Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Accepted manuscripts
    • Issue in progress
    • Latest complete issue
    • Issue archive
    • Archive by article type
    • Special issues
    • Subject collections
    • Cell Scientists to Watch
    • First Person
    • Sign up for alerts
  • About us
    • About JCS
    • Editors and Board
    • Editor biographies
    • Travelling Fellowships
    • Grants and funding
    • Journal Meetings
    • Workshops
    • The Company of Biologists
    • Journal news
  • For authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Aims and scope
    • Presubmission enquiries
    • Fast-track manuscripts
    • Article types
    • Manuscript preparation
    • Cover suggestions
    • Editorial process
    • Promoting your paper
    • Open Access
    • JCS Prize
    • Manuscript transfer network
    • Biology Open transfer
  • Journal info
    • Journal policies
    • Rights and permissions
    • Media policies
    • Reviewer guide
    • Sign up for alerts
  • Contacts
    • Contact JCS
    • Subscriptions
    • Advertising
    • Feedback
    • For library administrators
  • COB
    • About The Company of Biologists
    • Development
    • Journal of Cell Science
    • Journal of Experimental Biology
    • Disease Models & Mechanisms
    • Biology Open

User menu

  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Cell Science
  • COB
    • About The Company of Biologists
    • Development
    • Journal of Cell Science
    • Journal of Experimental Biology
    • Disease Models & Mechanisms
    • Biology Open

supporting biologistsinspiring biology

Journal of Cell Science

  • Log in
Advanced search

RSS   Twitter  Facebook   YouTube  

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Accepted manuscripts
    • Issue in progress
    • Latest complete issue
    • Issue archive
    • Archive by article type
    • Special issues
    • Subject collections
    • Cell Scientists to Watch
    • First Person
    • Sign up for alerts
  • About us
    • About JCS
    • Editors and Board
    • Editor biographies
    • Travelling Fellowships
    • Grants and funding
    • Journal Meetings
    • Workshops
    • The Company of Biologists
    • Journal news
  • For authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Aims and scope
    • Presubmission enquiries
    • Fast-track manuscripts
    • Article types
    • Manuscript preparation
    • Cover suggestions
    • Editorial process
    • Promoting your paper
    • Open Access
    • JCS Prize
    • Manuscript transfer network
    • Biology Open transfer
  • Journal info
    • Journal policies
    • Rights and permissions
    • Media policies
    • Reviewer guide
    • Sign up for alerts
  • Contacts
    • Contact JCS
    • Subscriptions
    • Advertising
    • Feedback
    • For library administrators
Research Article
Genetic identification of intracellular trafficking regulators involved in Notch-dependent binary cell fate acquisition following asymmetric cell division
Stéphanie Le Bras, Christine Rondanino, Géraldine Kriegel-Taki, Aurore Dussert, Roland Le Borgne
Journal of Cell Science 2012 125: 4886-4901; doi: 10.1242/jcs.110171
Stéphanie Le Bras
1CNRS, UMR 6061, Institut Génétique et Développement de Rennes, 35043 Rennes, France
2Université Rennes 1, UEB, IFR 140, Faculté de Médecine, 35043 Rennes, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: stephanie.lebras@univ-rennes1.fr roland.leborgne@univ-rennes1.fr
Christine Rondanino
1CNRS, UMR 6061, Institut Génétique et Développement de Rennes, 35043 Rennes, France
2Université Rennes 1, UEB, IFR 140, Faculté de Médecine, 35043 Rennes, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Géraldine Kriegel-Taki
1CNRS, UMR 6061, Institut Génétique et Développement de Rennes, 35043 Rennes, France
2Université Rennes 1, UEB, IFR 140, Faculté de Médecine, 35043 Rennes, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Aurore Dussert
1CNRS, UMR 6061, Institut Génétique et Développement de Rennes, 35043 Rennes, France
2Université Rennes 1, UEB, IFR 140, Faculté de Médecine, 35043 Rennes, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Roland Le Borgne
1CNRS, UMR 6061, Institut Génétique et Développement de Rennes, 35043 Rennes, France
2Université Rennes 1, UEB, IFR 140, Faculté de Médecine, 35043 Rennes, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: stephanie.lebras@univ-rennes1.fr roland.leborgne@univ-rennes1.fr
  • Article
  • Figures & tables
  • Supp info
  • Info & metrics
  • PDF + SI
  • PDF
Loading

Summary

Notch signalling is involved in numerous cellular processes during development and throughout adult life. Although ligands and receptors are largely expressed in the whole organism, activation of Notch receptors only takes place in a subset of cells and/or tissues and is accurately regulated in time and space. Previous studies have demonstrated that endocytosis and recycling of both ligands and/or receptors are essential for this regulation. However, the precise endocytic routes, compartments and regulators involved in the spatiotemporal regulation are largely unknown. In order to identify intracellular trafficking regulators of Notch signalling, we have undertaken a tissue-specific dsRNA genetic screen of candidates potentially involved in endocytosis and recycling within the endolysosomal pathway. dsRNA against 418 genes was induced in the Drosophila melanogaster sensory organ lineage in which Notch signalling regulates binary cell fate acquisition. Gain or loss of Notch signalling phenotypes were observed in adult sensory organs for 113 of them. Furthermore, 26 genes were found to regulate the steady state localisation of Notch, Sanpodo, a Notch co-factor, and/or Delta in the pupal lineage. In particular, we identified 20 genes with previously unknown function in D. melanogaster intracellular trafficking. Among them, we identified CG2747 and we show that it regulates the localisation of clathrin adaptor AP-1 complex, a negative regulator of Notch signalling. Together, our results further demonstrate the essential function of intracellular trafficking in regulating Notch-signalling-dependent binary cell fate acquisition and constitute an additional step toward the elucidation of the routes followed by Notch receptor and ligands during signalling.

Introduction

Notch cell-cell signalling is required in a vast majority of developmental processes and during the adult life of many organisms. It regulates cell fate specification as well as stem cell behaviour and defects can lead to numerous developmental pathologies and cancers underlying its crucial role (reviewed by Gridley, 2003; Miele et al., 2006). The challenging question is to understand the mechanisms allowing one cell to act as a signalling cell and the other one as the receiving cell, when both cells can potentially express both ligands and receptors. Although it can be performed through a spatial and temporal regulation of their expression, DSL (Delta, Serrate, Lag2) ligand and Notch receptor differential expression could not be sufficient to explain the subtle directionality of Notch signalling. In this context, regulation of the availability of both receptors and DSL ligands at the cell surface appears crucial to ensure a proper Notch signalling activation. Therefore ligand and receptor post-translational modifications and trafficking are emerging as crucial regulatory mechanisms.

Several lines of evidence suggest that endocytic trafficking of DSL ligands enhances their signalling activity while receptor trafficking insures their steady state level at the cell surface thereby regulating their availability for ligand binding (reviewed by Bray, 2006; Fürthauer and González-Gaitán, 2009; Kopan and Ilagan, 2009; Le Borgne, 2006; Weinmaster and Fischer, 2011; Yamamoto et al., 2010). Although recycling of DSL ligands is necessary to produce an active DSL ligand, the nature of this maturation is still poorly characterised and two models are actually favoured: endocytosis and pulling forces (Klueg and Muskavitch, 1999; Nichols et al., 2007; Windler and Bilder, 2010) versus endocytosis and recycling (Benhra et al., 2010; Emery et al., 2005; Jafar-Nejad et al., 2005; Le Borgne and Schweisguth, 2003; Rajan et al., 2009; Wang and Struhl, 2004). The cellular context dependence could account for these two non-mutually exclusive models and the Drosophila melanogaster sensory organ lineage, in which Notch unidirectional signalling is the only pathway involved (Heitzler and Simpson, 1991), represents an interesting study model in which the signal sending and receiving cells are easily distinguishable.

Each sensory organ, present on the adult D. melanogaster notum, is derived from a single precursor cell (pI), which undergoes a stereotyped series of four asymmetric cell divisions to generate five different cells, four composing the mechanosensory bristle and a glial cell (Fig. 1A,B). During each division, Notch signalling is involved in cell fate acquisition. For example, Notch is inhibited in the pI daughter cell, which adopts the pIIb cell identity and eventually activates Notch signalling in the adjacent daughter cell becoming the pIIa cell. Although data from different laboratories have emphasised the role of intracellular trafficking in the uni-directionality of Notch signalling between these two daughter cells (Benhra et al., 2011; Benhra et al., 2010; Berdnik et al., 2002; Coumailleau et al., 2009; Couturier et al., 2012; Djiane et al., 2011; Emery et al., 2005; Gallagher and Knoblich, 2006; Hutterer and Knoblich, 2005; Jafar-Nejad et al., 2005; Langevin et al., 2005; Rajan et al., 2009; Roegiers et al., 2005; Tong et al., 2010), little is known and understood about the regulators and membrane compartments involved in this process during the pI mitosis and/or in each of its daughter cells. Nonetheless, some recent data have emphasised the importance of a pI-daughter-cell-specific intracellular trafficking of Delta, Notch and/or a Drosophila Notch co-factor, Sanpodo (Spdo) (O'Connor-Giles and Skeath, 2003). In the signal sending pIIb cell, both basal to apical transcytosis of Delta mediated by Neuralized (see above and Benhra et al., 2010) and its trafficking toward an apical Actin Rich Structure (ARS) driven by WASp and the Arp2/3 complex (Rajan et al., 2009) are required for proper Notch signalling activation. While in the receiving cell, the clathrin adaptor complex AP-1 was genetically shown to be required for the correct localisation of Notch and Spdo (Benhra et al., 2011).

Fig. 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 1.

Sensory organ lineage and screen results. (A) Diagram of the adult sensory organ composed of two external cells (shaft and socket) and two internal cells (sheath and neuron). (B) Scheme of the cell precursor pI pupal lineage leading to the specification of the adult sensory organ cells and one apoptotic glial cell after four asymmetric cell divisions. In A and B, blue nuclei indicate cells responding to Notch signalling and red nuclei indicate cells sending Notch signals. (C–F). Examples of Notch-like bristle phenotype screened for, in the dsRNA genetic screen induced in the Drosophila notum. (D′,F′) Scheme of putative pI pupal lineages in case of a loss (D′) or gain (F′) of Notch signalling in all or some of the asymmetric cell divisions. (G) Numbers of candidates with dsRNA-induced adult phenotypes for each screen category (dark grey box: candidates with phenotype; light grey box: known Notch regulators with phenotype). Numbers into brackets indicate candidate genes/known Notch regulators screened in each category.

In order to identify novel regulators of the intracellular trafficking of Notch signalling major components, we have undertaken a tissue-specific double-strand RNA (dsRNA) genetic screen of 418 genes potentially involved in endocytosis and/or recycling within the endolysosomal pathway. To validate our in vivo Notch-specific strategy, 50 previously known Notch signalling regulators were screened, including 24 for which the function has not yet been studied during sensory organ lineage development. We took advantage of the fact that the genetic impairment of Notch signalling directly affects the development of external sensory organs and therefore allows for adult phenotype screening (Hartenstein and Posakony, 1990). Among the 113 Notch regulators identified based on adult phenotype, 61 were screened for, and 26 were found to cause a change in the steady state localisation of Notch, Sanpodo and/or Delta, in the pupal sensory organ lineage. In particular, we identified genes with previously unknown function in intracellular trafficking in Drosophila melanogaster such as CG27247 a regulator of AP-1 localisation, CG7787 putatively involved in the recycling pathway and members of the Tetraspanin family.

