1
|
Connell M, Xie Y, Deng X, Chen R, Zhu S. Kin17 regulates proper cortical localization of Miranda in Drosophila neuroblasts by regulating Flfl expression. Cell Rep 2024; 43:113823. [PMID: 38386552 PMCID: PMC10980573 DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2024.113823] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/07/2021] [Revised: 10/16/2022] [Accepted: 02/02/2024] [Indexed: 02/24/2024] Open
Abstract
During asymmetric division of Drosophila larval neuroblasts, the fate determinant Prospero (Pros) and its adaptor Miranda (Mira) are segregated to the basal cortex through atypical protein kinase C (aPKC) phosphorylation of Mira and displacement from the apical cortex, but Mira localization after aPKC phosphorylation is not well understood. We identify Kin17, a DNA replication and repair protein, as a regulator of Mira localization during asymmetric cell division. Loss of Kin17 leads to aberrant localization of Mira and Pros to the centrosome, cytoplasm, and nucleus. We provide evidence to show that the mislocalization of Mira and Pros is likely due to reduced expression of Falafel (Flfl), a component of protein phosphatase 4 (PP4), and defects in dephosphorylation of serine-96 of Mira. Our work reveals that Mira is likely dephosphorylated by PP4 at the centrosome to ensure proper basal localization of Mira after aPKC phosphorylation and that Kin17 regulates PP4 activity by regulating Flfl expression.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marisa Connell
- Department of Neuroscience and Physiology, State University of New York Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY 13210, USA
| | - Yonggang Xie
- Department of Neuroscience and Physiology, State University of New York Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY 13210, USA
| | - Xiaobing Deng
- Department of Neuroscience and Physiology, State University of New York Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY 13210, USA
| | - Rui Chen
- Department of Neuroscience and Physiology, State University of New York Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY 13210, USA
| | - Sijun Zhu
- Department of Neuroscience and Physiology, State University of New York Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY 13210, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Nguyen PK, Cheng LY. Non-autonomous regulation of neurogenesis by extrinsic cues: a Drosophila perspective. OXFORD OPEN NEUROSCIENCE 2022; 1:kvac004. [PMID: 38596708 PMCID: PMC10913833 DOI: 10.1093/oons/kvac004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/14/2022] [Revised: 03/20/2022] [Accepted: 03/23/2022] [Indexed: 04/11/2024]
Abstract
The formation of a functional circuitry in the central nervous system (CNS) requires the correct number and subtypes of neural cells. In the developing brain, neural stem cells (NSCs) self-renew while giving rise to progenitors that in turn generate differentiated progeny. As such, the size and the diversity of cells that make up the functional CNS depend on the proliferative properties of NSCs. In the fruit fly Drosophila, where the process of neurogenesis has been extensively investigated, extrinsic factors such as the microenvironment of NSCs, nutrients, oxygen levels and systemic signals have been identified as regulators of NSC proliferation. Here, we review decades of work that explores how extrinsic signals non-autonomously regulate key NSC characteristics such as quiescence, proliferation and termination in the fly.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Phuong-Khanh Nguyen
- Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia
- Department of Anatomy and Physiology, The University of Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia
| | - Louise Y Cheng
- Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, The University of Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia
- Department of Anatomy and Physiology, The University of Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Sood C, Justis VT, Doyle SE, Siegrist SE. Notch signaling regulates neural stem cell quiescence entry and exit in Drosophila. Development 2022; 149:274416. [PMID: 35112131 PMCID: PMC8918809 DOI: 10.1242/dev.200275] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/17/2021] [Accepted: 01/13/2022] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
Stem cells enter and exit quiescence as part of normal developmental programs and to maintain tissue homeostasis in adulthood. Although it is clear that stem cell intrinsic and extrinsic cues, local and systemic, regulate quiescence, it remains unclear whether intrinsic and extrinsic cues coordinate to control quiescence and how cue coordination is achieved. Here, we report that Notch signaling coordinates neuroblast intrinsic temporal programs with extrinsic nutrient cues to regulate quiescence in Drosophila. When Notch activity is reduced, quiescence is delayed or altogether bypassed, with some neuroblasts dividing continuously during the embryonic-to-larval transition. During embryogenesis before quiescence, neuroblasts express Notch and the Notch ligand Delta. After division, Delta is partitioned to adjacent GMC daughters where it transactivates Notch in neuroblasts. Over time, in response to intrinsic temporal cues and increasing numbers of Delta-expressing daughters, neuroblast Notch activity increases, leading to cell cycle exit and consequently, attenuation of Notch pathway activity. Quiescent neuroblasts have low to no active Notch, which is required for exit from quiescence in response to nutrient cues. Thus, Notch signaling coordinates proliferation versus quiescence decisions.
