Pathway to a phenocopy: Heat stress effects in early embryogenesis

Cofilin-Mediated Actin Stress Response Is Maladaptive in Heat-Stressed Embryos

Environmental stress threatens the fidelity of embryonic morphogenesis. Heat, for example, is a teratogen. Yet how heat affects morphogenesis is poorly understood. Here, we identify a heat-inducible actin stress response (ASR) in Drosophila embryos that is mediated by the activation of the actin regulator Cofilin. Similar to ASR in adult mammalian cells, heat stress in fly embryos triggers the assembly of intra-nuclear actin rods. Rods measure up to a few microns in length, and their assembly depends on elevated free nuclear actin concentration and Cofilin. Outside the nucleus, heat stress causes Cofilin-dependent destabilization of filamentous actin (F-actin) in actomyosin networks required for morphogenesis. F-actin destabilization increases the chance of morphogenesis mistakes. Blocking the ASR by reducing Cofilin dosage improves the viability of heat-stressed embryos. However, improved viability correlates with restoring F-actin stability, not rescuing morphogenesis. Thus, ASR endangers embryos, perhaps by shifting actin from cytoplasmic filaments to an elevated nuclear pool.

Figard et al. show that heat stress induces an actin stress response (ASR) in early Drosophila embryos. This ASR is mediated by a heat-induced increase in Cofilin activity. Increased Cofilin activity destabilizes F-actin structures required for morphogenesis. In addition, the Cofilin-mediated ASR reduces embryo viability.

Elongated Cells Drive Morphogenesis in a Surface-Wrapped Finite-Element Model of Germband Retraction

During Drosophila embryogenesis, the germband first extends to curl around the posterior end of the embryo and then retracts back; however, retraction is not simply the reversal of extension. At a tissue level, extension is coincident with ventral furrow formation, and at a cellular level, extension occurs via convergent cell neighbor exchanges in the germband, whereas retraction involves only changes in cell shape. To understand how cell shapes, tissue organization, and cellular forces drive germband retraction, we investigate this process using a whole-embryo, surface-wrapped cellular finite-element model. This model represents two key epithelial tissues-amnioserosa and germband-as adjacent sheets of two-dimensional cellular finite elements that are wrapped around an ellipsoidal three-dimensional approximation of an embryo. The model reproduces the detailed kinematics of in vivo retraction by fitting just one free model parameter, the tension along germband cell interfaces; all other cellular forces are constrained to follow ratios inferred from experimental observations. With no additional parameter adjustments, the model also reproduces quantitative assessments of mechanical stress using laser dissection and failures of retraction when amnioserosa cells are removed via mutations or microsurgery. Surprisingly, retraction in the model is robust to changes in cellular force values but is critically dependent on starting from a configuration with highly elongated amnioserosa cells. Their extreme cellular elongation is established during the prior process of germband extension and is then used to drive retraction. The amnioserosa is the one tissue whose cellular morphogenesis is reversed from germband extension to retraction, and this reversal coordinates the forces needed to retract the germband back to its pre-extension position and shape. In this case, cellular force strengths are less important than the carefully established cell shapes that direct them. VIDEO ABSTRACT.

Quantitative Proteomics Analysis of Developmental Reprogramming in Protoplasts of the Moss Physcomitrella patens

The moss Physcomitrella patens is a model system for studying Plant developmental processes. To better understand the biochemical and physiological changes involved in developmental reprogramming, we conducted a quantitative proteomics analysis for protonemata, protoplasts made therefrom and protoplasts regenerated for 2 d. Using an iTRAQ peptide labeling strategy and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), >3,000 peptides and 1,000 proteins were quantified. Of these, 162 proteins were identified as having differential abundances during developmental reprogramming. These proteins were involved in various biological functions, such as defense, energy production, translation, metabolism, protein destination and storage, transcription, transport, cell growth/division, cell structure and signal transduction. Of these, the proteins involved in energy production and translation increased in abundance, while many of the metabolism and defense proteins decreased in abundance. In addition, most of the cell growth/division, protein stability and cell structure proteins were also down-regulated. This is the first report on the metabolic changes involved in developmental reprogramming in protoplasts. The significance of metabolic networks in developmental programming is beginning to emerge. Our study suggested that stress signals, energy metabolism and ribosomal proteins are pivotal components during developmental programming.

Amnioserosa development and function in Drosophila embryogenesis: Critical mechanical roles for an extraembryonic tissue

Despite being a short-lived, extraembryonic tissue, the amnioserosa plays critical roles in the major morphogenetic events of Drosophila embryogenesis. These roles involve both cellular mechanics and biochemical signaling. Its best-known role is in dorsal closure-well studied by both developmental biologists and biophysicists-but the amnioserosa is also important during earlier developmental stages. Here, we provide an overview of amnioserosa specification and its role in several key developmental stages: germ band extension, germ band retraction, and dorsal closure. We also compare embryonic development in Drosophila and its relative Megaselia to highlight how the amnioserosa and its roles have evolved. Placed in context, the amnioserosa provides a fascinating example of how signaling, mechanics, and morphogen patterns govern cell-type specification and subsequent morphogenetic changes in cell shape, orientation, and movement. Developmental Dynamics 245:558-568, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.