Results

Principle and validation of gene silencing-inducible screen

To screen specifically in the sensory organ lineage, we made use of a well-characterised and previously described dsRNA in vivo strategy (Mummery-Widmer et al., 2009). Taking advantage of the GAL4–UAS binary expression system (Brand and Perrimon, 1993), we induced gene silencing of selected genes specifically in the notum where the sensory organs develop. To do so, transgenic females carrying GAL4 under the control of a sensory organ promoter were crossed with males carrying an upstream activating sequence (UAS)–dsRNA transgenic construct. In the F1 progeny, GAL4 specifically activates the UAS and eventually induces gene silencing in the fly notum during sensory organ development. For each cross, two experimenters analysed at least 20 F1 progenies blindly. In order to identify specific regulators of Notch signalling, we scored for bristle phenotype on the notum (Fig. 1D–F). While a loss of bristle and/or double shafts without a socket cell reflects a loss of Notch signalling in the sensory organ lineage (Fig. 1D,D′), an excess of socket cells and/or double shafts with socket cells is correlated with a gain of Notch signalling in the sensory organ lineage (Fig. 1F,F′). As Notch signalling is also involved in the process of pI specification, we could, additionally, score for an excess of sensory organs reflecting a loss of Notch signalling in lateral inhibition (Fig. 1E). A genome-wide dsRNA screen was previously performed to identify regulators of Notch signalling in the sensory organs in which one sensory organ driver-GAL4 was used: pannier (pnr)–GAL4 (Mummery-Widmer et al., 2009). In this previous screen, we noticed that the phenotype observed for 360 (86%) of our genes could not be assessed as expression of the dsRNA induced either lethality or a morphological defect of the notum. This observation led us to modulate the strength of gene silencing by placing the F1 progenies at 18, 25 or 29°C. As the efficiency of the GAL4–UAS system is partially temperature sensitive (Mondal et al., 2007), this allows inducing lower (at 18°C) or higher (at 29°C) dsRNA expression. Additionally, to circumvent any technical bias of GAL4–UAS-induced phenotype and further describe the Notch-like phenotype, we independently used two GAL4 transgenic constructs which both drive expression in the notum during development: apterous (ap)–GAL4 (Calleja et al., 1996) and scabrous (sca)–GAL4 (Mlodzik et al., 1990).

In order to validate our Notch signalling-specific strategy (Knoblich, 2010), we choose to screen 50 known Notch signalling regulators and observe the same phenotype than previously described for 24 of them (see supplementary material Table S1). Although we could not reproduce the Notch loss-of-function-like phenotype of only two known Notch regulators, aristaless (Kojima et al., 2005) and Liquid facets (Wang and Struhl, 2004), our data indicate that our strategy allows specific screening for Notch regulators in the sensory organ lineage as previously described (Mummery-Widmer et al., 2009). Interestingly, we also observed a bristle phenotype for 14 of the 24 known Notch regulators whose function in the sensory organ lineage had not been previously described. Not all the known Notch signalling regulators appear to be involved in the Drosophila sensory organ lineage, which further highlights the cellular context dependence of Notch signalling in vivo as previously reported (Fuwa et al., 2006). For example, dsRNA against Kurtz and Nedd4 did not induce an adult phenotype while they are negative regulators of Notch signalling in the Drosophila wing vein (Mukherjee et al., 2005; Sakata et al., 2004).

Identification of Notch signalling regulators

To identify intracellular trafficking regulators of Notch signalling in Drosophila melanogaster sensory organs, we specifically screened for 368 genes from the endolysosomal pathway (see supplementary material Table S2). We selected these genes among members of intracellular trafficking regulator families mostly identified from yeast genetics and involved in different trafficking aspects such as, coat components [clathrin mediated endocytosis (Maldonado-Báez and Wendland, 2006)], lipid microdomain organisation [non-clathrin mediated endocytosis (Simons and Gerl, 2010)], cytoskeleton [actin, myosin and/or microtubules (Hehnly and Stamnes, 2007)], small GTPases, ubiquitylation/deubiquitylation factors involved in vesicle targeting (Murphy et al., 2009; Wennerberg et al., 2005), Endosomal Sorting Complex Required for Transport (ESCRT) complexes (Henne et al., 2011), membrane recognition and/or fusion regulators [such as SNAP receptors, SNAREs (Malsam et al., 2008), Exocyst (Hsu et al., 2004)] and ATPases (Forgac, 2007). We also based our selection on gene ontology (GO) annotation from FlyBase (using the GO terms: endocytosis, endosomal sorting, secretion) and selected putative orthologue(s) of traffic regulators identified in a Caenorhabditis elegans genetic screen (Balklava et al., 2007) or mammal proteomic screens (Baust et al., 2008; Baust et al., 2006). Noteworthy, the molecular function of 54 of these genes has not yet been defined in D. melanogaster (‘novel unknown function’ category in supplementary material Table S2).

To perform our screen we used 716 dsRNA lines, which represent the 368 candidates and 50 known Notch regulators, as we systematically screened with up to five different dsRNA lines, when available, in order to circumvent any effect due to the dsRNA construct insertion site. Expression of 264/716 (36.8%) dsRNA lines induced a bristle phenotype or lethality with either both or one of the GAL4 lines in our screen conditions. When two or more dsRNA lines induced a bristle phenotype, it was consistently the same gain or loss of Notch signalling phenotype(s), depending on the candidate, as we never observed opposite bristle phenotype between different dsRNA lines against the same candidate.

In order to confirm and validate the results, we reproduced the screen, with all the positive and lethal dsRNA hits and some negative ones as controls, using the same GAL4 lines and up to two additional GAL4 also driving expression in the notum: Eq–GAL4 (Pi et al., 2001) and/or pnr–GAL4 (Calleja et al., 1996). Among the dsRNA lines individually crossed with these several GAL4 lines, we observed that 175/264 (66.3%) dsRNA lines, representing 113 candidates, induced a reproducible bristle phenotype with one or more GAL4 (see supplementary material Table S2). To further validate our results, we had included 52 dsRNA lines, obtained from the National Institute of Genetics Fly Stock Center (NIG-Fly) or the Transgenic RNAi Project (TRIP), which target different part of the candidate RNA sequence than the dsRNA lines from the Vienna Drosophila RNAi Center (VDRC). In doing so, we confirmed the specific Notch-like bristle or lack of phenotype observed with the VDRC dsRNA lines (see supplementary material Table S2).

In the end, we firmly identified 113 Notch regulators in the sensory organ lineage (Table 1), which belong to the different screening categories that we initially defined (Fig. 1G). Specifically, we identified 77 previously unknown regulators of the Notch signalling pathway with a role in the sensory organ lineage. These regulators belong to all our initial screen categories, which cover various aspects of intracellular trafficking. The vast majority of the observed phenotypes resemble those of a loss of Notch signalling. Nevertheless, phenotypes similar to gain-of-Notch signalling were observed for 20 genes from various screen categories including members of coat components (AP-1 and AP-2) or ESCRT complexes (0, I and III). Both AP-1 and AP-2 complexes had previously been identified as regulators of Spdo trafficking and eventually as negative regulators of Notch signalling pathway during binary cell fate decision (Benhra et al., 2011; Berdnik et al., 2002; Tong et al., 2010). Therefore, our genetic screen clearly led to the identification of potential intracellular trafficking regulators directly involved in the regulation of Notch signalling via its major components.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Complete list of positive hits from the genetic dsRNA screen

Steady-state localisation of Notch, Sanpodo, Delta and cell fate identity

A Notch-like adult sensory organ phenotype could be due to a defect in Notch signalling component traffic and/or induced by unrelated defects such as in cell fate determinant segregation, cell polarity, cell cycle control and/or general intracellular trafficking. Out of the 113 candidates that we genetically identified as Notch signalling regulators in the sensory organ lineage, we wanted to identify those involved in the intracellular trafficking of the major components of Notch signalling: Delta, Notch and its co-factor Spdo. This study was made feasible as they present a specific steady-state pattern of subcellular localisation in the sensory organ pupal lineage during pI mitosis and at the pI daughter cell stage (Fig. 2A–F′″) (also see Benhra et al., 2010). In a wild-type lineage, while both apical Delta and Notch are mostly localised at the cortex (Fig. 2A″,A′″, D″,D′″), basolateral Delta is found in vesicles in mitotic pI and pIIb/pIIa cells (Fig. 2B″,C″,E″,F″). Spdo has a more dynamic pattern of localisation: cytoplasmic in the mitotic pI (Fig. 2A′–C′), its localisation becomes asymmetric in the pI daughter cells. While Spdo is enriched along the apicobasal interface of pI daughter cells (Fig. 2D′–F′), Spdo is mostly localised in vesicles in the anterior pIIb cell but at the basolateral plasma membrane in the posterior pIIa cell (Fig. 2E′). Changes in Notch, Spdo and/or Delta localisation could either originate from an aberrant cell-fate identity acquisition in the lineage (two pIIb or pIIa-like cells) or reflect trafficking defect(s) causing a defective Notch signalling pathway. As a proof of principle, we recently demonstrated that the clathrin adaptor complex AP-1, identified in this screen, controls Spdo and Notch trafficking in the sensory organ lineage. In particular, a lack of AP-1 function induces Spdo and Notch subcellular localisation changes and an adult gain of Notch signalling phenotype (Benhra et al., 2011). Similarly, loss of Neur, Sec15 or Arp2/3 functions induce changes in Spdo and/or Delta subcellular localisation correlated with adult loss of Notch signalling phenotypes (Benhra et al., 2010; Jafar-Nejad et al., 2005; Le Borgne and Schweisguth, 2003; Rajan et al., 2009; Roegiers et al., 2005).

Fig. 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 2.

The steady-state pattern of localisation of Sanpodo, Delta and Notch. Localisation of Sanpodo (green), Delta (red) and Notch (blue) in wild-type pI dividing cell (A–C′″) and at the pI daughter-cell stage (D–F′″). A–A′″, D–D′″ show apical and B–B′″, E–E′″ basal confocal slices. C–C′″, F–F′″ show orthogonal sections of cells from A–B′″ and D–E′″, respectively. The asymmetric localisation of Spdo in endosomes in the anterior cell, and in endosomes and at the basolateral cortex in the posterior cell reflects the differential cell identity of the pI daughter cells (E′). In all panels, anterior is left; scale bar: 5 µm.

Regulators of Notch, Sanpodo and/or Delta subcellular localisation identified in the screen

Among the 113 Notch regulators we identified, we decided to analyse those that were not previously known to cause subcellular localisation changes and/or that do not have described function in cell polarity or in asymmetric cell division (see supplementary material Table S3). Among the 61 genes that we screened for a dsRNA-induced change in Delta, Notch and/or Spdo steady-state localisation (using one dsRNA line for each), 32 did not cause any visible defect while three genes (gigas, CG31048 and CG8435) caused a lack of pI specification (revealed by an absence of Spdo staining, our sensory organ identity marker), which explains the observed adult bristle loss phenotype (see supplementary material Table S3). Twenty-six genes caused a phenotype of Notch, Spdo and/or Delta mis-localisation at the pI and/or pI daughter cell stage (we used the threshold of at least three, out of 20 analysed, sensory organs presenting the same phenotype on two different nota). Although a wide range of phenotypes was observed, they can be subdivided into three major categories (Table 2; Figs 3–5).

Fig. 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 3.

