Genetic control of cell fate in the termini of the Drosophila embryo

Ectopic orthodenticle expression alters segment polarity gene expression but not head segment identity in the Drosophila embryo

The cephalic gap genes specify anterior head development in the Drosophila embryo. However, the mechanisms of action of these genes remain poorly understood. Here, we focused on the cephalic gap gene orthodenticle (otd), which establishes a specific region of the anterior head. It has been proposed that otd acts in a combinatorial fashion with the cephalic gap genes empty spiracles (ems) and buttonhead (btd) to assign segmental identities in this region. To test this model, we used a heat-inducible transgene to generate pulses of ubiquitous otd expression during embryonic development. Ectopic otd expression caused significant defects in head formation, including the duplication of sensory structures derived from otd-dependent segments. However, these defects do not appear to result from the transformation of head segment identities predicted by the combinatorial model. Instead, they correlate with specific regulatory effects of otd on the expression of the segment polarity genes engrailed (en) and wingless (wg). Ectopic otd expression also caused the loss of head structures derived from the maxillary segment, which lies posterior to the otd domain. We show that this effect is associated with otd repression of the homeotic selector gene Deformed (Dfd).

Control of germ-band retraction in Drosophila by the zinc-finger protein HINDSIGHT

Drosophila embryos lacking hindsight gene function have a normal body plan and undergo normal germ-band extension. However, they fail to retract their germ bands. hindsight encodes a large nuclear protein of 1920 amino acids that contains fourteen C2H2-type zinc fingers, and glutamine-rich and proline-rich domains, suggesting that it functions as a transcription factor. Initial embryonic expression of hindsight RNA and protein occurs in the endoderm (midgut) and extraembryonic membrane (amnioserosa) prior to germ-band extension and continues in these tissues beyond the completion of germ-band retraction. Expression also occurs in the developing tracheal system, central and peripheral nervous systems, and the ureter of the Malpighian tubules. Strikingly, hindsight is not expressed in the epidermal ectoderm which is the tissue that undergoes the cell shape changes and movements during germ-band retraction. The embryonic midgut can be eliminated without affecting germ-band retraction. However, elimination of the amnioserosa results in the failure of germ-band retraction, implicating amnioserosal expression of hindsight as crucial for this process. Ubiquitous expression of hindsight in the early embryo rescues germ-band retraction without producing dominant gain-of-function defects, suggesting that hindsight's role in germ-band retraction is permissive rather than instructive. Previous analyses have shown that hindsight is required for maintenance of the differentiated amnioserosa (Frank, L. C. and Rushlow, C. (1996) Development 122, 1343–1352). Two classes of models are consistent with the present data. First, hindsight's function in germ-band retraction may be limited to maintenance of the amnioserosa which then plays a physical role in the retraction process through contact with cells of the epidermal ectoderm. Second, hindsight might function both to maintain the amnioserosa and to regulate chemical signaling from the amnioserosa to the epidermal ectoderm, thus coordinating the cell shape changes and movements that drive germ-band retraction.

Structure of the insect head in ontogeny and phylogeny: a view from Drosophila

Evolutionary, developmental and insect biologists are currently using a three-pronged approach to study the evolution and development of the insect head. First, genetic manipulation of the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster has led to the identification of many genes, including the segmentation and homeotic genes, that are important for embryonic pattern formation and development. Second, a comparison of orthologous gene expression patterns in other insects reveals that these regulatory genes are deployed in similar, yet distinct, patterns in different insects. Third, comparisons of embryonic morphology with gene expression patterns suggest that in general these genes promote a common insect body plan, but that variations in gene expression can often be correlated to variations in morphology. Here, we present a detailed review of the development of the cephalic ectoderm of Drosophila and extrapolate to development of a generalized insect head. Our analysis of the variations among insect species, in both morphology and gene expression patterns, conducted within an evolutionary framework supported by traditional phylogenies and paleontology provides the basis for hypotheses about the genetic factors governing morphologic and developmental evolution.

The mouse homolog of the orphan nuclear receptor tailless is expressed in the developing forebrain

The Drosophila tailless gene is a member of the orphan nuclear receptor subfamily. In Drosophila, the tailless gene is required for pattern formation in embryonic poles. During development, tailless is activated in the termini of the embryo in response to the torso receptor tyrosine kinase signal transduction cascade. Recessive mutations of tailless result in abnormalities in anterior portions of the head and in all structures posterior to the eighth abdominal segment. Localised expression of tailless is required in combination with a second terminal gene, huckebein, to control the expression of downstream genes. We have isolated a mouse homolog of the Drosophila tailless gene, which shows considerable homology in the DNA-binding domain suggesting that the respective proteins bind similar recognition sequences. Although the ligand-binding domain shows features in common with the tailless ligand domain, it also shares conserved amino acid stretches with other orphan nuclear receptors, the human ovalbumin upstream binding protein transcription factors (hCOUP-TF I and II). We have analysed the expression of taillees in mice, and show that it is specifically localised to the developing forebrain from day 8 p.c. and in dorsal midbrain from day 8.75 p.c. To define the anterior and posterior boundaries of expression, we compared the expression pattern of tailless to those of other forebrain markers, including distal-less (Dlx1), brain factor 1 (BF1), and the orthodenticle genes (Otx1 and Otx2). In addition to the developing forebrain, these genes show dynamic patterns of expression in two structures whose development requires inductive signals from the forebrain: the eye and the nose. These results suggest that the mouse taillees gene may be required to pattern anterior brain differentiation.