Collapse
|
4
|
Magadi SS, Voutyraki C, Anagnostopoulos G, Zacharioudaki E, Poutakidou IK, Efraimoglou C, Stapountzi M, Theodorou V, Nikolaou C, Koumbanakis KA, Fullard JF, Delidakis C. Dissecting Hes-centred transcriptional networks in neural stem cell maintenance and tumorigenesis in Drosophila. Development 2020; 147:147/22/dev191544. [PMID: 33229432 DOI: 10.1242/dev.191544] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/16/2020] [Accepted: 10/05/2020] [Indexed: 01/26/2023]
Abstract
Neural stem cells divide during embryogenesis and juvenile life to generate the entire complement of neurons and glia in the nervous system of vertebrates and invertebrates. Studies of the mechanisms controlling the fine balance between neural stem cells and more differentiated progenitors have shown that, in every asymmetric cell division, progenitors send a Delta-Notch signal to their sibling stem cells. Here, we show that excessive activation of Notch or overexpression of its direct targets of the Hes family causes stem-cell hyperplasias in the Drosophila larval central nervous system, which can progress to malignant tumours after allografting to adult hosts. We combined transcriptomic data from these hyperplasias with chromatin occupancy data for Dpn, a Hes transcription factor, to identify genes regulated by Hes factors in this process. We show that the Notch/Hes axis represses a cohort of transcription factor genes. These are excluded from the stem cells and promote early differentiation steps, most likely by preventing the reversion of immature progenitors to a stem-cell fate. We describe the impact of two of these 'anti-stemness' factors, Zfh1 and Gcm, on Notch/Hes-triggered tumorigenesis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Srivathsa S Magadi
- Institute of Molecular Biology & Biotechnology, Foundation for Research & Technology Hellas, 70013 Heraklion, Crete, Greece.,Department of Biology, University of Crete, 70013 Heraklion, Crete, Greece
| | - Chrysanthi Voutyraki
- Institute of Molecular Biology & Biotechnology, Foundation for Research & Technology Hellas, 70013 Heraklion, Crete, Greece.,Department of Biology, University of Crete, 70013 Heraklion, Crete, Greece
| | - Gerasimos Anagnostopoulos
- Institute of Molecular Biology & Biotechnology, Foundation for Research & Technology Hellas, 70013 Heraklion, Crete, Greece.,Department of Biology, University of Crete, 70013 Heraklion, Crete, Greece
| | - Evanthia Zacharioudaki
- Institute of Molecular Biology & Biotechnology, Foundation for Research & Technology Hellas, 70013 Heraklion, Crete, Greece
| | - Ioanna K Poutakidou
- Institute of Molecular Biology & Biotechnology, Foundation for Research & Technology Hellas, 70013 Heraklion, Crete, Greece.,Department of Biology, University of Crete, 70013 Heraklion, Crete, Greece
| | - Christina Efraimoglou
- Institute of Molecular Biology & Biotechnology, Foundation for Research & Technology Hellas, 70013 Heraklion, Crete, Greece.,Department of Biology, University of Crete, 70013 Heraklion, Crete, Greece
| | - Margarita Stapountzi
- Institute of Molecular Biology & Biotechnology, Foundation for Research & Technology Hellas, 70013 Heraklion, Crete, Greece
| | - Vasiliki Theodorou
- Institute of Molecular Biology & Biotechnology, Foundation for Research & Technology Hellas, 70013 Heraklion, Crete, Greece
| | - Christoforos Nikolaou
- Institute of Molecular Biology & Biotechnology, Foundation for Research & Technology Hellas, 70013 Heraklion, Crete, Greece.,Department of Biology, University of Crete, 70013 Heraklion, Crete, Greece
| | - Konstantinos A Koumbanakis
- Institute of Molecular Biology & Biotechnology, Foundation for Research & Technology Hellas, 70013 Heraklion, Crete, Greece.,Department of Biology, University of Crete, 70013 Heraklion, Crete, Greece
| | - John F Fullard
- Institute of Molecular Biology & Biotechnology, Foundation for Research & Technology Hellas, 70013 Heraklion, Crete, Greece
| | - Christos Delidakis
- Institute of Molecular Biology & Biotechnology, Foundation for Research & Technology Hellas, 70013 Heraklion, Crete, Greece .,Department of Biology, University of Crete, 70013 Heraklion, Crete, Greece
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Shaikh MN, Tejedor FJ. Mnb/Dyrk1A orchestrates a transcriptional network at the transition from self-renewing neurogenic progenitors to postmitotic neuronal precursors. J Neurogenet 2018; 32:37-50. [PMID: 29495936 DOI: 10.1080/01677063.2018.1438427] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