Examples of accumulation at pI daughter cell contacts. Localisation of Sanpodo (green), Delta (red) and Notch (blue) in pI daughter cells of ChmpdsRNA (A–B′″), CG10341dsRNA (C–D′″) and Cullin-3dsRNA (Cul-3; E–F′″). A–A′″, C–C′″ show apical, and E–E′″ basal confocal slices. B–B′″, D–D′″ and F–F′″ show orthogonal sections of cells from A–A′″, C–C′″ and E–E′″, respectively. In ChmpdsRNA, Spdo accumulates subapically (B′, arrowhead) and at the apical interface (A′, arrow), between the two daughter cells, with Delta and Notch (A″,A′″, arrows). In CG10341dsRNA, Spdo, Delta and Notch accumulate at the apical interface between the two daughter cells (C′–C′″ and D′–D′″, arrows). In Cullin-3dsRNA, Spdo and Delta specifically accumulate at the lateral membrane between the pI daughter cells (E′,E″ and F′,F″, arrows). In all panels, anterior is left; scale bar: 5 µm.

Fig. 5.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 5.

Examples of apical and/or basal accumulation. Localisation of Sanpodo (green), Delta (red) and Notch (blue) in pI daughter cells of Exo84dsRNA (A–A′″), Rab35dsRNA (B–C′″) and Tsp68CdsRNA (D–D′″). B–B′″ show apical and A–A′″, C–C′″, D–D′″ basal confocal slices. In Exo84dsRNA, Spdo and Delta are found at the basolateral membrane or in close proximity to the plasma membrane of both daughter cells (A′–A″, arrows), a lineage somewhat reminiscent of two pIIa-like cells. In Rab35dsRNA, Spdo, Delta and Notch accumulate at the apical side of the anterior daughter cell (B′–B′″, arrowheads). Spdo is also found in basal vesicles in both daughter cells (C′, arrows), a lineage reminiscent of two pIIb-like cells. In Tsp68CdsRNA, Delta can be found at the basolateral cortex of epidermal cells (D″, arrowheads). In all panels, anterior is left; scale bar: 5 µm.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Complete list of genes that affect Notch, Sanpodo and/or Delta subcellular localisation at the pI daughter cell stage after dsRNA induction

(1) Accumulation at pI daughter cell contact (Fig. 3). An excess of Spdo is seen subapically between pI daughter cells of CG2747dsRNA, Vacuolar protein sorting 28 (Vps28dsRNA) and Chmp1dsRNA (Fig. 3B′, arrowhead; Fig. 6B′, arrowhead; and data not shown). We also observed an accumulation of Spdo, Notch and Delta at the apical interface between the pI daughter cells in CG2747dsRNA, Signal transducing adaptor molecule (StamdsRNA), Vps28dsRNA, Chmp1dsRNA, Vps2dsRNA and CG10341dsRNA (Fig. 3A′–A′″,C′–C′″,D′–D′″, arrows; Fig. 6A′–A′″, arrows; and data not shown). Finally, we detected an accumulation of Spdo and Delta at the lateral membrane between pI daughter cells of CG7787dsRNA and Cullin-3 (Guftagu/Cul-3dsRNA) (Fig. 3E′,E″,F′,F″, arrows; and data not shown). Strikingly, accumulation of Spdo subapically and/or, with Notch and Delta, at the apical interface between pI daughter cells correlates with a Notch gain-of-function adult phenotype, while accumulation of Spdo and Delta at the lateral membrane between pI daughter cells is associated with Notch loss-of-function adult phenotype (Table 2).

Fig. 6.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 6.

CG2747 regulates clathrin adaptor AP-1 intracellular localisation. (A–B′″). Localisation of Sanpodo (green), Delta (red) and Notch (blue) in pI daughter cells of CG2747dsRNA. A–A′″ show apical confocal slice and B–B′″ show orthogonal section of cells from A–A′″. Spdo accumulates subapically (B′, arrowhead) and at the interface between the two daughter cells with Delta and Notch (A′–A′″, arrows). (C) Excess of double shafts with sockets cells (arrows) observed on a CG2747dsRNA notum. This adult phenotype is reminiscent of gain of Notch signalling. (D–F″). Partial loss of HEATR5B staining (p200, green) in the median part of the notum where UAS–CG2747dsRNA is induced by ap–GAL4 (D,D′ left side, E–E″) compared with the posterior part of the notum where ap–GAL4 does not drive UAS expression (D,D′ right side, asterisk, F–F″). E–F′ are higher magnifications of D–D′, taken at the level of adherens junctions (DE-CAD, red in E,E′ and F,F′). (G) Loss of AP-1γ staining in the median part of the notum where UAS–CG2747dsRNA is induced by ap–GAL4 (right side) compared with the anterior head in which ap–GAL4 does not drive UAS expression (left side, star). (H–H″) HEATR5B staining is not affected in AP-47SHE11 mutant cells (red, H and H″, inside dotted lines). Mutant cells are identified by the absence of nls–GFP (H, blue, inside dotted line). H–H″ are confocal slices taken at the level of adherens junctions (DE-CAD, green in H and H′). In panels A–B′″, D–H″, anterior is left. Scale bar: 5 µm (A–B′″,G), 200 µm (D,D′) and 15 µm&#146>;(E–F″,H–H″).

(2) Vesicle excess (Fig. 4). A lineage reminiscent of two pIIb-like cells, in which Spdo is present in intracellular basal compartments in both daughter cells and absent from the cortex, is observed in specifically Rac1-associated protein 1 (Sra-1dsRNA), Origin recognition complex subunit 6 (Orc-6dsRNA), peanut (pnutdsRNA), Septin 5 (Sep5dsRNA), Septin 2 (Sep2dsRNA), Rab35dsRNA, Cul-3dsRNA, Vha16-1dsRNA and Vha16-2dsRNA (Fig. 4B′, arrows, Fig. 5C′, arrows, and data not shown). This mislocalisation is consistently associated with Notch loss-of-function phenotypes (Table 2). In a second group of phenotypes, we observed, in both pI daughter cells, enlarged basal vesicles that are positive for Spdo, Delta and Notch in CG7787dsRNA, StamdsRNA, Vps2dsRNA or Vacuolar protein sorting 4 (Vps4dsRNA) (Fig. 4D′–D′″, arrows; and data not shown). Accumulation of Spdo, Delta and Notch in enlarged intracellular compartments is predominantly associated with Notch gain-of-function phenotypes (Table 2). Finally, an excess of Spdo- and Delta-positive basal compartments is observed in the anterior cell and towards the anterior in the posterior cell in Receptor mediated endocytosis 8 (Rme-8dsRNA), while only in the anterior cell in l(2)dtldsRNA (Fig. 4F′–F′″, arrows; and data not shown) and correlates with Notch loss-of-function phenotype (Table 2).

Fig. 4.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 4.

Examples of excess vesicles in pI daughter cells. Localisation of Sanpodo (green), Delta (red) and Notch (blue) in pI daughter cells of Vha16-2dsRNA (A–B′″), Vps4dsRNA (C–D′″) and l(2)dtldsRNA (E–F′″). A–A′″, C–C′″, E–E′″ show apical and B–B′″, D–D′″ and F–F′″ basal confocal slices. In Vha16-2dsRNA, Spdo is found in basal vesicles in both daughter cells (B′, arrows), a lineage reminiscent of two pIIb-like cells. In Vps4dsRNA, Spdo, Delta and Notch colocalise in enlarged basal vesicles in both daughter cells (D′–D′″, arrows). In l(2)dtldsRNA, an excess of Spdo-, Delta- and Notch-positive basal compartments is observed in the anterior cell (F′–F′″, arrows). In all panels, anterior is left; scale bar: 5 µm.

(3) Apical and/or basolateral accumulation (Fig. 5). Spdo and Delta are found at the basolateral membrane or in close vicinity to the plasma membrane of both daughter cells in StamdsRNA, Syntaxin 7 (Syx7dsRNA), Exo84dsRNA, Sec6dsRNA and Sec5dsRNA (Fig. 5A′,A″, arrows; and data not shown). This mislocalisation is somewhat reminiscent of a two pIIa-like cells lineage and consistently associated with Notch gain-of-function phenotypes (Table 2). We also observed an accumulation of Spdo, and to a certain extent Delta and Notch, at the apical side of the anterior daughter cells of Sep2dsRNA and Rab35dsRNA (Fig. 5B′–B′″, arrowheads; and data not shown), associated with a Notch loss-of-function phenotype (Table 2).

Apart from these sensory organ lineage-specific phenotypes, we observed an accumulation of Delta at the basolateral cortex of surrounding epidermal cells in O-fucosyltranferase 1 [O-fut1dsRNA; a known Notch trafficking regulator (Sasamura et al., 2007)], Tetraspanin 47F (Tsp47FdsRNA) and Tetraspanin 68C (Tsp68CdsRNA; Fig. 5D″, arrowheads; and data not shown). In all cases, this phenotype is correlated with a lateral inhibition defect (excess of pI on the pupal notum based on Spdo staining; Table 1), which suggests a loss of Notch signalling during pI specification. This accumulation of Delta at the basolateral cortex could result from either a decrease in Delta internalisation or an increase in Delta exocytosis to the basolateral membrane. To test if basolateral Delta endocytosis could be affected, we performed a 15 min pulse-chase labelling experiment (Benhra et al., 2010) to monitor Delta internalisation in living pupae epidermal cells but did not observe any endocytosis failure (data not shown). These results raise the possibility that O-fut1, Tsp68C and Tsp47F could regulate, directly or not, Delta basolateral exocytosis.

All together, our genetic and cellular results clearly validate the essential function of intracellular trafficking in regulating Notch-signalling-dependent binary cell fate acquisition. Indeed, we identified 26 genes for which a Notch signalling adult phenotype is associated with a change in intracellular localisation of major Notch signalling components after the first asymmetric cell division.

CG2747 regulates clathrin adaptor AP-1 intracellular localisation

Among the genes isolated in the genetic and cellular screen, CG2747dsRNA phenocopies the loss of AP-1 function (Benhra et al., 2011). Indeed, we observed a subapical accumulation of Spdo (Fig. 6B′, arrowhead) and an accumulation of Spdo, Delta and Notch at the apical interface between pI daughter cells (Fig. 6A–B′″, arrows). To further validate the specificity of the phenotype induced by dsRNA, we used two independent dsRNA lines obtained from the NIG-Fly and TRIP Centers (lines 2747R-3 and BL29322, respectively), which target different regions of the transcript (regions 1081–1612 and 407–906 of the transcript CG2747-RD, respectively), and observed the same phenotype (data not shown). We also observed an excess of socket cells and/or double shafts with socket cells with both dsRNA lines (Fig. 6C, arrows; and data not shown), which is reminiscent of Notch signalling gain-of-function phenotype observed in AP-1 loss of function (Benhra et al., 2011).

