Planar cell polarity: A bridge too far?

The mechanisms of planar cell polarity are being revealed by genetic analysis. Recent studies have provided new insights into interactions between three proteins involved in planar cell polarity: Flamingo, Frizzled and Van Gogh.     

Planar cell polarity: one or two pathways?

In multicellular organisms, cells are polarized in the plane of the epithelial sheet, revealed in some cell types by oriented hairs or cilia. Many of the underlying genes have been identified in Drosophila melanogaster and are conserved in vertebrates. Here we dissect the logic of planar cell polarity (PCP). We review studies of genetic mosaics in adult flies - marked cells of different genotypes help us to understand how polarizing information is generated and how it passes from one cell to another. We argue that the prevailing opinion that planar polarity depends on a single genetic pathway is wrong and conclude that there are (at least) two independently acting processes. This conclusion has major consequences for the PCP field.     

Planar cell polarity signaling in the development of left–right asymmetry

The planar cell polarity (PCP) signaling pathway, principally understood from work in Drosophila, is now known to contribute to development in a broad swath of the animal kingdom, and its impairment leads to developmental malformations and diseases affecting humans. The ‘core’ mechanism underlying PCP signaling polarizes sheets of cells, aligning them in a head-to-tail fashion within the sheet. Cells use the resulting directional information to guide a wide variety of processes. One such process is lateralization, the determination of left–right asymmetry that guides the asymmetric morphology and placement of internal organs. Recent evidence extends the idea that PCP signaling underlies the earliest steps in lateralization and that PCP is invoked again during asymmetric morphogenesis of organs including the heart and gut.     

Planar cell polarization: do the same mechanisms regulate Drosophila tissue polarity and vertebrate gastrulation?

Many types of cell show different aspects of polarization. Epithelial cells display a ubiquitous apical-basolateral polarity but often are also polarized in the plane of the epithelium - a feature referred to as 'planar cell polarity' (PCP). In Drosophila all adult epithelial cuticular structures are polarized within the plane, whereas in vertebrates examples of PCP include aspects of skin development, features of the inner ear epithelium, and the morphology and behavior of mesenchymal cells undergoing the morphogenetic movement called 'convergent extension'. Recent advances in the study of PCP establishment are beginning to unravel the molecular mechanisms that underlie this aspect of cell and tissue differentiation. Here I discuss new developments in our molecular understanding of PCP in Drosophila and compare them towhat is known about the regulation of convergent extension in vertebrates.     

Planar cell polarity in the inner ear: how do hair cells acquire their oriented structure?

Sensory hair cells in the ear and lateral line have an asymmetrical hair-bundle structure, essential for their function as directional mechanotransducers. We examine four questions: (1) how does the planar asymmetry of the individual hair cell originate? (2) How are the orientations of neighboring hair cells coordinated? (3) How is the orientation of a group of hair cells controlled in relation to the ear as a whole? (4) How does the initial cell asymmetry lead to creation of the asymmetrical hair bundle? Studies of the development of hairs and bristles in Drosophila, combined with genetic data from vertebrates, suggest that the answer to questions (1) and (2) lies in asymmetries that develop at the cell cortex and at cell-cell junctions, generated by products of a set of primary planar cell polarity genes, including the transmembrane receptor Frizzled. A separate and largely independent mechanism controls asymmmetric allocation of cell fate determinants such as Numb at mitosis, in Drosophila and possibly in the ear also. Little is known about long-range signals that might orient hair cells globally in the ear, but progress has been made in identifying a set of genes responsible for read-out of the primary polarity specification. These genes, in flies and vertebrates, provide a link to assembly of the polarized cytoskeleton; myosin VIIA appears to belong in this group. The mechanism creating the staircase pattern of stereocilium lengths is unknown, but could involve regulation of stereocilium growth by Ca(2+) ions entering via transduction channels.     

Amphisomes: out of the autophagosome shadow?