Abstract
The Down syndrome and microcephaly related gene Mnb/Dyrk1A encodes an evolutionary conserved protein kinase subfamily that plays important roles in neurodevelopment. minibrain (mnb) mutants of Drosophila melanogaster (Dm) exhibit reduced adult brains due to neuronal deficits generated during larval development. These deficits are the consequence of the apoptotic cell death of numerous neuronal precursors that fail to properly exit the cell cycle and differentiate. We have recently found that in both the Dm larval brain and the embryonic vertebrate central nervous system (CNS), a transient expression of Mnb/Dyrk1A promotes the cell cycle exit of newborn neuronal precursors by upregulating the expression of the cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor p27kip1 (called Dacapo in Dm). In the larval brain, Mnb performs this action by regulating the expression of three transcription factors, Asense (Ase), Deadpan (Dpn) and Prospero (Pros), which are key regulators of the self-renewal, proliferation, and terminal differentiation of neural progenitor cells. We have here studied in detail the cellular/temporal expression pattern of Ase, Dpn, Pros and Mnb, and have analyzed possible regulatory effects among them at the transitions from neurogenic progenitors to postmitotic neuronal precursors in the Dm larval brain. The emerging picture of this analysis reveals an intricate regulatory network in which Mnb appears to play a pivotal role helping to delineate the dynamics of the expression patterns of Ase, Dpn and Pros, as well as their specific functions in the aforementioned transitions. Our results also show that Ase, Dpn and Pros perform several cross-regulatory actions and contribute to shape the precise cellular/temporal expression pattern of Mnb. We propose that Mnb/Dyrk1A plays a central role in CNS neurogenesis by integrating molecular mechanisms that regulate progenitor self-renewal, cell cycle progression and neuronal differentiation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mirja N Shaikh
- a Instituto de Neurociencias , CSIC and Universidad Miguel Hernandez , Alicante , Spain
| | - Francisco J Tejedor
- a Instituto de Neurociencias , CSIC and Universidad Miguel Hernandez , Alicante , Spain
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Minocha S, Boll W, Noll M. Crucial roles of Pox neuro in the developing ellipsoid body and antennal lobes of the Drosophila brain. PLoS One 2017; 12:e0176002. [PMID: 28441464 PMCID: PMC5404782 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0176002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/25/2016] [Accepted: 04/04/2017] [Indexed: 01/18/2023] Open
Abstract
The paired box gene Pox neuro (Poxn) is expressed in two bilaterally symmetric neuronal clusters of the developing adult Drosophila brain, a protocerebral dorsal cluster (DC) and a deutocerebral ventral cluster (VC). We show that all cells that express Poxn in the developing brain are postmitotic neurons. During embryogenesis, the DC and VC consist of only 20 and 12 neurons that express Poxn, designated embryonic Poxn-neurons. The number of Poxn-neurons increases only during the third larval instar, when the DC and VC increase dramatically to about 242 and 109 Poxn-neurons, respectively, virtually all of which survive to the adult stage, while no new Poxn-neurons are added during metamorphosis. Although the vast majority of Poxn-neurons express Poxn only during third instar, about half of them are born by the end of embryogenesis, as demonstrated by the absence of BrdU incorporation during larval stages. At late third instar, embryonic Poxn-neurons, which begin to express Poxn during embryogenesis, can be easily distinguished from embryonic-born and larval-born Poxn-neurons, which begin to express Poxn only during third instar, (i) by the absence of Pros, (ii) their overt differentiation of axons and neurites, and (iii) the strikingly larger diameter of their cell bodies still apparent in the adult brain. The embryonic Poxn-neurons are primary neurons that lay out the pioneering tracts for the secondary Poxn-neurons, which differentiate projections and axons that follow those of the primary neurons during metamorphosis. The DC and the VC participate