Institut de Génétique et de Biologie Moléculaire et Cellulaire, CNRS/INSERM/ULP, BP 163, 67404 Illkirch Cedex, CU de Strasbourg, France and Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EJ, UK
* Present address: Institut für Zoologie, Lehrstuhl für Entwicklungsbiologie, Universität Regensburg, 93040 Regensburg, Germany
Present address: Department of Zoology, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EJ, UK
Author for correspondence (e-mail: pas49{at}cam.ac.uk)
Accepted 30 April 2002
![]() |
SUMMARY |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Key words: Diptera, Anopheles gambiae, Sensory organ, achaete-scute, pannier, Drosophila melanogaster
![]() |
INTRODUCTION |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
pannier is expressed in a longitudinal, dorsal domain extending from the head to the end of the abdomen in both larvae and imagos and is involved in the subdivision of the dorsal component of each segment (Calleja et al., 2000; Maurel-Zaffran and Treisman, 2000
). It acts in combination with engrailed and the genes of the BXC to specify the identity of the dorsal, medial domain (Calleja et al., 2000
). The lateral domain is specified by the expression of the iro-C genes (Calleja et al., 2000
; Diez del Corral et al., 1999
; Kehl et al., 1998
). The most obvious pattern elements of the notum are the large sensory bristles that arise in a stereotyped pattern as a result of the spatially regulated expression of the achaete-scute (ac-sc) genes (Cubas et al., 1991
; Ghysen and Dambly-Chaudiere, 1988
; Romani et al., 1989
; Skeath and Carroll, 1991
). Both Pnr and the iro-C gene products have been shown to activate transcription of ac-sc in Drosophila, and this regulatory function of the iro-C proteins appears to have been conserved in Xenopus (Garcia-Garcia et al., 1999
; Gomez-Skarmeta et al., 1996
; Gomez-Skarmeta et al., 1998
; Haenlin et al., 1997
).
There are about 60,000 species of true flies many of which display species-specific bristle patterns that differ from that of Drosophila (McAlpine, 1981; Simpson, 1999
). Dipteran flies thus provide a convenient model group in which to investigate evolutionary changes in the regulation of expression of ac-sc by the selector genes of the iro-C and pnr. The more derived species of cyclorraphous Diptera, such as Drosophila, Ceratitis capitata and Calliphora vicina, display stereotyped bristle patterns. These result from the expression of ac-sc in discrete proneural clusters or stripes, corresponding to each bristle or bristle row (Cubas et al., 1991
; Pistillo et al., 2002
; Romani et al., 1989
; Simpson et al., 1999
; Skeath and Carroll, 1991
; Sturtevant, 1970
; Wülbeck and Simpson, 2000
). In Drosophila this complex spatial expression relies on a number of cis-regulatory elements scattered throughout the ac-sc gene complex (ASC) (Gomez-Skarmeta et al., 1995
). These are likely to be conserved in Ceratitis and Calliphora, together with the function of pnr, which is expressed in an identical medial dorsal domain in all three species (Pistillo et al., 2002
; Wülbeck and Simpson, 2000
).
The Nematocera comprises a group of basal Dipteran species in most of which the bristles are randomly positioned on the notum (McAlpine, 1981; Simpson et al., 1999
). A few families, such as the Culicidae, do include species with a simple arrangement of bristles into two or three rows on the notum, most of the body being densely covered with sensory scales (Stone, 1981
; McIver, 1975
). Here we examine the expression patterns of pnr and an ac-sc homologue, Ag-ASH, on the notum of Anopheles gambiae (Culicidae), a vector of the malaria-causing parasite. We find that, on the medial notum, Ag-ASH is expressed in very broad domains coincident with domains of expression of Ag-pnr. This suggests that activation of Ag-ASH by Ag-Pnr has been conserved. Indeed expression of Ag-pnr in Drosophila mimics the effects of mis-expression of Dm-pnr, and causes the development of ectopic bristles. The coincident expression domains of Ag-pnr and Ag-ASH suggest that activation of Ag-ASH may not require the complex modular promoter characteristic of the ASC of Drosophila. We hypothesise that duplication of the ASC genes, acquisition of position-specific cis-regulatory sequences, and regulatory co-factors for Pnr, may only have been co-opted after the separation of the Nematocera and the Brachycera, some 200 million years ago, and may have allowed the evolution of stereotyped bristle patterns. Interestingly, all of the bristles on the medial notum of Anopheles appear to arise along the borders of the Ag-pnr (and Ag-ASH) expression domains. This indicates that pnr may specify the dorsal bristle pattern in both Drosophila and Anopheles, but in quite different ways.
![]() |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Mosquito cultures
Mosquito larvae were kindly provided by members of the laboratory of Professor Fotis Kafatos, at the EMBL. Larvae were reared in humid chambers at room temperature and fed with cat food. Newly eclosed Anopheles adults were dehydrated and mounted in Euparal for microscopic analysis.