EMBO J (2013) 32: 3130–3144 doi: 10.1038/emboj.2013.233; published online November012013Amphisomes are intermediate organelles, formed during autophagy through the fusion between autophagosomes and endosomes. Complex multivesicular vacuoles that resemble amphisomes have been observed in various cell types, but whether they have cellular roles other than being a precursor structure is still enigmatic. While autophagy-related (ATG) proteins interact with the endocytic pathways in other processes different from autophagy, Patel and colleagues now report that these factors come together to generate amphisome-like compartments that regulate mucin secretion in goblet cells.ATG and endosomal proteins have been linked to secretion, and the specific loss of them impairs the function of different secretory cell types (Jung et al, 2008; DeSelm et al, 2011; Ushio et al, 2011; Sasidharan et al, 2012). ATG proteins have also been shown to interact with the endocytic pathway in few situations that do not involve autophagy. For example in phagocytic cells, the surface of bacteria-containing phagosomes acquires LC3/Atg8 through the concerted action of a subpopulation of ATG proteins. This process, which has been termed LC3-associated phagocytosis (LAP), promotes the fusion of phagosomes with lysosomes (Sanjuan et al, 2007). Something similar occurs during entotic cell death, an engulfment programme leading to the elimination of cells into lysosomes. The entotic vacuole membranes surrounding the internalized cells also recruit LC3 through a mechanism that depends on several ATG proteins, but not on autophagosome formation (Florey et al, 2011).In their work aimed to understand the function of ATG proteins in goblet cells, Patel et al (2013) show that the autophagy and endocytic machinery converge at the amphisomes to promote the secretion of mucins. In the gastrointestinal tract, secretory cells have a crucial role in providing the mucus barrier that protects against intestinal pathogens. Mucins, the main components of the mucus, are produced in goblet cells where large polymers of these highly glycosylated proteins are packed into secretory granules that accumulate at the apical surface. The release of these mucin granules relies on a series of cellular events that are tightly coordinated. Patel et al (2013) show that knockout mice lacking ATG5 in the intestinal epithelium, that is, Atg5VC mice, exhibit both a dramatic accumulation of mucin granules in goblet cells and a diminished mucus secretion. Taking advantage of a newly developed in vitro system to culture and differentiate intestinal epithelial stem cells into secretory goblet cells, the authors also demonstrate that the ablation of other ATG proteins causes the same phenotype showing that the autophagy machinery is required for mucin secretion in these specialized cells (Patel et al, 2013). Interestingly, ATG proteins affect the functionality of another gastrointestinal secretory lineage, the Paneth cells. Paneth cells homozygous for the atg16L1 risk allele, associated with Crohn disease, produce less secretory granules than in controls (Cadwell et al, 2008). This suggests that although ATG proteins regulate secretion in the two most abundant secretory lineages in the intestinal tract, two different mechanisms are probably involved.A microarray analysis of mRNA from Atg5VC mouse colonic epithelial cells revealed a possible alteration in the endocytic pathway. Indeed, blocking endocytosis also provoked an accumulation of mucin granules. While LC3B has been previously found on the surface of secretory granules (Ushio et al, 2011; Ishibashi et al, 2012), immuno-electron microscopy of wild-type mouse intestinal tissue revealed a distribution of LC3B not on mucin granules, but on multivesicular vacuoles positive for several endosomal proteins (Patel et al, 2013). Because of the morphological and molecular characteristics of these compartments, it appears that the ATG proteins together with the endocytic pathway regulate secretion in goblet cells by converging in what could be a new amphisome-like organelle (Figure 1).Open in a separate windowFigure 1Schematic representation for the regulated secretion of mucin granules by amphisome-like structures in goblet cells. ROS generated by NADPH oxidases promote the fusion of LC3-positive vesicles with endosomes marked by Rab5 and containing the NADPH oxidase subunit p22phox. The resulting amphisomes-like organelles are decorated with LC3, endosomal proteins (Rab5, Rab7 and EEA1) and p22phox and localize near the mucin granules. The formation of these copartments probably prolong and/or enhance the production of ROS by the NADPH oxidase, which in turn increases the levels of cytoplasmic calcium through an unknown mechanism leading to the release of the mucin granules.NADPH oxidases are known to be present in endosomes, and NADPH oxidase-generated reactive oxygen species (ROS) are necessary for LC3 recruitment to phagosomes.