Although CG2747 function has not yet been studied in D. melanogaster, it belongs to the highly conserved HEAT repeat-containing protein 5 (HEATR5) family (Fernández and Payne, 2006), previously shown to physically interact with the ear-domain of murine γ-adaptin subunit of the AP-1 complex (Lui et al., 2003). For instance CG2747 shares 49% of sequence identities with the Homo sapiens HEATR5B and when we used the p200 antibody against the mammal HEATR5B (Hirst et al., 2005), we observed a staining in intracellular vesicles and at the junction of wild-type notum epithelial cells (Fig. 6F,F″). In the area of a notum where CG2747dsRNA is induced, p200 staining is greatly reduced (Fig. 6E,E″ compared to Fig. 6F,F″), suggesting that the mammal antibody recognises the Drosophila protein. Furthermore, it was demonstrated in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, that Laap1, sole member of the HEATR5 family, is necessary for proper AP-1 intracellular localisation (Fernández and Payne, 2006). To investigate whether CG2747 shares the same function in D. melanogaster, we analysed the localisation of AP-1 on the pupal notum. AP-1γ staining is greatly reduced in the region of the notum where UAS–CG2747dsRNA expression is induced in comparison with the anterior head in which the ap–GAL4 driver is not active (Fig. 6G). In the converse experiment, we observed that p200 staining is not affected in AP-47 (gene encoding the mu subunit of AP-1 complex) homozygote mutant cells (Fig. 6H–H″). Thus CG2747 localisation is independent of AP-1 activity. We concluded that CG2747dsRNA reduces the level of CG2747 at a sufficient degree to prevent AP-1γ membrane localisation and phenocopies the AP-1 cellular and adult phenotypes. All these results strongly support the model in which CG2747 is necessary for AP-1 proper intracellular localisation and function in Drosophila.

Discussion

Our dsRNA genetic screen, performed in D. melanogaster notum using the GAL4–UAS system, allowed us to specifically identify 113 Notch signalling regulators among 418 candidates chosen for previously described or suggested function in intracellular trafficking (Table 1). Importantly, up to 76% of the regulators we identified were not found in a similar genetic screen performed at a genome-wide level (Mummery-Widmer et al., 2009). Our study clearly shows that using multiple GAL4 drivers and three different temperatures increases the efficiency of such dsRNA genetic screen as it allows identifying optimal dsRNA technical conditions for each construct. In particular, using different GAL4 drivers limit the false positive or negative results observed when the driver itself induces morphological defects and/or when the expression of the dsRNA induces lethality or notum morphological defects.

Recovering almost 30% of positive hits in a screen is unusual. We interpret this high number first as a reflection of the tight interconnection between membrane traffic and both Delta and Notch signalling to ultimately ensure the proper spatiotemporal control of the pathway. Second, this high number is also explained by the fact that many regulators are acting as protein complexes (APs, ESCRTs, Exocysts, ATPases, septins etc.). This property could be used to confirm the specificity of the dsRNA effect, as inactivation of gene products belonging to the same protein complex is expected to give similar phenotype. If this prediction is fully fulfilled for AP-1, AP-2, septins and the ubiquitin ligase complex SCF, it is only partially fulfilled for the ESCRT and Exocyst complexes (see below).

Although these results are novel and further validate the concept of a regulation of Notch signalling by intracellular trafficking (for review, see Fortini and Bilder, 2009; Fürthauer, González-Gaitán, 2009; Kopan and Ilagan, 2009; Le Bras et al., 2011; Musse et al., 2012; Yamamoto et al., 2010), we were aiming at identifying novel regulators of the subcellular localisation of three major Notch signalling components: Notch, Spdo and Delta. Indeed, the observed adult phenotypes could result from various and multiple defects in Notch signalling during pI asymmetric cell division and/or at the pI daughter cell stage. Furthermore, our identified genes could regulate various molecular events such as cell fate determinants segregation, Delta, Spdo and/or Notch proper subcellular localisation via endocytosis and/or recycling. Therefore, we decided to take advantage of the fact that Spdo, Delta and Notch localisation are dynamic during pI division and at the pI daughter cell stage in the pupal notum. We were able to observe localisation changes for 26 out of the 61 genes that we studied to further understand the adult phenotypes induced by dsRNA (Table 2). Three major categories of localisation changes were identified at the pI daughter cell stage: accumulation at pI daughter cell contact, vesicle excess (and in some cases, enlarged vesicles), and apical and/or basolateral accumulation. And, in each of these categories, we observed pupal lineages which correlate either with an adult Notch gain- or loss-of-function-like phenotype (as illustrated with Spdo localisation in supplementary material Fig. S1).

For 10 genes, changes in Notch component localisation can be a direct consequence of their inactivation or reflect a change in pI daughter cell fate acquisition. Indeed, we observed a pupal lineage somewhat reminiscent of two pIIa-like (Syx7, Exo84, Sec6, Sec5) or two pIIb-like (Sra-1, Orc6, pnut, Sep5, Vha16-1, Vha16-2) daughter cells (supplementary material Fig. S1B,F respectively). And these lineages correlate with the observed adult phenotypes i.e. Notch gain of function or loss of function, respectively. Although these results do not elucidate the function of these genes on Notch signalling regulation, they indicate that Notch signalling can be similarly regulated in various cellular contexts. For example, it was previously shown that the Vacuolar ATPase functions to control the acidification of endosomes required for Notch activation after binding by its ligand in the eye imaginal disc and ovaries (Vaccari et al., 2010; Yan et al., 2009).

Surprisingly, our results suggest that part of the same complex might regulate different aspects of Notch signalling in the sensory organ lineage. Indeed, we observed a gain-of-Notch-signalling-like adult phenotype for three Exocyst components (Exo84, Sec6 and Sec5) but also a loss-of-Notch-signalling-like adult one for Exo84. These results can either reflect a bias in the RNAi silencing which might not be as effective for each Exocyst subunits and/or suggest that the Exocyst might have several functions during pI asymmetric cell division with opposite role in the regulation of Notch signalling. Further studies will be necessary to validate these results and to define if Exo84 could function with Sec15, another Exocyst component, which positively regulates Spdo and Delta post-endocytic trafficking in pI daughter cells (Jafar-Nejad et al., 2005).

For the first time, we identified members of the septin family (pnut and Sep5) and one of their regulator [Orc-6 (Chesnokov et al., 2003)] as putative regulators of Notch signalling. Septin complexes can act as scaffolds and/or diffusion barriers in various cellular events such as cytoskeleton organisation, cytokinesis, membrane organisation and vesicle targeting which could potentially regulate the pI asymmetric cell division (for a review, see Cao et al., 2009). It is necessary to further decipher the pupal phenotype to define if these septins directly regulate Notch signalling traffic and/or pI cytokinesis (N.B. Founounou and R.L.B. unpublished). While the pupal lineage is somewhat reminiscent of two pIIb-like daughter cells, we also observed an accumulation of Spdo, Notch and Delta at the apical side of the anterior pI daughter cell of Sep2dsRNA as well as of Rab35dsRNA (supplementary material Fig. S1G). Their common phenotype is not surprising knowing that human Rab35 was proposed to play an essential control on the terminal step of cytokinesis in part by controlling SEPT2 subcellular distribution during cell division (Kouranti et al., 2006). Although it is not yet possible to decipher if this apical accumulation is a cause or a consequence of the Notch pupal and adult loss-of-function phenotype, this data identify two putative regulators of apical localisation and confirm that Notch signalling major components are differentially trafficked between pI daughter cells.

Inactivation of 14 genes led to localisation changes indicating multiple subcellular sites (plasma membrane, vesicular compartments, interface between the two daughter cells), which appear to be essential to the fine regulation of Notch signalling in the Drosophila sensory organ lineage. Indeed, subapical accumulation of Spdo, localisation of Notch, Spdo and Delta at the apical interface between pI daughter cells, and/or an excess of enlarged endosomes in both daughter cells are associated with adult Notch gain-of-function-like phenotypes (supplementary material Fig. S1C,D,E, respectively). However, accumulation of Spdo and Delta at the lateral membrane between pI daughter cells correlates with Notch signalling loss-of-function phenotype (supplementary material Fig. S1H,I).

In a control situation, Notch accumulates transiently at the apical interface between pIIb and pIIa (Benhra et al., 2011; Couturier et al., 2012). Accumulation of Spdo together with Notch at this apical pIIb/pIIa interface has previously been observed in AP-1 loss-of-function mutants and correlated with a gain of Notch signalling (Benhra et al., 2011). Because, impairment of Delta trafficking towards the pIIb/pIIa interface in Arp2/3 mutants leads to a loss of Notch signalling (Rajan et al., 2009), it was proposed that Delta–Notch interaction resulting in Notch activation is taking place at the apical pIIb/pIIa interface that could function as a signalling platform (Benhra et al., 2011). Nonetheless, this proposal awaits experimental demonstration. This proposal was recently challenged by F. Schweisguth and colleagues, who generated a functional Notch construct tagged with GFP and expressed at physiological level (NiGFP) (Couturier et al., 2012). Notch activation is reported to occur 15–45 min after cytokinesis and productive signalling is proposed to take place at the pIIa/pIIb interface of the cytokinetic furrow, where NiGFP accumulates in numb mutant background or when Dynamin-dependent endocytosis is blocked.

Adult and subcellular AP-1 loss-of-function-type phenotypes are observed when two genes with previously unknown function in Drosophila, CG10341 and CG2747, were inactivated. Both of them had been identified as putative membrane trafficking regulators in a C. elegans screen (Balklava et al., 2007). CG10341 belongs to the Nuclear Assembly Factor 1 (NAF1) family involved in ribosome biogenesis, which suggests an indirect role, if so, in intracellular trafficking. On the contrary, CG2747 belongs to the HEATR5 family and we were able to show that CG2747 is required for the clathrin adaptor AP-1 complex subcellular localisation, similarly to its putative orthologue of the S. cerevisiae Laa1p (Fernández and Payne, 2006). We observed that the human HEATR5B/p200 antibody staining is affected in CG2747dsRNA, which supports an evolutionary conservation of the HEATR5 function among metazoans. Nonetheless, the function of human HEATR5B/p200 remains unknown as no phenotype could be observed in p200-depleted cells maybe due to a poor silencing efficiency and/or a redundancy with the other human HEATR5 member, HEATR5A (Lui et al., 2003). Therefore, we identified a new regulator of Notch signalling that acts as a major regulator of the clathrin adaptor complex, AP-1.

We also observed an accumulation of Notch, Spdo and Delta at the interface and/or in endosomes in both daughter cells, correlated with adult Notch gain-of-function phenotypes, when we inactivated members of the ESCRT complex (Stam, Vps28, Chmp1, Vps2 and Vps4). Accumulation at the interface and/or endosomes can result from a blockade in endosome maturation when ESCRT function is impaired and it has already been described that accumulation of Notch in endocytic compartments can result in an ectopic ligand-independent activation of Notch (Herz et al., 2009; Moberg et al., 2005; Thompson et al., 2005; Vaccari and Bilder, 2005; Vaccari et al., 2009). Additionally, ESCRT complexes are involved in various cellular mechanisms: cargo engagement and/or deubiquitylation, maturation of multi vesicular bodies, vesicle budding and/or cytokinesis (for a review, see Henne et al., 2011). In our screen, impairment of different ESCRT pathway components led to opposite adult phenotypes i.e. loss- or gain-of-Notch-signalling-like ones depending on the complex and/or its subunit(s) depleted by dsRNA (see Table 1). However, we did not observe any Spdo, Delta or Notch localisation changes associated with these adult loss-of-function phenotypes. Further studies are, therefore, necessary to elucidate our genetics results by identifying which subcellular mechanisms and which cargo(es) are regulated by the different identified ESCRT subunits to control Notch signalling.