Labelling of RNA probes
Digoxigenin-labelled RNA probes (DIG-UTP; Boehringer Mannheim) were generated using the standard protocol of Boehringer Mannheim. The resulting RNA was resuspended in 100 µl preHyb solution (50% formamide, 5x SSC, 0,1% Tween 20, pH 6.0). RNA was transcribed from linearized DNA templates: Ag-pnr pBS-PAC3F1 (T3 sense, T7 antisense), Ag-ASH pBS-AC3K1 (T3 sense, T7 antisense).
RNA in situ hybridisation
In situ hybridisation was performed (Wülbeck and Simpson, 2000) with some modifications. Incubation with proteinase K was for 5 minutes at room temperature and incubation with anti-digoxigenin alkaline phosphatase-coupled antibody (Boehringer Mannheim) was performed overnight at 4°C instead of for 2 hours at room temperature.
Tissue preparation and antibody staining
Larvae and pupae for RNA in situ hybridisation were dissected in ice cold PBS and fixed as described previously (Wülbeck and Simpson, 2000), then stored in 100% methanol at 20°C. For antibody staining Anopheles larvae and pupae were boiled for 5 minutes in PBS and the cuticle removed when possible. Staining was performed immediately afterwards using standard procedures and dilutions of 1/200 in 10% foetal calf serum (FCS) for the primary antibody (rabbit anti-horseradish peroxidase (HRP); Jackson) and 1/200 in 10% FCS for the secondary antibody (anti-rabbit coupled with HRP; Jackson). DAB staining was performed using standard protocols.
Transformation in Drosophila
A full-length cDNA EcoRI-XbaI fragment of Ag-ASH (pBS-AC3K1) and a full-length cDNA SpeI-KpnI fragment of Ag-pnr (PAC3F1) were each subcloned into the corresponding restriction sites of the pUAST vector under the control of the Drosophila HSP70 minimal promoter. Germline transformants were obtained as described previously (Rubin and Spradling, 1982). Three independent lines were established. Expression of UAS-Ag-ASH was driven by GAL4-pnrMD237 and that of UAS-Ag-pnr by Gal4-ap, C765, sca534, pnrMD237, MD455 and MD410 (Brand and Perrimon, 1993
; Calleja et al., 1996
; Gorfinkiel et al., 1997
; Garcia-Garcia et al., 1997
). Standard procedures were used for X-gal staining. Flies were dehydrated and mounted in Euparal for microscopic analysis.
![]() |
RESULTS |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Ag-ASH appears closest to Drosophila lsc (l(1)sc FlyBase). The complete protein sequence of Ag-ASH is compared with that of lsc from Drosophila melanogaster and an ac-sc homologue from the butterfly Precis coenia, in Fig. 1A. Sequence analysis revealed that 81% of the amino acids in the bHLH domain are identical to those of the Drosophila lsc protein. Outside of this functional domain, amino acid sequence conservation is low (ranging from 20-27% for the amino (N)-terminal portion to 25-38% for the carboxy (C)-terminal part). A single stretch of 15 conserved amino acids, which appears to be restricted to insect ac-sc proteins, can be seen at the C terminus (shaded blue box). The central tyrosine of this sequence has changed in the butterfly Precis coenia (Galant et al., 1998).
|
Ag-pnr and Ag-ASH mimic the effects of ectopic expression of Dm-pnr and DmSc in Drosophila
Ag-ASH displays strong proneural activity when expressed in Drosophila. We made use of the GAL4-UAS system and the driver pnrMD237, to express Ag-ASH in the medial half of the notum. This leads to the formation of an excess of bristles in this region (Fig. 2A,B). These bristles are characteristic of the large bristles, or macrochaetes, of Drosophila.
|
Ontogeny of the imaginal notum in Anopheles
Many features of the life cycle of Anopheles are ancestral and characteristic of Nematocera (Clements, 1992). There are four larval instars after which the animal moults to a free-swimming pupa. The duration of larval development was variable under our laboratory conditions, but most animals pupated after about 12 days at room temperature. As in most Nematocera, the appendages develop from simple imaginal discs that are little more than invaginated pouches attached to the body wall (Clements, 1992
). These can be seen at the second larval instar (Fig. 3A). Although the discs are enclosed in a peripodial membrane, their stalks do not close. The wing buds are situated laterally on either side of the larval mesothorax. By the fourth instar, the adult appendages have evaginated into a space outside the larval epidermis and lie flat against the body wall (Fig. 3C). The trunk of much of the adult body does not arise from imaginal discs. The abdomen of the larva, pupa and imago is made from the same epithelium that secretes successive cuticles at each moult (Clements, 1992
). Thus, in Anopheles, the outline of the imaginal body is already present at pupation. Consequently the pupal period is short, lasting little more than 24 hours. This contrasts with cyclorraphous Schizophora, such as Drosophila, where it may last 5 days or more, during which time the larval body is destroyed and an entirely new adult body constructed from the imaginal discs and histoblasts.