(Huang et al, 2009). Patel et al (2013) thus explored whether these enzymes played a role in mucin granule secretion in goblet cells. Indeed, expression of a mutant form of p22phox, a transmembrane subunit of several NADPH oxidase complexes, altered the exocytosis of these carriers. Moreover, p22phox was found to localize to Rab5-positive endosomes and also with the observed amphisome-like structures (Figure 1). Because a mutant form of p22phox also caused a misslocalization of both LC3 and the early-endosomal marker protein EEA1, the obvious conclusion was that ROS production by endosomes is necessary to trigger the formation of the amphisome-like organelles via the acquisition of the ATG machinery (Figure 1). Interestingly, addition of H₂O₂ that mimics ROS generation was able to induce mucin granule exocytosis in the p22phox mutant cells, showing that ROS was also required to regulate secretion in goblet cells (Patel et al, 2013). Furthermore, H₂O₂ bypassed as well the mucin granule secretion defect in autophagy and endocytosis-deficient goblet cells through an increase of cytosolic calcium levels (Patel et al, 2013). This, together with the observation that the loss of ATG5 and the block of the endocytic pathway impair the production of ROS has led Patel et al (2013) to propose that amphisome-like organelles are a signalling platform, where NADPH oxidase-driven ROS production promotes the release of the mucin granules.Amphisomes have been characterized and defined as autophagic vacuoles formed upon fusion between autophagosomes and endosomes. Given that ATG and endosomal proteins converge in multivesicular and/or vacuolar compartments resembling amphisomes in cellular processes independent of autophagy, one could consider to use the term amphisomes to describe a more heterogenous and ampler population of unnamed compartments where part of the autophagy and endosomal machineries co-localize. Based on this consideration, the study by Patel et al (2013) has identified an amphisome-like structure where molecular events interconnect to trigger granule secretion. While their work adds to the still limited number of non-degradative roles of the autophagic pathway, which include unconventional secretion (Subramani and Malhotra, 2013), it is one of the first reports highlighting that amphisomes (or any autophagosomal intermediate structure) could be more than just a transport intermediate, and at least in goblet cells, they could act as a platform where signals integrating some aspects of the cell physiology are elicited.Though it remains to be establish whether the organelles described by Patel et al (2013) are indeed amphisomes, especially as they are formed by fusion of endosomes with LC3-positive single-membrane vesicles rather than LC3-positive double-membrane autophagosomes, their study raises some intriguing questions. Are these compartments persistent or will they eventually fuse with lysosomes? Why has the cell opted to signal from amphisomes and not from endosomes, where the NADPH oxidases are normally present? Maybe the answer to these questions is hidden in the transient life of amphisomes. In the most classical signalling pathways, the transduction cascade amplifies the initial cue but it also turn it off subsequently through negative feedback loops. This permits to precisely modulate the signal output temporally (and locally). The amphisome-like structures observed in goblet cells could also act as the molecular switch for the signal-stimulating mucin granule secretion. The ROS generated initially from endosomes would trigger the recruitment of LC3 through vesicle fusion events, and the production of this second messenger will be prolonged and/or enhanced in the resulting amphisomes-like structure, leading to a stimulation of mucin granule exocytosis (Figure 1). The subsequent fusion of the amphisomes with lysosomes could lead to the termination of the signal. Other scenarios, however, cannot be excluded like, for example, the delivery of a protein enhancing the NADPH oxidase activity to the endosomes by the LC3-positive vesicles.While these are just hypotheses, it is clear that Patel et al (2013) have opened a window on a new and unexplored area of the autophagy field. Future investigations will tell us whether what observed in goblet cells is a unique situation or the intermediate organelles characterizing autophagy can carry out cellular functions different from the one delivering unwanted structures into the lysosome interior for degradation, including to serve as signalling platforms.     

