondary antibodies were purchased from Dianova. Fluorescent images were acquired using a Leica TCSsp2 confocal scanning microscope.
Whole-mount in situ hybridizations were performed as described previously (Tautz and Pfeifle, 1989). The full-length Arp3 cDNA LD35711, which was labeled for RNA in situ hybridizations, were obtained from the DGRC.
Antibody generation
Polyclonal antiserum against Vrp1 was generated by injection of guinea pigs with recombinant HIS-tagged protein corresponding to residues 837-936 of Vrp1 in pETM11 (details available upon request). The resulting guinea pig antiserum (Medprobe) was IgG-purifed on a Protein A column (Pierce) prior to use at 1:1000 for immunohistochemistry.
PCRs and sequencing
The insertion of the EP element was confirmed by inverse PCR. We used CfoI to digest the genomic DNA isolated from Arp66BEP3640, and Pry1 and Pry2 (BDGP) as primer pairs for inverse PCR. This revealed that the EP-element insertion is located 123 bp in front of the ORF of Arp3. To sequence the Arp3 gene in Arp3schwächling mutants, genomic DNA was isolated from homozygous Arp3schwächling mutant embryos and the coding region of Arp3 was amplified by PCR. Sequencing was performed by AGOWA (Berlin). For RT-PCR, total RNA was prepared using TRIzol (Invitrogen) from embryos. We used the OneStep RT-PCR Kit (Qiagen) to amplify a 509-bp spliced and a 674-bp unspliced fragment. We used the following primer pairs: forward primer located at the 5' UTR of LD35711 (5'-CTGGGTTTATCTGCAACTG-3') and reverse primer located within the third exon of LD35711 (3'-GAACGTCTCAAACATTATCTC-5').
EM analysis
Embryos were fixed in 18% glutaraldehyde:heptan (1:1) for 20 minutes. X-Gal staining was used to detect homozygous mutant embryos that were then devitillinized manually in 0.5% formaldehyde/0.2 M HEPES. Embryos were washed three times in PBS for 10 minutes each, and then the PBS was replaced with 1% OsO4 and 0.15% ferrisyanide in PBS for 60 minutes. Embryos were washed three times in H2O for 10 minutes each and incubated with 4% uranylacetate for 60 minutes. Afterwards, embryos were dehydrated in an ethanol series and incubated for 3 hours in Epon (Epoy-embedding kit, Fluka)/Ethanol (1:1). Ultrathin sections were obtained using an Ultracut E microtome (Reichert-Jung) and analyzed with the Hitachi HU-12A electron microscope.
|
Acknowledgments |
|---|
|
Footnotes |
|---|
Present address: Abteilung für Entwicklungsbiologie I, Zentrum für Medizinische Biotechnologie, Universität Duisburg-Essen, Universitätsstr., D-45117 Essen, Germany
|
References |
|---|
|
TopSummaryIntroductionResultsDiscussionMaterials and MethodsReferences |
|---|
Abmayr, S. M., Balagopalan, L., Galletta, B. J. and Hong, S. J. (2005). Myogenesis and muscle development. In Comprehensive Molecular Insect Science. Vol. 2 (ed. L.-I. Gilbert, K. Iatrou and S. Gill), pp. 1-45. Oxford: Pergamon.
Anton, I. M. and Jones, G. E. (2006). WIP: a multifunctional protein involved in actin cytoskeleton regulation. Eur. J. Cell Biol. 85, 295-304.[CrossRef][Medline]
Aspenström, P. (2005). The verprolin family of proteins: regulators of cell morphogenesis and endocytosis. FEBS Lett. 579, 5253-5259.[CrossRef][Medline]
Bate, M. (1990). The embryonic development of larval muscles in Drosophila. Development 110, 791-804.