only in two neuropils of the adult brain. The DC forms most, if not all, of the neurons that connect the bulb (lateral triangle) with the ellipsoid body, a prominent neuropil of the central complex, while the VC forms most of the ventral projection neurons of the antennal lobe, which connect it ipsilaterally to the lateral horn, bypassing the mushroom bodies. In addition, Poxn-neurons of the VC are ventral local interneurons of the antennal lobe. In the absence of Poxn protein in the developing brain, embryonic Poxn-neurons stall their projections and cannot find their proper target neuropils, the bulb and ellipsoid body in the case of the DC, or the antennal lobe and lateral horn in the case of the VC, whereby the absence of the ellipsoid body neuropil is particularly striking. Poxn is thus crucial for pathfinding both in the DC and VC. Additional implications of our results are discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shilpi Minocha
- Institute of Molecular Life Sciences, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
| | - Werner Boll
- Institute of Molecular Life Sciences, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
| | - Markus Noll
- Institute of Molecular Life Sciences, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
- * E-mail:
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Banerjee A, Roy JK. Dicer-1 regulates proliferative potential of Drosophila larval neural stem cells through bantam miRNA based down-regulation of the G1/S inhibitor Dacapo. Dev Biol 2017; 423:57-65. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ydbio.2017.01.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/22/2016] [Revised: 10/19/2016] [Accepted: 01/18/2017] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
|
8
|
Shaikh MN, Gutierrez-Aviño F, Colonques J, Ceron J, Hämmerle B, Tejedor FJ. Minibrain drives the Dacapo dependent cell cycle exit of neurons in the Drosophila brain by promoting asense and prospero expression. Development 2016; 143:3195-205. [DOI: 10.1242/dev.134338] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/18/2015] [Accepted: 07/25/2016] [Indexed: 01/20/2023]
Abstract
A key issue in neurodevelopment is to understand how precursor cells decide to stop dividing and commence their terminal differentiation at the correct time and place. Here, we show that minibrain (mnb), the Drosophila ortholog of the Down syndrome candidate gene MNB/DYRK1A, is transiently expressed in newborn neuronal precursors known as ganglion cells (GCs). Mnb promotes the cell cycle exit of GCs through a dual mechanism that regulates the expression of the cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor Dacapo, the homolog of vertebrate p27kip1. On the one hand, Mnb upregulates the expression of the proneural transcription factor (TF) Asense, which promotes Dacapo expression. On the other, Mnb induces the expression of Prospero, a homeodomain TF that in turn inhibits the expression of Deadpan, a pan-neural TF that represses dacapo. In addition to its effects on Asense and Prospero, Mnb also promotes the expression of the neuronal-specific RNA regulator Elav, strongly suggesting that Mnb facilitates neuronal differentiation. These actions of Mnb ensure the precise timing of neuronal birth, coupling the mechanisms that regulate neurogenesis, cell cycle control and terminal differentiation of neurons.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mirja N. Shaikh
- Instituto de Neurociencias, CSIC and Universidad Miguel Hernandez, Alicante, Spain
| | | | - Jordi Colonques
- Instituto de Neurociencias, CSIC and Universidad Miguel Hernandez, Alicante, Spain
| | - Julian Ceron
- Instituto de Neurociencias, CSIC and Universidad Miguel Hernandez, Alicante, Spain
| | - Barbara Hämmerle
- Instituto de Neurociencias, CSIC and Universidad Miguel Hernandez, Alicante, Spain
| | - Francisco J. Tejedor
- Instituto de Neurociencias, CSIC and Universidad Miguel Hernandez, Alicante, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Swanson CI, Meserve JH, McCarter PC, Thieme A, Mathew T, Elston TC, Duronio RJ. Expression of an S phase-stabilized version of the CDK inhibitor Dacapo can alter endoreplication. Development 2015; 142:4288-98. [PMID: 26493402 DOI: 10.1242/dev.115006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/04/2014] [Accepted: 10/12/2015] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