Stress-induced morphogenic responses: growing out of trouble?

Plants exposed to sub-lethal abiotic stress conditions exhibit a broad range of morphogenic responses. Despite the diversity of phenotypes, a generic 'stress-induced morphogenic response' can be recognized that appears to be carefully orchestrated and comprises three components: (a) inhibition of cell elongation, (b) localized stimulation of cell division and (c) alterations in cell differentiation status. It is hypothesized that the similarities in the morphogenic responses induced by distinct stresses, reflect common molecular processes such as increased ROS-production and altered phytohormone transport and/or metabolism. The stress-induced morphogenic response (SIMR) is postulated to be part of a general acclimation strategy, whereby plant growth is redirected to diminish stress exposure.     

Cell polarity: intrinsic or externally imposed?

A basic question in studies of the genesis of cell polarity is whether the polarity is an intrinsic and permanent property of cells or whether it is externally imposed by signals at the cell periphery. Current models favor the possibility that an external signal selectively imposes a polarized cell morphology. However, recent data from different experimental systems are discussed here that support the idea that an intrinsic polarity in animal cells is maintained through a dynamic process involving specific activities of the cortical microfilament system and the centrosome-microtubule complex. In this view, external signals capable of modulating cell polarity, for example, during chemotaxis or histogenesis, do so by acting on mechanisms that maintain cells permanently polarized. The contribution of the cytoskeleton to the genesis of cell polarity is discussed, with particular reference to experimental evidence for global cytoskeletal dynamics, and it is suggested that critical advances in our understanding of the maintenance of cell polarity will depend on our obtaining further knowledge of the molecular mechanisms controlling interactions between microtubules and microfilaments. Microtubules appear to exert an inhibitory control on the recruitment of cytoplasmic myosin into the cortex, and there are data indicating that the centrosome and centrioles could actively contribute to the establishment of cell polarity.     

A molecular phylogeny of ichthyophiid caecilians (Amphibia: Gymnophiona: Ichthyophiidae): out of India or out of South East Asia?

Recent molecular phylogenetic studies indicate that the rafting Indian plate harboured several isolated vertebrate lineages between ca. 130 and 56 Myr ago that dispersed and diversified 'out of India' following accretion with Eurasia. A single family of the amphibian order Gymnophiona, the Ichthyophiidae, presently occurs on the Indian plate and across much of South East Asia. Ichthyophiid phylogeny is investigated in order to test competing out of India and out of South East Asia hypotheses for their distribution. Partial sequences of mitochondrial 12S and 16S rRNA and cytochrome b genes for 20 ichthyophiids and proximate outgroups were assembled. Parsimony, maximum-likelihood and distance analyses all recover optimum trees in which uraeotyphlids plus Ichthyophis cf. malabarensis are the sister taxa to all other Ichthyophis, among which the South East Asian taxa are monophyletic. Tree topology and branch lengths indicate that the Indian lineages are more basal and older, and thus are more consistent with the hypothesis that ichthyophiids dispersed from the Indian subcontinent into South East Asia. The estimated relationships also support monophyly of Sri Lankan Ichthyophis, and non-monophyly of striped and unstriped Ichthyophis species groups. Mitochondrial DNA sequences provide evidence that should assist current problematic areas of caecilian taxonomy.     

Cell polarity: The missing link in skeletal morphogenesis?

Despite extensive genetic analysis of the dynamic multi-phase process that transforms a small population of lateral plate mesoderm into the mature limb skeleton, the mechanisms by which signaling pathways regulate cellular behaviors to generate morphogenetic forces are not known. Recently, a series of papers have offered the intriguing possibility that regulated cell polarity fine-tunes the morphogenetic process via orienting cell axes, division planes and cell movements. Wnt5a-mediated non-canonical signaling, which may include planar cell polarity, has emerged as a common thread in the otherwise distinct signaling networks that regulate morphogenesis in each phase of limb development. These findings position the limb as a key model to elucidate how global tissue patterning pathways direct local differences in cell behavior that, in turn, generate growth and form.     