Baylies, M. K., Bate, M. and Ruiz Gomez, M. (1998). Myogenesis: a view from Drosophila. Cell 93, 921-927.[CrossRef][Medline]
Beckett, K. and Baylies, M. K. (2007). 3D analysis of founder cell and fusion competent myoblast arrangements outlines a new model of myoblast fusion. Dev. Biol. 309, 113-125.[CrossRef][Medline]
Ben-Yaacov, S., Le Borgne, R., Abramson, I., Schweisguth, F. and Schejter, E. D. (2001). Wasp, the Drosophila Wiskott-Aldrich syndrome gene homologue, is required for cell fate decisions mediated by Notch signaling. J. Cell Biol. 152, 1-13.[CrossRef][Medline]
Bour, B. A., Chakravarti, M., West, J. M. and Abmayr, S. M. (2000). Drosophila SNS, a member of the immunoglobulin superfamily that is essential for myoblast fusion. Genes Dev. 14, 1498-1511.
Buttgereit, D., Paululat, A. and Renkawitz-Pohl, R. (1996). Muscle development and attachment to the epidermis is accompanied by expression of beta 3 and beta 1 tubulin isotypes, respectively. Int. J. Dev. Biol. 40, 189-196.[Medline]
Chen, E. H. and Olson, E. N. (2001). Antisocial, an intracellular adaptor protein, is required for myoblast fusion in Drosophila. Dev. Cell 1, 705-715.[CrossRef][Medline]
Chen, E. H. and Olson, E. N. (2004). Towards a molecular pathway for myoblast fusion in Drosophila. Trends Cell Biol. 14, 452-460.[CrossRef][Medline]
Doberstein, S. K., Fetter, R. D., Mehta, A. Y. and Goodman, C. S. (1997). Genetic analysis of myoblast fusion: blown fuse is required for progression beyond the prefusion complex. J. Cell Biol. 136, 1249-1261.
Estrada, B., Maeland, A. D., Gisselbrecht, S. S., Bloor, J. W., Brown, N. H. and Michelson, A. M. (2007). The MARVEL domain protein, Singles Bar, is required for progression past the pre-fusion complex stage of myoblast fusion. Dev. Biol. 307, 328-339.[CrossRef][Medline]
Horsley, V. and Pavlath, G. K. (2004). Forming a multinucleated cell: molecules that regulate myoblast fusion. Cells Tissues Organs 176, 67-78.[CrossRef][Medline]
Hummel, T., Menne, T., Scholz, H., Granderath, S., Giesen, K. and Klambt, C. (1997). CNS midline development in Drosophila. Perspect. Dev. Neurobiol. 4, 357-368.[Medline]
Ibarra, N., Pollitt, A. and Insall, R. H. (2005). Regulation of actin assembly by SCAR/WAVE proteins. Biochem. Soc. Trans. 33, 1243-1246.[CrossRef][Medline]
Kesper, D. A., Stute, C., Buttgereit, D., Kreiskother, N., Vishnu, S., Fischbach, K. F. and Renkawitz-Pohl, R. (2007). Myoblast fusion in Drosophila melanogaster is mediated through a fusion-restricted myogenic-adhesive structure (FuRMAS). Dev. Dyn. 236, 404-415.[CrossRef][Medline]
Kim, S., Shilagardi, K., Zhang, S., Hong, S. N., Sens, K. L., Bo, J., Gonzalez, G. A. and Chen, E. H. (2007). A critical function for the actin cytoskeleton in targeted exocytosis of prefusion vesicles during myoblast fusion. Dev. Cell 12, 571-586.[CrossRef][Medline]
Kreisköther, N., Reichert, N., Buttgereit, D., Hertenstein, A., Fischbach, K. F. and Renkawitz-Pohl, R. (2006). Drosophila Rolling pebbles colocalises and putatively interacts with alpha-Actinin and the Sls isoform Zormin in the Z-discs of the sarcomere and with Dumbfounded/Kirre, alpha-Actinin and Zormin in the terminal Z-discs. J. Muscle Res. Cell Motil. 27, 93-106.[CrossRef][Medline]
Leiss, D., Hinz, U., Gasch, A., Mertz, R. and Renkawitz-Pohl, R. (1988). Beta 3 tubulin expression characterizes the differentiating mesodermal germ layer during Drosophila embryogenesis. Development 104, 525-531.
