Spatial regulation of cell adhesion in the Drosophila wing is mediated by Delilah, a potent activator of βPS integrin expression

In spite of our conceptual view of how differential gene expression is used to define different cell identities, we still do not understand how different cell identities are translated into actual cell properties. The example discussed here is that of the fly wing, which is composed of two main cell types: vein and intervein cells. These two cell types differ in many features, including their adhesive properties. One of the major differences is that intervein cells express integrins, which are required for the attachment of the two wing layers to each other, whereas vein cells are devoid of integrin expression. The major signaling pathways that divide the wing to vein and intervein domains have been characterized. However, the genetic programs that execute these two alternative differentiation programs are still very roughly drawn. Here we identify the bHLH protein Delilah (Dei) as a mediator between signaling pathways that specify intervein cell-fate and one of the most significant realizators of this fate, βPS integrin. Dei's expression is restricted to intervein territories where it acts as a potent activator of βPS integrin expression. In the absence of normal Dei activity the level of βPS integrin is reduced, leading to a failure of adhesion between the dorsal and ventral wing layers and a consequent formation of wing blisters. The effect of Dei on βPS expression is not restricted to the wing, suggesting that Dei functions as a general genetic switch, which is turned on wherever a sticky cell-identity is determined and integrin-based adhesion is required.     

Visualization of proprioceptors in Drosophila larvae and pupae

Proprioception is the ability to sense the motion, or position, of body parts by responding to stimuli arising within the body. In fruitflies and other insects proprioception is provided by specialized sensory organs termed chordotonal organs (ChOs). Like many other organs in Drosophila, ChOs develop twice during the life cycle of the fly. First, the larval ChOs develop during embryogenesis. Then, the adult ChOs start to develop in the larval imaginal discs and continue to differentiate during metamorphosis. The development of larval ChOs during embryogenesis has been studied extensively. The centerpiece of each ChO is a sensory unit composed of a neuron and a scolopale cell. The sensory unit is stretched between two types of accessory cells that attach to the cuticle via specialized epidermal attachment cells. When a fly larva moves, the relative displacement of the epidermal attachment cells leads to stretching of the sensory unit and consequent opening of specific transient receptor potential vanilloid (TRPV) channels at the outer segment of the dendrite. The elicited signal is then transferred to the locomotor central pattern generator circuit in the central nervous system. Multiple ChOs have been described in the adult fly. These are located near the joints of the adult fly appendages (legs, wings and halters) and in the thorax and abdomen. In addition, several hundreds of ChOs collectively form the Johnston's organ in the adult antenna that transduce acoustic to mechanical energy. In contrast to the extensive knowledge about the development of ChOs in embryonic stages, very little is known about the morphology of these organs during larval stages. Moreover, with the exception of femoral ChOs and Johnston's organ, our knowledge about the development and structure of ChOs in the adult fly is very fragmentary. Here we describe a method for staining and visualizing ChOs in third instar larvae and pupae. This method can be applied together with genetic tools to better characterize the morphology and understand the development of the various ChOs in the fly.     

What are decision trees?

Decision trees have been applied to problems such as assigning protein function and predicting splice sites. How do these classifiers work, what types of problems can they solve and what are their advantages over alternatives?     

Acquisition and Evolution of Plant Pathogenesis–Associated Gene Clusters and Candidate Determinants of Tissue-Specificity in Xanthomonas

Background

Xanthomonas is a large genus of plant-associated and plant-pathogenic bacteria. Collectively, members cause diseases on over 392 plant species. Individually, they exhibit marked host- and tissue-specificity. The determinants of this specificity are unknown.

Methodology/Principal Findings

To assess potential contributions to host- and tissue-specificity, pathogenesis-associated gene clusters were compared across genomes of eight Xanthomonas strains representing vascular or non-vascular pathogens of rice, brassicas, pepper and tomato, and citrus. The gum cluster for extracellular polysaccharide is conserved except for gumN and sequences downstream. The xcs and xps clusters for type II secretion are conserved, except in the rice pathogens, in which xcs is missing. In the otherwise conserved hrp cluster, sequences flanking the core genes for type III secretion vary with respect to insertion sequence element and putative effector gene content. Variation at the rpf (regulation of pathogenicity factors) cluster is more pronounced, though genes with established functional relevance are conserved. A cluster for synthesis of lipopolysaccharide varies highly, suggesting multiple horizontal gene transfers and reassortments, but this variation does not correlate with host- or tissue-specificity. Phylogenetic trees based on amino acid alignments of gum, xps, xcs, hrp, and rpf cluster products generally reflect strain phylogeny. However, amino acid residues at four positions correlate with tissue specificity, revealing hpaA and xpsD as candidate determinants. Examination of genome sequences of xanthomonads Xylella fastidiosa and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia revealed that the hrp, gum, and xcs clusters are recent acquisitions in the Xanthomonas lineage.

Conclusions/Significance

Our results provide insight into the ancestral Xanthomonas genome and indicate that differentiation with respect to host- and tissue-specificity involved not major modifications or wholesale exchange of clusters, but subtle changes in a small number of genes or in non-coding sequences, and/or differences outside the clusters, potentially among regulatory targets or secretory substrates.