Accumulation of Spdo and Delta at the lateral membrane between pI daughter cells is correlated with adult Notch loss-of-function phenotypes in Cul-3dsRNA and CG7787dsRNA (supplementary material Fig. S1H,I respectively). This lateral membrane was previously named apical actin-rich structure ‘stalk’ and identified as the lateral part of branched actin network present at the interface and through which endocytosed Delta traffic back (Rajan et al., 2009). Therefore, CG7787 and Cul-3 might regulate Spdo and/or Delta basolateral endocytosis and/or recycling required for Notch signalling as this accumulation phenotype is correlated with a loss of Notch signalling. While Cul-3 is a subunit of E3 ubiquitin ligase, CG7787 putatively encodes a guanyl-nucleotide exchange factor. CG7787 belongs to the MSS4/DSS4 family proposed to function as chaperone for misfolded Rab proteins (Nuoffer et al., 1997) and in particular, Rabs associated with the Exocyst pathway (Itzen et al., 2006). Therefore, CG7787 might be involved in the same recycling pathway as Sec15 (see above) and positively regulates Notch signalling. Other data support the general idea that a recycling pathway positively regulates Notch signalling in the sensory organ lineage. Indeed, we observed an excess of Spdo-, Notch- and Delta-positive vesicles either in the anterior or towards the anterior cell in Rme-8dsRNA and l(2)dtldsRNA, which is associated with an adult Notch loss-of-function phenotype. Although l(2)dtl function in intracellular trafficking is still unknown, Rme-8 was shown to regulate a recycling pathway (Shi et al., 2009). All those results confirm that Spdo, Notch and Delta transiently traffic through the lateral membrane and/or endosomes to ensure a proper Notch signalling.

Finally, we observed a basolateral accumulation of Delta in epithelial cells of O-fut1dsRNA, Tsp47FdsRNA and Tsp68CdsRNA nota and that Delta endocytosis is not affected which suggest the existence of basolateral Delta exocytosis. In support of this hypothesis, it was already demonstrated that Delta can be fucosylated by mammalian O-fut1 (Panin et al., 2002) but this data remained to be demonstrated in vivo and in Drosophila. When confirmed by further studies in classical genetic mutants, these results will eventually highlight a function for Delta basolateral exocytosis and also a new role of the tetraspanins family on Notch signalling.

In conclusion, our screen led us to identify intracellular trafficking regulators of major Notch signalling actors. Although it is still debatable whether the subcellular localisation changes observed are a cause or a consequence of the Notch signalling phenotype, the screen we performed led to the identification of 11 previously unknown regulators of Notch signalling (CG2747, Tsp47F, Orc-6, pnut, Sep2, Sep5, Rab35, CG7787, CG10341, l(2)dtl and Rme-8). Without any doubt, further analyses of our identified genes will bring a better understanding of their trafficking function in regulating Notch-signalling-dependent binary cell fate acquisition, as well as of their putative molecular interactions.

Materials and Methods

Drosophila stocks and genetics

Unless otherwise stated, fly stocks were obtained from the Bloomington Drosophila Stock Center. Driver–GAL4 stocks used in this study were: ap–GAL4 (Calleja et al., 1996), sca–GAL4 (Mlodzik et al., 1990), Eq–GAL4 (Pi et al., 2001) and pnr–GAL4 (Calleja et al., 1996). All dsRNA transgenic lines were supplied by the Vienna Drosophila RNAi Center [VDRC, (Dietzl et al., 2007)]; except lines (as indicated in supplementary material Tables S1–S3), which were obtained from the National Institute of Genetics Fly Stock Center (NIG-FLY) or the Transgenic RNAi Project (TRIP) via the Bloomington Drosophila Stock Center. For RNAi-induced phenotype study, crosses between UAS-hairpin RNAi males and driver-GAL4 females were raised at 18°C, 25°C or shifted at 29°C during L2–L3 larval stages. For each cross in which the genotypes were blinded for objectivity purpose, two experimenters examined at least 20 flies sensory organ distribution and/or morphological phenotypes. w1118 males were crossed with driver-GAL4 females for control experiments. To obtain AP-47SHE11 mitotic clones, we used the FLP-FRT technique and the stocks (1) y w hs-FLP; FRT82B, Ubi-GFP(S65T)nls and (2) FRT82B, AP-47SHE11/TM6 Tb Sb, as previously described (Benhra et al., 2011). Heat shocks were performed at L2 and L3 during 30 min.

Immunocytochemistry

Pupae were aged for 17 h to 20 h after puparium formation, dissected in 1×PBS, fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde and stained as previously described (Le Borgne and Schweisguth, 2003). Primary antibodies used were mouse anti-Notch Extra Cellular Domain (NECD; DSHB, 1∶100), rabbit anti-Spdo [a kind gift from J. Skeath; 1∶1000 (O'Connor-Giles and Skeath, 2003)], guinea pig anti-Delta Extra Cellular Domain (GP582, a kind gift from M. Muskavitch; 1∶2000), rabbit anti-HEATR5B [p200; a kind gift from M. Robinson; 1∶20 (Hirst et al., 2005)], rat anti-DE-CAD (DCAD2; DSHB 1∶250) and mouse anti-AP-1γ [1∶100 (Benhra et al., 2011)]. Cy2-, Cy3- and Cy5-coupled secondary antibodies (1∶500) were from Jackson Laboratories. Delta 15 minutes internalisation assays were performed with mouse anti-Delta DSHB (1∶100), as previously described (Benhra et al., 2011).

Images were acquired with a Leica SPE confocal microscope, which was noise-suppressed using the smooth function of ImageJ. In all figures, Notch (Cy5-) images were colour balanced using ImageJ. Defect in lateral inhibition was acknowledged when more than four to five sensory organs were systematically detected with a 63× 1.4 NA lens, zoom 3 on a notum.

Acknowledgments

We thank M. Muskavitch, M. Robinson, J. Skeath, the Bloomington Stock Center, the Vienna Drosophila RNAi Center, the TRiP at Harvard Medical School (NIH/NIGMS R01-GM084947) and the National Institute of Genetics Fly Stock Center for providing antibodies or fly stocks, as well as the Microscopy Rennes Imaging Center. The monoclonal antibody generated by S. Artavanis Tsakonas (NECD) was obtained from the Developmental Studies Hybridoma Bank, generated under the auspices of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, and maintained by the University of Iowa Department of Biological Sciences. We thank members of the Le Borgne laboratory for helpful discussions. We thank A. Pacquelet and G. Michaux for critical reading of the manuscript. Special thanks to Amy Winehouse for her music that accompanied us, while we screened around 100,000 flies.

Footnotes

  • ↵‡ Present addresses: GReD Laboratory, CNRS UMR 6293, INSERM U1103, Clermont Université, 63177 Aubière, France; Université d'Auvergne, Faculté de Médecine, 63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France

  • ↵§ Present address: Department of Developmental and Regenerative Biology, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, USA

  • Funding

    This work was supported by the Action Thématique Incitative Prioritaire programme CNRS to R.L.B.; Région Bretagne (Programme Accueil de COMpétences en Bretagne ‘Notasid’ [grant number 2168 to R.L.B.]; Fondation ARC pour la Recherche sur le Cancer [grant number 4905 to R.L.B.]; Fondation pour la Recherche Médicale to R.L.B., Rennes Métropole [grant ‘Aide d'Installation Scientifique’ to S.L.B.]; and La Ligue contre le Cancer 35 to R.L.B.

  • Supplementary material available online at http://jcs.biologists.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1242/jcs.110171/-/DC1