Machesky, L. M. and Insall, R. H. (1998). Scar1 and the related Wiskott-Aldrich syndrome protein, WASP, regulate the actin cytoskeleton through the Arp2/3 complex. Curr. Biol. 8, 1347-1356.[CrossRef][Medline]
Machesky, L. M., Mullins, R. D., Higgs, H. N., Kaiser, D. A., Blanchoin, L., May, R. C., Hall, M. E. and Pollard, T. D. (1999). Scar, a WASp-related protein, activates nucleation of actin filaments by the Arp2/3 complex. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 96, 3739-3744.
Massarwa, R., Carmon, S., Shilo, B. Z. and Schejter, E. D. (2007). WIP/WASp-based actin-polymerization machinery is essential for myoblast fusion in Drosophila. Dev. Cell 12, 557-569.[CrossRef][Medline]
Menon, S. D. and Chia, W. (2001). Drosophila rolling pebbles: a multidomain protein required for myoblast fusion that recruits D-Titin in response to the myoblast attractant Dumbfounded. Dev. Cell 1, 691-703.[CrossRef][Medline]
Miki, H. and Takenawa, T. (1998). Direct binding of the verprolin-homology domain in N-WASP to actin is essential for cytoskeletal reorganization. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 243, 73-78.[CrossRef][Medline]
Nose, A., Isshiki, T. and Takeichi, M. (1998). Regional specification of muscle progenitors in Drosophila: the role of the msh homeobox gene. Development 125, 215-223.[Abstract]
Paululat, A., Burchard, S. and Renkawitz-Pohl, R. (1995). Fusion from myoblasts to myotubes is dependent on the rolling stone gene (rost) of Drosophila. Development 121, 2611-2620.[Abstract]
Rau, A., Buttgereit, D., Holz, A., Fetter, R., Doberstein, S. K., Paululat, A., Staudt, N., Skeath, J., Michelson, A. M. and Renkawitz-Pohl, R. (2001). rolling pebbles (rols) is required in Drosophila muscle precursors for recruitment of myoblasts for fusion. Development 128, 5061-5073.[Medline]
Richardson, B. E., Beckett, K., Nowak, S. J. and Baylies, M. K. (2007). SCAR/WAVE and ARp2/3 are crucial for cytoskeletal remodeling at the site of myoblast fusion. Development 134, 4357-4367.
Robinson, R. C., Turbedsky, K., Kaiser, D. A., Marchand, J. B., Higgs, H. N., Choe, S. and Pollard, T. D. (2001). Crystal structure of Arp2/3 complex. Science 294, 1679-1684.
Rohatgi, R., Ma, L., Miki, H., Lopez, M., Kirchhausen, T., Takenawa, T. and Kirschner, M. W. (1999). The interaction between N-WASP and the Arp2/3 complex links Cdc42-dependent signals to actin assembly. Cell 97, 221-231.[CrossRef][Medline]
Ruiz-Gomez, M., Coutts, N., Price, A., Taylor, M. V. and Bate, M. (2000). Drosophila dumbfounded: a myoblast attractant essential for fusion. Cell 102, 189-198.[CrossRef][Medline]
Schäfer, G., Weber, S., Holz, A., Bogdan, S., Schumacher, S., Müller, A., Renkawitz-Pohl, R. and Önel, S. F. (2007). The Wiskott-Aldrich syndrome protein (WASP) is essential for myoblast fusion in Drosophila. Dev. Biol. 304, 664-674.[CrossRef][Medline]
Schröter, R. H., Lier, S., Holz, A., Bogdan, S., Klämbt, C., Beck, L. and Renkawitz-Pohl, R. (2004). kette and blown fuse interact genetically during the second fusion step of myogenesis in Drosophila. Development 131, 4501-4509.