Abstract
In developing organisms, divergence from the canonical cell division cycle is often necessary to ensure the proper growth, differentiation, and physiological function of a variety of tissues. An important example is endoreplication, in which endocycling cells alternate between G and S phase without intervening mitosis or cytokinesis, resulting in polyploidy. Although significantly different from the canonical cell cycle, endocycles use regulatory pathways that also function in diploid cells, particularly those involved in S phase entry and progression. A key S phase regulator is the Cyclin E-Cdk2 kinase, which must alternate between periods of high (S phase) and low (G phase) activity in order for endocycling cells to achieve repeated rounds of S phase and polyploidy. The mechanisms that drive these oscillations of Cyclin E-Cdk2 activity are not fully understood. Here, we show that the Drosophila Cyclin E-Cdk2 inhibitor Dacapo (Dap) is targeted for destruction during S phase via a PIP degron, contributing to oscillations of Dap protein accumulation during both mitotic cycles and endocycles. Expression of a PIP degron mutant Dap attenuates endocycle progression but does not obviously affect proliferating diploid cells. A mathematical model of the endocycle predicts that the rate of destruction of Dap during S phase modulates the endocycle by regulating the length of G phase. We propose from this model and our in vivo data that endo S phase-coupled destruction of Dap reduces the threshold of Cyclin E-Cdk2 activity necessary to trigger the subsequent G-S transition, thereby influencing endocycle oscillation frequency and the extent of polyploidy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christina I Swanson
- Integrative Program for Biological and Genome Sciences, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA
| | - Joy H Meserve
- Curriculum in Genetics and Molecular Biology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA
| | - Patrick C McCarter
- Curriculum in Bioinformatics & Computational Biology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA
| | - Alexis Thieme
- Department of Biology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA
| | - Tony Mathew
- Department of Biology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA
| | - Timothy C Elston
- Curriculum in Bioinformatics & Computational Biology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA Department of Pharmacology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA
| | - Robert J Duronio
- Integrative Program for Biological and Genome Sciences, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA Curriculum in Genetics and Molecular Biology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA Department of Biology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Apitz H, Salecker I. A Challenge of Numbers and Diversity: Neurogenesis in theDrosophilaOptic Lobe. J Neurogenet 2014; 28:233-49. [DOI: 10.3109/01677063.2014.922558] [Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/07/2023]
|
11
|
Das SS, Nanda GG, Alone DP. Artemisinin and curcumin inhibit Drosophila brain tumor, prolong life span, and restore locomotor activity. IUBMB Life 2014; 66:496-506. [PMID: 24975030 DOI: 10.1002/iub.1284] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2014] [Revised: 06/11/2014] [Accepted: 06/11/2014] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
Abstract
Deletion of tumor suppressor gene, lethal(2)giant larvae [l(2)gl], leads to brain tumor in Drosophila melanogaster at larval stage of development and severe brain dysplasia in mice. We have studied the effect of two potential antitumor drugs artemisinin and curcumin in the perspective of inhibiting l(2)gl brain tumor. Efficacies of these drugs are characterized morphologically by measuring brain sizes of untreated and treated larvae on the basis of tumor inhibition and anatomically by looking at the cellular patterning via antibody staining of the third instar Drosophila larval brains. Behavioral experiments were done in form of locomotion to correlate tumor inhibition with the revival of brain function and longevity assays to assess general health span. It was observed that both drugs show antitumor properties individually and in combination when larvae were treated with these drugs. We also found evidence for reactive oxygen species-mediated action of these drugs. Both the drugs when treated individually or together show better median life span and locomotory response. Although the efficacies of various treatments varied, overall, the positive effects of artemisinin and curcumin demonstrate a potential applicability of these drugs against brain tumor in higher organisms. It also paves a way for a simpler model system for screening such natural products for antitumor property.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sourajit Soumyaranjan Das
