CtBP represses Dpp-dependent Mad activation during Drosophila eye development

Dachshund and C-terminal Binding Protein bind directly during Drosophila eye development

The transcription factor Dachshund (Dac) and the transcriptional co-regulator C-terminal Binding Protein (CtBP) were identified as the retinal determination factors during Drosophila eye development . A previous study established that Dac and CtBP interact genetically during eye development. Co-immunoprecipitation assays suggested that both molecules interact in the Drosophila larval eye-antennal disc. Our present study shows that Dac and CtBP bind each other directly, as determined by GST pull-down assays. Thus, our results demonstrate the molecular mechanism of Dac and CtBP interaction and suggest the direct binding of these two transcription regulators in the cells of the eye disc promotes the Drosophila eye specification.

TGF-β Type II Receptor Punt Suppresses Antimicrobial Peptide Expression and Influences Development in Tribolium castaneum

The transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β) superfamily in insects regulated various physiological events, including immune response, growth and development, and metamorphosis. This complex network of signaling pathways involves conserved cell-surface receptors and signaling co-receptors that allow for precisely coordinated cellular events. However, the roles of TGF-β receptors, particularly the type II receptor Punt, in mediating the innate immunity in insects remains unclear. In this study, we used the red flour beetle, Tribolium castaneum, as a model species to investigate the role of TGF-β type II receptor Punt in mediating antimicrobial peptide (AMP) expression. Developmental and tissue-specific transcript profiles revealed Punt was constitutively expressed throughout development, with the highest transcript level in 1-day female pupae and the lowest transcript level in 18-day larvae. Tissue specific expression profiles showed the highest transcript level of Punt was observed in the Malpighian tubule and ovary in 18-day larvae and 1-day female adults, respectively, suggesting Punt might have distinct functions in larvae and adults. Further results indicated that Punt RNAi in the 18-day larvae led to increased transcript level of AMP genes through transcription factor Relish, leading to inhibition of Escherichia coli proliferation. Knockdown of Punt in larvae also led to splitting of adult elytra and abnormal compound eyes. Furthermore, knockdown of Punt during the female pupal stage resulted in increased transcript levels of AMP genes, as well as abnormal ovary, reduced fecundity, and failure of eggs to hatch. This study deepens our understanding of the biological significance of Punt in insect TGF-β signaling and lays the groundwork for further research of its role in insect immune response, development, and reproduction.

Krüppel-homolog 1 exerts anti-metamorphic and vitellogenic functions in insects via phosphorylation-mediated recruitment of specific cofactors

Background

The zinc-finger transcription factor Krüppel-homolog 1 (Kr-h1) exerts a dual regulatory role during insect development by preventing precocious larval/nymphal metamorphosis and in stimulating aspects of adult reproduction such as vitellogenesis. However, how Kr-h1 functions both as a transcriptional repressor in juvenile metamorphosis and an activator in adult reproduction remains elusive. Here, we use the insect Locusta migratoria to dissect the molecular mechanism by which Kr-h1 functions as activator and repressor at these distinct developmental stages.

Results

We report that the kinase PKCα triggers Kr-h1 phosphorylation at the amino acid residue Ser¹⁵⁴, a step essential for its dual functions. During juvenile stage, phosphorylated Kr-h1 recruits a corepressor, C-terminal binding protein (CtBP). The complex of phosphorylated Kr-h1 and CtBP represses the transcription of Ecdysone induced protein 93F (E93) and consequently prevents the juvenile-to-adult transition. In adult insects, phosphorylated Kr-h1 recruits a coactivator, CREB-binding protein (CBP), and promotes vitellogenesis by inducing the expression of Ribosomal protein L36. Furthermore, Kr-h1 phosphorylation with the concomitant inhibition of E93 transcription is evolutionarily conserved across insect orders.

Conclusion

Our results suggest that Kr-h1 phosphorylation is indispensable for the recruitment of transcriptional cofactors, and for its anti-metamorphic and vitellogenic actions in insects. Our data shed new light on the understanding of Kr-h1 regulation and function in JH-regulated insect metamorphosis and reproduction.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12915-021-01157-3.

The Pebble/Rho1/Anillin pathway controls polyploidization and axonal wrapping activity in the glial cells of the Drosophila eye

During development glial cell are crucially important for the establishment of neuronal networks. Proliferation and migration of glial cells can be modulated by neurons, and in turn glial cells can differentiate to assume key roles such as axonal wrapping and targeting. To explore the roles of actin cytoskeletal rearrangements in glial cells, we studied the function of Rho1 in Drosophila developing visual system. We show that the Pebble (RhoGEF)/Rho1/Anillin pathway is required for glia proliferation and to prevent the formation of large polyploid perineurial glial cells, which can still migrate into the eye disc if generated. Surprisingly, this Rho1 pathway is not necessary to establish the total glial membrane area or for the differentiation of the polyploid perineurial cells. The resulting polyploid wrapping glial cells are able to initiate wrapping of axons in the basal eye disc, however the arrangement and density of glia nuclei and membrane processes in the optic stalk are altered and the ensheathing of the photoreceptor axonal fascicles is reduced.

The selector genes midline and H15 control ventral leg pattern by both inhibiting Dpp signaling and specifying ventral fate

mid and H15 encode Tbx20 transcription factors that specify ventral pattern in the Drosophila leg. We find that there are at least two pathways for mid and H15 specification of ventral fate. In the first pathway, mid and H15 negatively regulate Dpp, the dorsal signal in leg development. mid and H15 block the dorsalizing effects of Dpp signaling in the ventral leg. In loss- and gain-of-function experiments in imaginal discs, we show that mid and H15 block the accumulation of phospho-Mad, the activated form of the Drosophila pSmad1/5 homolog. In a second pathway, we find mid and H15 must also directly promote ventral fate because simultaneously blocking Dpp signaling in mid H15 mutants does not rescue the ventral to dorsal transformation in most ventral leg structures. We show that mid and H15 act as transcriptional repressors in ventral leg development. The two genes repress the Dpp target gene Dad, the laterally expressed gene Upd, and the mid VLE enhancer. This repression depends on the eh1 domain, a binding site for the Groucho co-repressor, and is likely direct because Mid localizes to target gene enhancers in PCR-ChIP assays. A mid allele mutant for the repressing domain (eh1), mid^eh1, was found to be compromised in gain-of-function assays and in rescue of mid H15 loss-of-function. We propose that mid and H15 specify ventral fate through inhibition of Dpp signaling and through coordinating the repression of genes in the ventral leg.