  • Accepted June 12, 2012.
  • © 2012. Published by The Company of Biologists Ltd

References

    1. Abdelilah–Seyfried, S.,
    2. Chan, Y. M.,
    3. Zeng, C.,
    4. Justice, N. J.,
    5. Younger–Shepherd, S.,
    6. Sharp, L. E.,
    7. Barbel, S.,
    8. Meadows, S. A.,
    9. Jan, L. Y. and
    10. Jan, Y. N.
    (2000). A gain-of-function screen for genes that affect the development of the Drosophila adult external sensory organ. Genetics 155, 733–752.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Acar, M.,
    2. Jafar–Nejad, H.,
    3. Takeuchi, H.,
    4. Rajan, A.,
    5. Ibrani, D.,
    6. Rana, N. A.,
    7. Pan, H.,
    8. Haltiwanger, R. S. and
    9. Bellen, H. J.
    (2008). Rumi is a CAP10 domain glycosyltransferase that modifies Notch and is required for Notch signaling. Cell 132, 247–258. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2007.12.016
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  1. ↵
    1. Balklava, Z.,
    2. Pant, S.,
    3. Fares, H. and
    4. Grant, B. D.
    (2007). Genome-wide analysis identifies a general requirement for polarity proteins in endocytic traffic. Nat. Cell Biol. 9, 1066–1073. doi:10.1038/ncb1627
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  2. ↵
    1. Baust, T.,
    2. Czupalla, C.,
    3. Krause, E.,
    4. Bourel–Bonnet, L. and
    5. Hoflack, B.
    (2006). Proteomic analysis of adaptor protein 1A coats selectively assembled on liposomes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 103, 3159–3164. doi:10.1073/pnas.0511062103
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    1. Baust, T.,
    2. Anitei, M.,
    3. Czupalla, C.,
    4. Parshyna, I.,
    5. Bourel, L.,
    6. Thiele, C.,
    7. Krause, E. and
    8. Hoflack, B.
    (2008). Protein networks supporting AP-3 function in targeting lysosomal membrane proteins. Mol. Biol. Cell 19, 1942–1951. doi:10.1091/mbc.E08-02-0110
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Ben–Yaacov, S.,
    2. Le Borgne, R.,
    3. Abramson, I.,
    4. Schweisguth, F. and
    5. 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.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. ↵
    1. Benhra, N.,
    2. Vignaux, F.,
    3. Dussert, A.,
    4. Schweisguth, F. and
    5. Le Borgne, R.
    (2010). Neuralized promotes basal to apical transcytosis of delta in epithelial cells. Mol. Biol. Cell 21, 2078–2086. doi:10.1091/mbc.E09-11-0926
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. ↵
    1. Benhra, N.,
    2. Lallet, S.,
    3. Cotton, M.,
    4. Le Bras, S.,
    5. Dussert, A. and
    6. Le Borgne, R.
    (2011). AP-1 controls the trafficking of Notch and Sanpodo toward E-cadherin junctions in sensory organ precursors. Curr. Biol. 21, 87–95. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2010.12.010
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Berdnik, D.,
    2. Török, T.,
    3. González–Gaitán, M. and
    4. Knoblich, J. A.
    (2002). The endocytic protein alpha-Adaptin is required for numb-mediated asymmetric cell division in Drosophila. Dev. Cell 3, 221–231. doi:10.1016/S1534-5807(02)00215-0
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    1. Bogdan, S.,
    2. Grewe, O.,
    3. Strunk, M.,
    4. Mertens, A. and
    5. Klämbt, C.
    (2004). Sra-1 interacts with Kette and Wasp and is required for neuronal and bristle development in Drosophila. Development 131, 3981–3989. doi:10.1242/dev.01274
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. ↵
    1. Brand, A. H. and
    2. Perrimon, N.
    (1993). Targeted gene expression as a means of altering cell fates and generating dominant phenotypes. Development 118, 401–415.
    OpenUrlAbstract
  8. ↵
    1. Bray, S. J.
    (2006). Notch signalling: a simple pathway becomes complex. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 7, 678–689. doi:10.1038/nrm2009
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  9. ↵
    1. Calleja, M.,
    2. Moreno, E.,
    3. Pelaz, S. and
    4. Morata, G.
    (1996). Visualization of gene expression in living adult Drosophila. Science 274, 252–255. doi:10.1126/science.274.5285.252
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Campbell, G.
    (2005). Regulation of gene expression in the distal region of the Drosophila leg by the Hox11 homolog, C15. Dev. Biol. 278, 607–618. doi:10.1016/j.ydbio.2004.12.009
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  10. ↵
    1. Cao, L.,
    2. Yu, W.,
    3. Wu, Y. and
    4. Yu, L.
    (2009). The evolution, complex structures and function of septin proteins. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 66, 3309–3323. doi:10.1007/s00018-009-0087-2
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Chen, C. M.,
    2. Freedman, J. A.,
    3. Bettler, D. R. Jr.,
    4. Manning, S. D.,
    5. Giep, S. N.,
    6. Steiner, J. and
    7. Ellis, H. M.
    (1996). Polychaetoid is required to restrict segregation of sensory organ precursors from proneural clusters in Drosophila. Mech. Dev. 57, 215–227. doi:10.1016/0925-4773(96)00548-5
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. ↵
    1. Chesnokov, I. N.,
    2. Chesnokova, O. N. and
    3. Botchan, M.
    (2003). A cytokinetic function of Drosophila ORC6 protein resides in a domain distinct from its replication activity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 100, 9150–9155. doi:10.1073/pnas.1633580100
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Chung, H. M. and
    2. Struhl, G.
    (2001). Nicastrin is required for Presenilin-mediated transmembrane cleavage in Drosophila. Nat. Cell Biol. 3, 1129–1132. doi:10.1038/ncb1201-1129
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  12. ↵
    1. Coumailleau, F.,
    2. Fürthauer, M.,
    3. Knoblich, J. A. and
    4. González–Gaitán, M.
    (2009). Directional Delta and Notch trafficking in Sara endosomes during asymmetric cell division. Nature 458, 1051–1055. doi:10.1038/nature07854
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  13. ↵
    1. Couturier, L.,
    2. Vodovar, N. and
    3. Schweisguth, F.
    (2012). Endocytosis by Numb breaks Notch symmetry at cytokinesis. Nat. Cell Biol. 14, 131–139. doi:10.1038/ncb2419
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. David, N. B.,
    2. Martin, C. A.,
    3. Segalen, M.,
    4. Rosenfeld, F.,
    5. Schweisguth, F. and
    6. Bellaïche, Y.
    (2005). Drosophila Ric-8 regulates Galphai cortical localization to promote Galphai-dependent planar orientation of the mitotic spindle during asymmetric cell division. Nat. Cell Biol. 7, 1083–1090. doi:10.1038/ncb1319
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  14. ↵
    1. Dietzl, G.,
    2. Chen, D.,
    3. Schnorrer, F.,
    4. Su, K. C.,
    5. Barinova, Y.,
    6. Fellner, M.,
    7. Gasser, B.,
    8. Kinsey, K.,
    9. Oppel, S. and
    10. Scheiblauer, S.
    et al. (2007). A genome-wide transgenic RNAi library for conditional gene inactivation in Drosophila. Nature 448, 151–156. doi:10.1038/nature05954
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  15. ↵
    1. Djiane, A.,
    2. Shimizu, H.,
    3. Wilkin, M.,
    4. Mazleyrat, S.,
    5. Jennings, M. D.,
    6. Avis, J.,
    7. Bray, S. and
    8. Baron, M.
    (2011). Su(dx) E3 ubiquitin ligase-dependent and -independent functions of polychaetoid, the Drosophila ZO-1 homologue. J. Cell Biol. 192, 189–200. doi:10.1083/jcb.201007023
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Dobens, L.,
    2. Jaeger, A.,
    3. Peterson, J. S. and
    4. Raftery, L. A.
    (2005). Bunched sets a boundary for Notch signaling to pattern anterior eggshell structures during Drosophila oogenesis. Dev. Biol. 287, 425–437. doi:10.1016/j.ydbio.2005.09.019
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    1. Eid, J. P.,
    2. Arias, A. M.,
    3. Robertson, H.,
    4. Hime, G. R. and
    5. Dziadek, M.
    (2008). The Drosophila STIM1 orthologue, dSTIM, has roles in cell fate specification and tissue patterning. BMC Dev. Biol. 8, 104. doi:10.1186/1471-213X-8-104
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. ↵
    1. Emery, G.,
    2. Hutterer, A.,
    3. Berdnik, D.,
    4. Mayer, B.,
    5. Wirtz–Peitz, F.,
    6. Gaitan, M. G. and
    7. Knoblich, J. A.
    (2005). Asymmetric Rab 11 endosomes regulate delta recycling and specify cell fate in the Drosophila nervous system. Cell 122, 763–773. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2005.08.017
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  17. ↵
    1. Fernández, G. E. and
    2. Payne, G. S.
    (2006). Laa1p, a conserved AP-1 accessory protein important for AP-1 localization in yeast. Mol. Biol. Cell 17, 3304–3317. doi:10.1091/mbc.E06-02-0096
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Fetchko, M.,
    2. Huang, W.,
    3. Li, Y. and
    4. Lai, Z. C.
    (2002). Drosophila Gp150 is required for early ommatidial development through modulation of Notch signaling. EMBO J. 21, 1074–1083. doi:10.1093/emboj/21.5.1074
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  18. ↵
    1. Forgac, M.
    (2007). Vacuolar ATPases: rotary proton pumps in physiology and pathophysiology. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 8, 917–929. doi:10.1038/nrm2272
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  19. ↵
    1. Fortini, M. E. and
    2. Bilder, D.
    (2009). Endocytic regulation of Notch signaling. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 19, 323–328. doi:10.1016/j.gde.2009.04.005
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Fostier, M.,
    2. Evans, D. A.,
    3. Artavanis–Tsakonas, S. and
    4. Baron, M.
    (1998). Genetic characterization of the Drosophila melanogaster Suppressor of deltex gene: A regulator of notch signaling. Genetics 150, 1477–1485.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  20. ↵
    1. Fürthauer, M. and
    2. González–Gaitán, M.
    (2009). Endocytic regulation of notch signalling during development. Traffic 10, 792–802. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0854.2009.00914.x
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. ↵
    1. Fuwa, T. J.,
    2. Hori, K.,
    3. Sasamura, T.,
    4. Higgs, J.,
    5. Baron, M. and
    6. Matsuno, K.
    (2006). The first deltex null mutant indicates tissue-specific deltex-dependent Notch signaling in Drosophila. Mol. Genet. Genomics 275, 251–263. doi:10.1007/s00438-005-0087-3
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  22. ↵
    1. Gallagher, C. M. and
    2. Knoblich, J. A.
    (2006). The conserved c2 domain protein lethal (2) giant discs regulates protein trafficking in Drosophila. Dev. Cell 11, 641–653. doi:10.1016/j.devcel.2006.09.014
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  23. ↵
    1. Gridley, T.
    (2003). Notch signaling and inherited disease syndromes. Hum. Mol. Genet. 12, 9R–13R. doi:10.1093/hmg/ddg052
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  24. ↵
    1. Hartenstein, V. and
    2. Posakony, J. W.
    (1990). A dual function of the Notch gene in Drosophila sensillum development. Dev. Biol. 142, 13–30. doi:10.1016/0012-1606(90)90147-B
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  25. ↵
    1. Hehnly, H. and
    2. Stamnes, M.
    (2007). Regulating cytoskeleton-based vesicle motility. FEBS Lett. 581, 2112–2118. doi:10.1016/j.febslet.2007.01.094
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. ↵
    1. Heitzler, P. and
    2. Simpson, P.
    (1991). The choice of cell fate in the epidermis of Drosophila. Cell 64, 1083–1092. doi:10.1016/0092-8674(91)90263-X
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  27. ↵
    1. Henne, W. M.,
    2. Buchkovich, N. J. and
    3. Emr, S. D.
    (2011). The ESCRT pathway. Dev. Cell 21, 77–91. doi:10.1016/j.devcel.2011.05.015
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    1. Herranz, H.,
    2. Stamataki, E.,
    3. Feiguin, F. and
    4. Milán, M.
    (2006). Self-refinement of Notch activity through the transmembrane protein Crumbs: modulation of gamma-secretase activity. EMBO Rep. 7, 297–302. doi:10.1038/sj.embor.7400617
    OpenUrlAbstract
  28. ↵
    1. Herz, H. M.,
    2. Woodfield, S. E.,
    3. Chen, Z.,
    4. Bolduc, C. and
    5. Bergmann, A.
    (2009). Common and distinct genetic properties of ESCRT-II components in Drosophila. PLoS ONE 4, e4165. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0004165
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. ↵
    1. Hirst, J.,
    2. Borner, G. H.,
    3. Harbour, M. and
    4. Robinson, M. S.
    (2005). The aftiphilin/p200/gamma-synergin complex. Mol. Biol. Cell 16, 2554–2565. doi:10.1091/mbc.E04-12-1077
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  30. ↵
    1. Hsu, S. C.,
    2. TerBush, D.,
    3. Abraham, M. and
    4. Guo, W.
    (2004). The exocyst complex in polarized exocytosis. Int. Rev. Cytol. 233, 243–265. doi:10.1016/S0074-7696(04)33006-8
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  31. ↵
    1. Hutterer, A. and
    2. Knoblich, J. A.
    (2005). Numb and alpha-Adaptin regulate Sanpodo endocytosis to specify cell fate in Drosophila external sensory organs. EMBO Rep. 6, 836–842. doi:10.1038/sj.embor.7400500
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  32. ↵
    1. Itzen, A.,
    2. Bleimling, N.,
    3. Ignatev, A.,
    4. Pylypenko, O. and
    5. Rak, A.
    (2006). Purification, crystallization and preliminary X-ray crystallographic analysis of mammalian MSS4-Rab8 GTPase protein complex. Acta Crystallogr. Sect. F Struct. Biol. Cryst. Commun. 62, 113–116. doi:10.1107/S1744309105042995
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  33. ↵
    1. Jafar–Nejad, H.,
    2. Andrews, H. K.,
    3. Acar, M.,
    4. Bayat, V.,
    5. Wirtz–Peitz, F.,
    6. Mehta, S. Q.,
    7. Knoblich, J. A. and
    8. Bellen, H. J.
    (2005). Sec15, a component of the exocyst, promotes notch signaling during the asymmetric division of Drosophila sensory organ precursors. Dev. Cell 9, 351–363. doi:10.1016/j.devcel.2005.06.010
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    1. Jankovics, F.,
    2. Sinka, R. and
    3. Erdélyi, M.
    (2001). An interaction type of genetic screen reveals a role of the Rab11 gene in oskar mRNA localization in the developing Drosophila melanogaster oocyte. Genetics 158, 1177–1188.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Jékely, G. and
    2. Rørth, P.
    (2003). Hrs mediates downregulation of multiple signalling receptors in Drosophila. EMBO Rep. 4, 1163–1168. doi:10.1038/sj.embor.7400019
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    1. Justice, N.,
    2. Roegiers, F.,
    3. Jan, L. Y. and
    4. Jan, Y. N.
    (2003). Lethal giant larvae acts together with numb in notch inhibition and cell fate specification in the Drosophila adult sensory organ precursor lineage. Curr. Biol. 13, 778–783. doi:10.1016/S0960-9822(03)00288-4
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  34. ↵
    1. Klueg, K. M. and
    2. Muskavitch, M. A.
    (1999). Ligand-receptor interactions and trans-endocytosis of Delta, Serrate and Notch: members of the Notch signalling pathway in Drosophila. J. Cell Sci. 112, 3289–3297.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  35. ↵
    1. Knoblich, J. A.
    (2010). Asymmetric cell division: recent developments and their implications for tumour biology. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 11, 849–860. doi:10.1038/nrm3010
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  36. ↵
    1. Kojima, T.,
    2. Tsuji, T. and
    3. Saigo, K.
    (2005). A concerted action of a paired-type homeobox gene, aristaless, and a homolog of Hox11/tlx homeobox gene, clawless, is essential for the distal tip development of the Drosophila leg. Dev. Biol. 279, 434–445. doi:10.1016/j.ydbio.2004.12.005
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  37. ↵
    1. Kopan, R. and
    2. Ilagan, M. X.
    (2009). The canonical Notch signaling pathway: unfolding the activation mechanism. Cell 137, 216–233. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2009.03.045
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  38. ↵
    1. Kouranti, I.,
    2. Sachse, M.,
    3. Arouche, N.,
    4. Goud, B. and
    5. Echard, A.
    (2006). Rab35 regulates an endocytic recycling pathway essential for the terminal steps of cytokinesis. Curr. Biol. 16, 1719–1725. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2006.07.020
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  39. ↵
    1. Langevin, J.,
    2. Le Borgne, R.,
    3. Rosenfeld, F.,
    4. Gho, M.,
    5. Schweisguth, F. and
    6. Bellaïche, Y.