- School of Biological Sciences, National Institute of Science Education and Research (NISER), Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
12
|
Yasugi T, Fischer A, Jiang Y, Reichert H, Knoblich JA. A regulatory transcriptional loop controls proliferation and differentiation in Drosophila neural stem cells. PLoS One 2014; 9:e97034. [PMID: 24804774 PMCID: PMC4013126 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0097034] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/20/2014] [Accepted: 04/14/2014] [Indexed: 12/04/2022] Open
Abstract
Neurogenesis is initiated by a set of basic Helix-Loop-Helix (bHLH) transcription factors that specify neural progenitors and allow them to generate neurons in multiple rounds of asymmetric cell division. The Drosophila Daughterless (Da) protein and its mammalian counterparts (E12/E47) act as heterodimerization factors for proneural genes and are therefore critically required for neurogenesis. Here, we demonstrate that Da can also be an inhibitor of the neural progenitor fate whose absence leads to stem cell overproliferation and tumor formation. We explain this paradox by demonstrating that Da induces the differentiation factor Prospero (Pros) whose asymmetric segregation is essential for differentiation in one of the two daughter cells. Da co-operates with the bHLH transcription factor Asense, whereas the other proneural genes are dispensible. After mitosis, Pros terminates Asense expression in one of the two daughter cells. In da mutants, pros is not expressed, leading to the formation of lethal transplantable brain tumors. Our results define a transcriptional feedback loop that regulates the balance between self-renewal and differentiation in Drosophila optic lobe neuroblasts. They indicate that initiation of a neural differentiation program in stem cells is essential to prevent tumorigenesis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tetsuo Yasugi
- Institute of Molecular Biotechnology of the Austrian Academy of Sciences, Vienna, Austria
| | - Anja Fischer
- Institute of Molecular Biotechnology of the Austrian Academy of Sciences, Vienna, Austria
| | - Yanrui Jiang
- Biozentrum, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | | | - Juergen A. Knoblich
- Institute of Molecular Biotechnology of the Austrian Academy of Sciences, Vienna, Austria
- * E-mail:
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Tsuda L, Lim YM. Regulatory system for the G1-arrest during neuronal development in Drosophila. Dev Growth Differ 2014; 56:358-67. [PMID: 24738783 DOI: 10.1111/dgd.12130] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/31/2014] [Revised: 03/04/2014] [Accepted: 03/04/2014] [Indexed: 01/25/2023]
Abstract
Neuronal network consists of many types of neuron and glial cells. This diversity is guaranteed by the constant cell proliferation of neuronal stem cells following stop cell cycle re-entry, which leads to differentiation during development. Neuronal differentiation occurs mainly at the specific cell cycle phase, the G1 phase. Therefore, cell cycle exit at the G1 phase is quite an important issue in understanding the process of neuronal cell development. Recent studies have revealed that aberrant S phase re-entry from the G1 phase often links cellular survival. In this review we discuss the different types of G1 arrest on the process of neuronal development in Drosophila. We also describe the issue that aberrant S phase entry often causes apoptosis, and the same mechanism might contribute to sensory organ defects, such as deafness.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Leo Tsuda
- Animal Models of Aging, National Center for Geriatrics and Gerontology, Gengo, Obu, Aichi, Japan
| | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Kelsom C, Lu W. Uncovering the link between malfunctions in Drosophila neuroblast asymmetric cell division and tumorigenesis. Cell Biosci 2012; 2:38. [PMID: 23151376 PMCID: PMC3524031 DOI: 10.1186/2045-3701-2-38] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/02/2012] [Accepted: 11/05/2012] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Asymmetric cell division is a developmental process utilized by several organisms. On the most basic level, an asymmetric division produces two daughter cells, each possessing a different identity or fate. Drosophila melanogaster progenitor cells, referred to as neuroblasts, undergo asymmetric division to produce a daughter neuroblast and another cell known as a ganglion mother cell (GMC). There are several features of asymmetric division in Drosophila that make it a very complex process, and these aspects will be discussed at length. The cell fate determinants that play a role in specifying daughter cell fate, as well as the mechanisms behind setting up cortical polarity within neuroblasts, have proved to be essential to ensuring that neurogenesis occurs properly. The role that mitotic spindle orientation plays in coordinating asymmetric division, as well as how cell cycle regulators influence asymmetric division machinery, will also be addressed. Most significantly, malfunctions during asymmetric cell division have shown to be causally linked with neoplastic growth and tumor formation. Therefore, it is imperative that the developmental repercussions as a result of asymmetric cell division gone awry be understood.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Corey Kelsom
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Eli and Edythe Broad Center for Regenerative Medicine and Stem Cell Research, University of Southern California, 1425 San Pablo Street, Los Angeles, CA, 90033, USA.
| | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Foskolou IP, Stellas D, Rozani I, Lavigne MD, Politis PK. Prox1 suppresses the proliferation of neuroblastoma cells via a dual action in p27-Kip1 and Cdc25A. Oncogene 2012; 32:947-60. [PMID: 22508481 DOI: 10.1038/onc.2012.129] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/08/2023]
Abstract
Neuroblastoma is a pediatric tumor that originates from precursor cells of the sympathetic nervous system with less than 40% long-term survival in children diagnosed with high-risk disease. These clinical observations underscore the need for novel insights in the mechanisms of malignant transformation and progression. Accordingly, it was recently reported that Prox1, a homeobox transcription regulator, is expressed in higher levels in human neuroblastoma with favorable prognosis. Consistently, we have recently shown that Prox1 exerts a strong antiproliferative effect on neural precursor cells during embryonic development. Thus, Prox1 is a candidate gene with a critical role in suppressing malignant neuroblastoma transformation. Here, we provide evidence that Prox1 strongly suppresses the proliferation of mouse and human neuroblastoma cell lines and blocks the growth of neuroblastoma tumors in SCID mice. Conversely, short hairpin RNA (shRNA) -mediated knockdown of basal Prox1 expression significantly induces proliferation, genomic instability and the ability of neuroblastoma cells to form tumors. Mechanistically, analysis of an inducible Prox1-overexpressing Neuro2A cell line indicates that Prox1 is sufficient to suppress CyclinD1, CyclinA and CyclinB1, consistent with a role in cell cycle arrest. Surprisingly, Prox1 strongly induces CyclinE1 expression in the same system despite its action on blocking cell cycle progression, which could account for the context dependent oncogenic function of Prox1. Most importantly, Prox1 was sufficient to decrease Cdc25A and induce p27-Kip1, but not p21-Cip1 or p53. By alleviating the Prox1 action in Cdc25A and p27-Kip1 expression, we were able to rescue its effect on cell cycle arrest. Together these data suggest that Prox1 negatively regulates neuroblastoma carcinogenesis through suppression of Cdc25A and induction of p27-Kip1 to counteract CyclinE1 overexpression and block cell cycle progression. Furthermore, these observations render Prox1 a candidate target for the treatment of neuroblastoma tumors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- I P Foskolou
- Center for Basic Research, Biomedical Research Foundation of the Academy of Athens, Athens, Greece
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|