Schröter, R. H., Buttgereit, D., Beck, L., Holz, A. and Renkawitz-Pohl, R. (2006). Blown fuse regulates morphogenesis but not myoblast fusion of the circular visceral muscles in Drosophila. Differentiation 74, 1-14.[CrossRef][Medline]
Srinivas, B. P., Woo, J., Leong, W. Y. and Roy, S. (2007). A conserved molecular pathway mediates myoblast fusion in insects and vertebrates. Nat. Genet. 39, 781-786.[CrossRef][Medline]
Strünkelnberg, M., Bonengel, B., Moda, L. M., Hertenstein, A., de Couet, H. G., Ramos, R. G. and Fischbach, K. F. (2001). rst and its paralogue kirre act redundantly during embryonic muscle development in Drosophila. Development 128, 4229-4239.
Takenawa, T. and Miki, H. (2001). WASP and WAVE family proteins: key molecules for rapid rearrangement of cortical actin filaments and cell movement. J. Cell Sci. 114, 1801-1809.[Abstract]
Tautz, D. and Pfeifle, C. (1989). A non-radioactive in situ hybridization method for the localization of specific RNAs in Drosophila embryos reveals translational control of the segmentation gene hunchback. Chromosoma 98, 81-85.[CrossRef][Medline]
Taylor, M. V. (2000). Muscle development: molecules of myoblast fusion. Curr. Biol. 10, R646-R648.[CrossRef][Medline]
Taylor, M. V. (2006). Comparison of muscle development in Drosophila and vertebrates. In Muscle Development in Drosophila (ed. H. Sink), pp. 169-203. New York: Springer, Business Media.
Volkmann, N., Amann, K. J., Stoilova-McPhie, S., Egile, C., Winter, D. C., Hazelwood, L., Heuser, J. E., Li, R., Pollard, T. D. and Hanein, D. (2001). Structure of Arp2/3 complex in its activated state and in actin filament branch junctions. Science 293, 2456-2459.
Zallen, J. A., Cohen, Y., Hudson, A. M., Cooley, L., Wieschaus, E. and Schejter, E. D. (2002). SCAR is a primary regulator of Arp2/3-dependent morphological events in Drosophila. J. Cell Biol. 156, 689-701.
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati 
Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  S. J. Nowak, P. C. Nahirney, A.-K. Hadjantonakis, and M. K. Baylies Nap1-mediated actin remodeling is essential for mammalian myoblast fusion J. Cell Sci., September 15, 2009; 122(18): 3282 - 3293. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. Liu, M. T. Abreu-Blanco, K. C. Barry, E. V. Linardopoulou, G. E. Osborn, and S. M. Parkhurst Wash functions downstream of Rho and links linear and branched actin nucleation factors Development, August 15, 2009; 136(16): 2849 - 2860. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Zhuang, H. Shao, F. Guo, R. Trimble, E. Pearce, and S. M. Abmayr Sns and Kirre, the Drosophila orthologs of Nephrin and Neph1, direct adhesion, fusion and formation of a slit diaphragm-like structure in insect nephrocytes Development, July 15, 2009; 136(14): 2335 - 2344. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. Vasyutina, B. Martarelli, C. Brakebusch, H. Wende, and C. Birchmeier The small G-proteins Rac1 and Cdc42 are essential for myoblast fusion in the mouse PNAS, June 2, 2009; 106(22): 8935 - 8940. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Shelton, K. S. Kocherlakota, S. Zhuang, and S. M. Abmayr The immunoglobulin superfamily member Hbs functions redundantly with Sns in interactions between founder and fusion-competent myoblasts Development, April 1, 2009; 136(7): 1159 - 1168. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Chen, E. Leikina, K. Melikov, B. Podbilewicz, M. M. Kozlov, and L. V. Chernomordik Fusion-pore expansion during syncytium formation is restricted by an actin network J. Cell Sci., November 1, 2008; 121(21): 3619 - 3628. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Berger, G. Schafer, D. A. Kesper, A. Holz, T. Eriksson, R. H. Palmer, L. Beck, C. Klambt, R. Renkawitz-Pohl, and S.-F. Onel WASP and SCAR play distinct roles in activating the Arp2/3 complex during myoblast fusion Development, May 1, 2008; 135(9): e1 - e1. [Full Text]
|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