    (2005). Lethal giant larvae controls the localization of notch-signaling regulators numb, neuralized, and Sanpodo in Drosophila sensory-organ precursor cells. Curr. Biol. 15, 955–962. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2005.04.054
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  40. ↵
    1. Le Borgne, R.
    (2006). Regulation of Notch signalling by endocytosis and endosomal sorting. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 18, 213–222. doi:10.1016/j.ceb.2006.02.011
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  41. ↵
    1. Le Borgne, R. and
    2. Schweisguth, F.
    (2003). Unequal segregation of Neuralized biases Notch activation during asymmetric cell division. Dev. Cell 5, 139–148. doi:10.1016/S1534-5807(03)00187-4
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    1. Le Borgne, R.,
    2. Remaud, S.,
    3. Hamel, S. and
    4. Schweisguth, F.
    (2005). Two distinct E3 ubiquitin ligases have complementary functions in the regulation of delta and serrate signaling in Drosophila. PLoS Biol. 3, e96. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0030096
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  42. ↵
    1. Le Bras, S.,
    2. Loyer, N. and
    3. Le Borgne, R.
    (2011). The multiple facets of ubiquitination in the regulation of notch signaling pathway. Traffic 12, 149–161. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0854.2010.01126.x
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    1. Lu, H. and
    2. Bilder, D.
    (2005). Endocytic control of epithelial polarity and proliferation in Drosophila. Nat. Cell Biol. 7, 1139–1132. doi:10.1038/ncb1324
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  43. ↵
    1. Lui, W. W.,
    2. Collins, B. M.,
    3. Hirst, J.,
    4. Motley, A.,
    5. Millar, C.,
    6. Schu, P.,
    7. Owen, D. J. and
    8. Robinson, M. S.
    (2003). Binding partners for the COOH-terminal appendage domains of the GGAs and gamma-adaptin. Mol. Biol. Cell 14, 2385–2398. doi:10.1091/mbc.E02-11-0735
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  44. ↵
    1. Maldonado–Báez, L. and
    2. Wendland, B.
    (2006). Endocytic adaptors: recruiters, coordinators and regulators. Trends Cell Biol. 16, 505–513. doi:10.1016/j.tcb.2006.08.001
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  45. ↵
    1. Malsam, J.,
    2. Kreye, S. and
    3. Söllner, T. H.
    (2008). Membrane fusion: SNAREs and regulation. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 65, 2814–2832. doi:10.1007/s00018-008-8352-3
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  46. ↵
    1. Miele, L.,
    2. Golde, T. and
    3. Osborne, B.
    (2006). Notch signaling in cancer. Curr. Mol. Med. 6, 905–918. doi:10.2174/156652406779010830
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    1. Mistry, H.,
    2. Wilson, B. A.,
    3. Roberts, I. J.,
    4. O'Kane, C. J. and
    5. Skeath, J. B.
    (2004). Cullin-3 regulates pattern formation, external sensory organ development and cell survival during Drosophila development. Mech. Dev. 121, 1495–1507. doi:10.1016/j.mod.2004.07.007
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  47. ↵
    1. Mlodzik, M.,
    2. Baker, N. E. and
    3. Rubin, G. M.
    (1990). Isolation and expression of scabrous, a gene regulating neurogenesis in Drosophila. Genes Dev. 4, 1848–1861. doi:10.1101/gad.4.11.1848
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  48. ↵
    1. Moberg, K. H.,
    2. Schelble, S.,
    3. Burdick, S. K. and
    4. Hariharan, I. K.
    (2005). Mutations in erupted, the Drosophila ortholog of mammalian tumor susceptibility gene 101, elicit non-cell-autonomous overgrowth. Dev. Cell 9, 699–710. doi:10.1016/j.devcel.2005.09.018
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  49. ↵
    1. Mondal, K.,
    2. Dastidar, A. G.,
    3. Singh, G.,
    4. Madhusudhanan, S.,
    5. Gande, S. L.,
    6. VijayRaghavan, K. and
    7. Varadarajan, R.
    (2007). Design and isolation of temperature-sensitive mutants of Gal4 in yeast and Drosophila. J. Mol. Biol. 370, 939–950. doi:10.1016/j.jmb.2007.05.035
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  50. ↵
    1. Mukherjee, A.,
    2. Veraksa, A.,
    3. Bauer, A.,
    4. Rosse, C.,
    5. Camonis, J. and
    6. Artavanis–Tsakonas, S.
    (2005). Regulation of Notch signalling by non-visual beta-arrestin. Nat. Cell Biol. 7, 1091–1101. doi:10.1038/ncb1327
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  51. ↵
    1. Mummery–Widmer, J. L.,
    2. Yamazaki, M.,
    3. Stoeger, T.,
    4. Novatchkova, M.,
    5. Bhalerao, S.,
    6. Chen, D.,
    7. Dietzl, G.,
    8. Dickson, B. J. and
    9. Knoblich, J. A.
    (2009). Genome-wide analysis of Notch signalling in Drosophila by transgenic RNAi. Nature 458, 987–992. doi:10.1038/nature07936
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  52. ↵
    1. Murphy, J. E.,
    2. Padilla, B. E.,
    3. Hasdemir, B.,
    4. Cottrell, G. S. and
    5. Bunnett, N. W.
    (2009). Endosomes: a legitimate platform for the signaling train. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 106, 17615–17622. doi:10.1073/pnas.0906541106
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  53. ↵
    1. Musse, A. A.,
    2. Meloty–Kapella, L. and
    3. Weinmaster, G.
    (2012). Notch ligand endocytosis: mechanistic basis of signaling activity. Semin. Cell Dev. Biol. 23, 429–436. doi:10.1016/j.semcdb.2012.01.011
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  54. ↵
    1. Nichols, J. T.,
    2. Miyamoto, A.,
    3. Olsen, S. L.,
    4. D'Souza, B.,
    5. Yao, C. and
    6. Weinmaster, G.
    (2007). DSL ligand endocytosis physically dissociates Notch1 heterodimers before activating proteolysis can occur. J. Cell Biol. 176, 445–458. doi:10.1083/jcb.200609014
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  55. ↵
    1. Nuoffer, C.,
    2. Wu, S. K.,
    3. Dascher, C. and
    4. Balch, W. E.
    (1997). Mss4 does not function as an exchange factor for Rab in endoplasmic reticulum to Golgi transport. Mol. Biol. Cell 8, 1305–1316.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  56. ↵
    1. O'Connor–Giles, K. M. and
    2. Skeath, J. B.
    (2003). Numb inhibits membrane localization of Sanpodo, a four-pass transmembrane protein, to promote asymmetric divisions in Drosophila. Dev. Cell 5, 231–243. doi:10.1016/S1534-5807(03)00226-0
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    1. Ohshiro, T.,
    2. Yagami, T.,
    3. Zhang, C. and
    4. Matsuzaki, F.
    (2000). Role of cortical tumour-suppressor proteins in asymmetric division of Drosophila neuroblast. Nature 408, 593–596. doi:10.1038/35046087
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    1. Overstreet, E.,
    2. Chen, X.,
    3. Wendland, B. and
    4. Fischer, J. A.
    (2003). Either part of a Drosophila epsin protein, divided after the ENTH domain, functions in endocytosis of delta in the developing eye. Curr. Biol. 13, 854–860. doi:10.1016/S0960-9822(03)00326-9
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    1. Overstreet, E.,
    2. Fitch, E. and
    3. Fischer, J. A.
    (2004). Fat facets and Liquid facets promote Delta endocytosis and Delta signaling in the signaling cells. Development 131, 5355–5366. doi:10.1242/dev.01434
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  57. ↵
    1. Panin, V. M.,
    2. Shao, L.,
    3. Lei, L.,
    4. Moloney, D. J.,
    5. Irvine, K. D. and
    6. Haltiwanger, R. S.
    (2002). Notch ligands are substrates for protein O-fucosyltransferase-1 and Fringe. J. Biol. Chem. 277, 29945–29952. doi:10.1074/jbc.M204445200
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  58. ↵
    1. Pi, H.,
    2. Wu, H. J. and
    3. Chien, C. T.
    (2001). A dual function of phyllopod in Drosophila external sensory organ development: cell fate specification of sensory organ precursor and its progeny. Development 128, 2699–2710.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  59. ↵
    1. Rajan, A.,
    2. Tien, A. C.,
    3. Haueter, C. M.,
    4. Schulze, K. L. and
    5. Bellen, H. J.
    (2009). The Arp2/3 complex and WASp are required for apical trafficking of Delta into microvilli during cell fate specification of sensory organ precursors. Nat. Cell Biol. 11, 815–824. doi:10.1038/ncb1888
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    1. Resino, J. and
    2. García–Bellido, A.
    (2004). Drosophila genetic variants that change cell size and rate of proliferation affect cell communication and hence patterning. Mech. Dev. 121, 351–364. doi:10.1016/j.mod.2004.02.007
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  60. ↵
    1. Roegiers, F.,
    2. Jan, L. Y. and
    3. Jan, Y. N.
    (2005). Regulation of membrane localization of Sanpodo by lethal giant larvae and neuralized in asymmetrically dividing cells of Drosophila sensory organs. Mol. Biol. Cell 16, 3480–3487. doi:10.1091/mbc.E05-03-0177
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Royet, J.,
    2. Bouwmeester, T. and
    3. Cohen, S. M.
    (1998). Notchless encodes a novel WD40-repeat-containing protein that modulates Notch signaling activity. EMBO J. 17, 7351–7360. doi:10.1093/emboj/17.24.7351
    OpenUrlAbstract
  61. ↵
    1. Sakata, T.,
    2. Sakaguchi, H.,
    3. Tsuda, L.,
    4. Higashitani, A.,
    5. Aigaki, T.,
    6. Matsuno, K. and
    7. Hayashi, S.
    (2004). Drosophila Nedd4 regulates endocytosis of notch and suppresses its ligand-independent activation. Curr. Biol. 14, 2228–2236. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2004.12.028
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  62. ↵
    1. Sasamura, T.,
    2. Ishikawa, H. O.,
    3. Sasaki, N.,
    4. Higashi, S.,
    5. Kanai, M.,
    6. Nakao, S.,
    7. Ayukawa, T.,
    8. Aigaki, T.,
    9. Noda, K. and
    10. Miyoshi, E.
    et al. (2007). The O-fucosyltransferase O-fut1 is an extracellular component that is essential for the constitutive endocytic trafficking of Notch in Drosophila. Development 134, 1347–1356. doi:10.1242/dev.02811
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Seidner, G. A.,
    2. Ye, Y.,
    3. Faraday, M. M.,
    4. Alvord, W. G. and
    5. Fortini, M. E.
    (2006). Modeling clinically heterogeneous presenilin mutations with transgenic Drosophila. Curr. Biol. 16, 1026–1033. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2006.04.004
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  63. ↵
    1. Shi, A.,
    2. Sun, L.,
    3. Banerjee, R.,
    4. Tobin, M.,
    5. Zhang, Y. and
    6. Grant, B. D.
    (2009). Regulation of endosomal clathrin and retromer-mediated endosome to Golgi retrograde transport by the J-domain protein RME-8. EMBO J. 28, 3290–3302. doi:10.1038/emboj.2009.272
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  64. ↵
    1. Simons, K. and
    2. Gerl, M. J.
    (2010). Revitalizing membrane rafts: new tools and insights. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 11, 688–699. doi:10.1038/nrm2977
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    1. Tang, H.,
    2. Rompani, S. B.,
    3. Atkins, J. B.,
    4. Zhou, Y.,
    5. Osterwalder, T. and
    6. Zhong, W.
    (2005). Numb proteins specify asymmetric cell fates via an endocytosis- and proteasome-independent pathway. Mol. Cell. Biol. 25, 2899–2909. doi:10.1128/MCB.25.8.2899-2909.2005
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Tenney, K.,
    2. Gerber, M.,
    3. Ilvarsonn, A.,
    4. Schneider, J.,
    5. Gause, M.,
    6. Dorsett, D.,
    7. Eissenberg, J. C. and
    8. Shilatifard, A.
    (2006). Drosophila Rtf1 functions in histone methylation, gene expression, and Notch signaling. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 103, 11970–11974. doi:10.1073/pnas.0603620103
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  65. ↵
    1. Thompson, B. J.,
    2. Mathieu, J.,
    3. Sung, H. H.,
    4. Loeser, E.,
    5. Rørth, P. and
    6. Cohen, S. M.
    (2005). Tumor suppressor properties of the ESCRT-II complex component Vps25 in Drosophila. Dev. Cell 9, 711–720. doi:10.1016/j.devcel.2005.09.020
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  66. ↵
    1. Tong, X.,
    2. Zitserman, D.,
    3. Serebriiskii, I.,
    4. Andrake, M.,
    5. Dunbrack, R. and
    6. Roegiers, F.
    (2010). Numb independently antagonizes Sanpodo membrane targeting and Notch signaling in Drosophila sensory organ precursor cells. Mol. Biol. Cell 21, 802–810. doi:10.1091/mbc.E09-09-0831
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Tuxworth, R. I.,
    2. Vivancos, V.,
    3. O'Hare, M. B. and
    4. Tear, G.
    (2009). Interactions between the juvenile Batten disease gene, CLN3, and the Notch and JNK signalling pathways. Hum. Mol. Genet. 18, 667–678. doi:10.1093/hmg/ddn396
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  67. ↵
    1. Vaccari, T. and
    2. Bilder, D.
    (2005). The Drosophila tumor suppressor vps25 prevents nonautonomous overproliferation by regulating notch trafficking. Dev. Cell 9, 687–698. doi:10.1016/j.devcel.2005.09.019
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    1. Vaccari, T.,
    2. Lu, H.,
    3. Kanwar, R.,
    4. Fortini, M. E. and
    5. Bilder, D.
    (2008). Endosomal entry regulates Notch receptor activation in Drosophila melanogaster. J. Cell Biol. 180, 755–762. doi:10.1083/jcb.200708127
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  68. ↵
    1. Vaccari, T.,
    2. Rusten, T. E.,
    3. Menut, L.,
    4. Nezis, I. P.,
    5. Brech, A.,
    6. Stenmark, H. and
    7. Bilder, D.
    (2009). Comparative analysis of ESCRT-I, ESCRT-II and ESCRT-III function in Drosophila by efficient isolation of ESCRT mutants. J. Cell Sci. 122, 2413–2423. doi:10.1242/jcs.046391
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  69. ↵
    1. Vaccari, T.,
    2. Duchi, S.,
    3. Cortese, K.,
    4. Tacchetti, C. and
    5. Bilder, D.
    (2010). The vacuolar ATPase is required for physiological as well as pathological activation of the Notch receptor. Development 137, 1825–1832. doi:10.1242/dev.045484
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  70. ↵
    1. Wang, W. and
    2. Struhl, G.
    (2004). Drosophila Epsin mediates a select endocytic pathway that DSL ligands must enter to activate Notch. Development 131, 5367–5380. doi:10.1242/dev.01413
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Wang, W. and
    2. Struhl, G.
    (2005). Distinct roles for Mind bomb, Neuralized and Epsin in mediating DSL endocytosis and signaling in Drosophila. Development 132, 2883–2894. doi:10.1242/dev.01860
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  71. ↵
    1. Weinmaster, G. and
    2. Fischer, J. A.
    (2011). Notch ligand ubiquitylation: what is it good for? Dev. Cell 21, 134–144. doi:10.1016/j.devcel.2011.06.006
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  72. ↵
    1. Wennerberg, K.,
    2. Rossman, K. L. and
    3. Der, C. J.
    (2005). The Ras superfamily at a glance. J. Cell Sci. 118, 843–846. doi:10.1242/jcs.01660
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    1. Wilkin, M. B.,
    2. Carbery, A. M.,
    3. Fostier, M.,
    4. Aslam, H.,
    5. Mazaleyrat, S. L.,
    6. Higgs, J.,
    7. Myat, A.,
    8. Evans, D. A.,
    9. Cornell, M. and
    10. Baron, M.
    (2004). Regulation of notch endosomal sorting and signaling by Drosophila Nedd4 family proteins. Curr. Biol. 14, 2237–2244. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2004.11.030
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  73. ↵
    1. Windler, S. L. and
    2. Bilder, D.
    (2010). Endocytic internalization routes required for delta/notch signaling. Curr. Biol. 20, 538–543. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2010.01.049
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  74. ↵
    1. Yamamoto, S.,
    2. Charng, W. L. and
    3. Bellen, H. J.
    (2010). Endocytosis and intracellular trafficking of Notch and its ligands. Curr. Top. Dev. Biol. 92, 165–200. doi:10.1016/S0070-2153(10)92005-X
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  75. ↵
    1. Yan, Y.,
    2. Denef, N. and
    3. Schüpbach, T.
    (2009). The vacuolar proton pump, V-ATPase, is required for notch signaling and endosomal trafficking in Drosophila. Dev. Cell 17, 387–402. doi:10.1016/j.devcel.2009.07.001
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    1. Yeh, E.,
    2. Zhou, L.,
    3. Rudzik, N. and
    4. Boulianne, G. L.
    (2000). Neuralized functions cell autonomously to regulate Drosophila sense organ development. EMBO J. 19, 4827–4837. doi:10.1093/emboj/19.17.4827
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
View Abstract
Previous ArticleNext Article
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