ERAD substrates: Which way out?

Global folding of polypeptides entering the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) starts as soon as they emerge from the narrow Sec61 translocon. Attainment of the native structure can take from several minutes to hours, depending on the gene product. Until then, non-native folding intermediates must be protected from molecular chaperones that recognize misfolded determinants and could prematurely interrupt folding programs by re-directing them to disposal pathways. On the other hand, futile folding attempts must actively be stopped to prevent intraluminal accumulation of defective cargo. This review describes recent advances in understanding how terminally misfolded polypeptides are extracted from the folding environment and directed to specific dislocons within the ER membrane for transfer to the cytoplasm for proteasome-mediated degradation.     

Review: transport of tRNA out of the nucleus-direct channeling to the ribosome?

Although tRNA was the first substrate whose export from the nuclei of eukaryotic cells had been shown to be carrier-mediated and active, it has only been in the last 2 years that the first mechanistic details of this nucleocytoplasmic transport pathway have begun to emerge. A member of the importin/karyopherin beta superfamily, Los1p in yeast and Xpo-t in vertebrates, has been shown to export tRNA in cooperation with the small GTPase Ran (Gsp1p) from the nucleus into the cytoplasm, where tRNA becomes available for translation. However, Los1p is not essential for viability in yeast cells, suggesting that alternative tRNA export pathways exist. Recent results show that aminoacylation and a translation factor are also required for efficient nuclear tRNA export. Thus, protein translation and nuclear export of tRNA appear to be coupled processes.     

Penetrability of the inner mucus layer: who is out there?

Large numbers of microorganisms colonise the skin and mucous membranes of animals, with their highest density in the lower gastrointestinal tract. The impact of these microbes on the host can be demonstrated by comparing animals (usually mice) housed under germ‐free conditions, or colonised with different compositions of microbes. Inbreeding and embryo manipulation programs have generated a wide variety of mouse strains with a fixed germ‐line (isogenic) and hygiene comparisons robustly show remarkably strong interactions between the microbiota and the host, which can be summarised in three axioms. (I) Live microbes are largely confined to their spaces at body surfaces, provided the animal is not suffering from an infection. (II) There is promiscuous molecular exchange throughout the host and its microbiota in both directions 1 . (III) Every host organ system is profoundly shaped by the presence of body surface microbes. It follows that one must draw a line between live microbial and host “spaces” (I) to understand the crosstalk (II and III) at this interesting interface of the host‐microbial superorganism. Of course, since microbes can adapt to very different niches, there has to be more than one line. In this issue of EMBO Reports, Johansson and colleagues have studied mucus, which is the main physical frontier for most microbes in the intestinal tract: they report how different non‐pathogenic microbiota compositions affect its permeability and the functional protection of the epithelial surface 2 .     

Epithelial cell polarity: a major gatekeeper against cancer?

The correct establishment and maintenance of cell polarity are crucial for normal cell physiology and tissue homeostasis. Conversely, loss of cell polarity, tissue disorganisation and excessive cell growth are hallmarks of cancer. In this review, we focus on identifying the stages of tumoural development that are affected by the loss or deregulation of epithelial cell polarity. Asymmetric division has recently emerged as a major regulatory mechanism that controls stem cell numbers and differentiation. Links between cell polarity and asymmetric cell division in the context of cancer will be examined. Apical-basal polarity and cell-cell adhesion are tightly interconnected. Hence, how loss of cell polarity in epithelial cells may promote epithelial mesenchymal transition and metastasis will also be discussed. Altogether, we present the argument that loss of epithelial cell polarity may have an important role in both the initiation of tumourigenesis and in later stages of tumour development, favouring the progression of tumours from benign to malignancy.