This Issue

Keywords

  • Notch
  • Endocytosis
  • Recycling
  • Intracellular trafficking
  • AP-1

 Download PDF

Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Cell Science.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Genetic identification of intracellular trafficking regulators involved in Notch-dependent binary cell fate acquisition following asymmetric cell division
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Cell Science
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Cell Science web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Research Article
Genetic identification of intracellular trafficking regulators involved in Notch-dependent binary cell fate acquisition following asymmetric cell division
Stéphanie Le Bras, Christine Rondanino, Géraldine Kriegel-Taki, Aurore Dussert, Roland Le Borgne
Journal of Cell Science 2012 125: 4886-4901; doi: 10.1242/jcs.110171
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Research Article
Genetic identification of intracellular trafficking regulators involved in Notch-dependent binary cell fate acquisition following asymmetric cell division
Stéphanie Le Bras, Christine Rondanino, Géraldine Kriegel-Taki, Aurore Dussert, Roland Le Borgne
Journal of Cell Science 2012 125: 4886-4901; doi: 10.1242/jcs.110171

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Alerts

Please log in to add an alert for this article.

Sign in to email alerts with your email address

Article navigation

  • Top
  • Article
    • Summary
    • Introduction
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Materials and Methods
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & tables
  • Supp info
  • Info & metrics
  • PDF + SI
  • PDF

Related articles

Cited by...

More in this TOC section

  • An SNX10-dependent mechanism down-regulates fusion between mature osteoclasts
  • Combined heterogeneity in cell size and deformability promotes cancer invasiveness
  • Non-canonical ago loading of EV-derived exogenous single stranded miRNA in recipient cells
Show more RESEARCH ARTICLE

Similar articles

Other journals from The Company of Biologists

Development

Journal of Experimental Biology

Disease Models & Mechanisms

Biology Open

Advertisement

Follow us on Instagram

Cell science is bursting with beautiful images and over on Instagram, we’re showing them off! Find both JCS and FocalPlane on Instagram for stories and techniques across cell biology.


An interview with Derek Walsh

Professor Derek Walsh is the guest editor of our new special issue Cell Biology of Host-Pathogen Interactions. In an interview, Derek tells us about his work in the field of DNA viruses, the impact of the pandemic on virology and what his role as Guest Editor taught him.


How to improve your scientific writing

"If you are a scientist and you want to succeed, you must become a writer."

How do scientists become master storytellers? We called on our journal Editors, proofreaders and contributors to our community sites for their advice on how to improve your scientific writing.


Meet the preLighters: Jennifer Ann Black

Following the theme of our latest special issue, postdoc Jennifer Ann Black studies replication stress and genome plasticity in Leishmania in Professor Luiz Tosi’s lab in Sao Paolo. We caught up with Jenn (virtually) to hear about her relocation to Brazil mid-pandemic, her research on parasites and what she enjoys about ‘preLighting’.

In our special issue, Chandrakar et al. and Rosazza et al. present their latest work on Leishmania.


Mole – The Corona Files

“There are millions of people around the world who continue to believe that the Terrible Pandemic is a hoax.”

Mole continues to offer his wise words to researchers on how to manage during the COVID-19 pandemic.


JCS and COVID-19

For more information on measures Journal of Cell Science is taking to support the community during the COVID-19 pandemic, please see here.

If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hestiate to contact the Editorial Office.

Articles

  • Accepted manuscripts
  • Issue in progress
  • Latest complete issue
  • Issue archive
  • Archive by article type
  • Special issues
  • Subject collections
  • Interviews
  • Sign up for alerts

About us

  • About Journal of Cell Science
  • Editors and Board
  • Editor biographies
  • Travelling Fellowships
  • Grants and funding
  • Journal Meetings
  • Workshops
  • The Company of Biologists

For Authors

  • Submit a manuscript
  • Aims and scope
  • Presubmission enquiries
  • Fast-track manuscripts
  • Article types
  • Manuscript preparation
  • Cover suggestions
  • Editorial process
  • Promoting your paper
  • Open Access
  • JCS Prize
  • Manuscript transfer network
  • Biology Open transfer

Journal Info

  • Journal policies
  • Rights and permissions
  • Media policies
  • Reviewer guide
  • Sign up for alerts

Contacts

  • Contact JCS
  • Subscriptions
  • Advertising
  • Feedback

Twitter   YouTube   LinkedIn

© 2021   The Company of Biologists Ltd   Registered Charity 277992