|
The adult notum of Anopheles displays large sensory bristles as well as many small sensory scales (McIver, 1975; Stone, 1981
) (Fig. 4A). The medial half of each heminotum bears two rows of bristles named the acrostichal (AC) and dorsocentral (DC) rows. In addition there is a small transverse row of prescutellar (PST) bristles. The lateral part of each heminotum bears a band of antealar bristles and the scutellum a row of scutellar (SC) bristles. The number of bristles in each row varies considerably between individuals (Simpson et al., 1999
). Numbers and positions of scales are quite variable between individuals. However, scales do not cover the entire notum and are consistently found in specific regions: between the AC and DC bristle rows, around the positions of the PST and SC bristles and close to the lateral intercalary bristles (Fig. 4A). They are more or less absent from the area between the DC and antealar bristles. Scales are much smaller than bristles, each scale is composed of a socket and a short pedicel followed by a flattened blade (Fig. 4B). Both bristles and scales are innervated (Fig. 4C). It has been suggested, on the basis of expression of an ac-sc homologue, that the scales of butterflies are analogous to the bristles of flies (Galant et al., 1998
).
|
We have concentrated on the pattern in the medial notum where Ag-pnr and Ag-ASH are expressed in domains that appear to be identical. Expression is first evident in two longitudinal bands, one on either side of the dorsal midline that is itself devoid of expression (Fig. 5E). When viewed through the cuticle of fourth instar larvae, these domains appear to be quite broad (Fig. 5E), but after pupation and the subsequent cell shape changes of the epithelium, they appear as longer, thinner bands (Fig. 5A). These bands extend from the anterior border of the notum to almost the level of the future scutal-scutellar suture. They subsequently fade and three other expression domains appear in rapid succession: a small, posterior, triangle that straddles the dorsal midline (Fig. 5F) and that gradually transforms to a kidney-shaped domain (Fig. 5B,C,G) and a crescent-shaped domain along the future scutellum (Fig. 5D). Ag-ASH, but not Ag-pnr, is also expressed in another broad longitudinal domain on the lateral part of the notum (not shown).
|
|
Precursors of the sensory scales arise both on the borders and inside the Ag-ASH expression domains.
![]() |
DISCUSSION |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
When expressed in Drosophila, Ag-ASH has a conserved and strong, proneural function.
Regulation of Ag-ASH by Ag-Pannier
Several observations argue in favour of a role for Ag-Pnr in the activation of Ag-ASH. First, the two genes are expressed in what appear to be identical domains in the medial notum. Secondly, both genes are also expressed in sensory organ precursors. In the cyclorraphous flies examined to date, pnr is not expressed in bristle precursors (Pistillo et al., 2002; Ramain et al., 1993
; Wülbeck and Simpson, 2000
). Thirdly, expression of Ag-pnr is able to mimic the effects of mis-expression of Dm-pnr in Drosophila. Thus, when expressed in the lateral notum Ag-pnr elicits the development of ectopic DC bristles, strongly suggesting that it can activate the Drosophila ac-sc genes. Therefore we think it probable that regulation of ac-sc genes by Pnr has been conserved throughout the Diptera.
In Drosophila, pnr is expressed in a conserved broad medial domain but activates ac and sc in discrete proneural clusters within this domain (Cubas et al., 1991; Garcia-Garcia et al., 1999
; Ramain et al., 1993
; Romani et al., 1989
; Skeath and Carroll, 1991
) The ac-sc genes of Drosophila are organised into a complex containing multiple enhancer regions, each of which independently regulates expression in one or a small number of proneural clusters (Gomez-Skarmeta et al., 1995
; Ruiz-Gomez and Modolell, 1987
). In this species three proneural clusters arise in the domain of pnr expression and Pnr has been shown to directly activate ac-sc in the dorso-central cluster, through binding to a cis-regulatory sequence just upstream of ac (Garcia-Garcia et al., 1999
; Haenlin et al., 1997
). It is not entirely understood how the broad domain of Pnr is translated into the small clusters of ac-sc expression, but this is at least in part achieved through interaction of Pnr with regulatory co-factors (Cubadda et al., 1997
; Haenlin et al., 1997
; Ramain et al., 2000
). The spatially complex expression of sc in Calliphora and Ceratitis suggests that the ASC genes of these species may also have modular promoters (Pistillo et al., 2002
; Wülbeck and Simpson, 2000
). Furthermore, the expression domain of pnr in these species is conserved with that of Drosophila (ibid).
In contrast, the regulatory interactions between the two genes appear to have diverged in Anopheles since Ag-ASH is expressed in all Ag-pnr-expressing cells. The common domains of expression suggest that Ag-Pnr may activate Ag-ASH in every cell in which it is expressed, in a simple straightforward fashion. This observation raises two possibilities. First, for the regulation of Ag-ASH, Ag-Pnr may not associate with the various co-factors known to modulate its activity in Drosophila. Second, in order to be activated in all Ag-pnr-expressing cells, Ag-ASH would not need to have a modular promoter structure like that of the Drosophila locus, and could have a less complex organisation. If so, the acquisition of position-specific enhancers may have occurred after the separation of Nematocera and Brachycera, at a time when further gene duplication events appear to have taken place (Skaer et al., 2002). In addition, modulation of Pnr activity through the use of different co-factors may have accompanied the acquisition of cis-regulatory enhancer sequences in the lineage leading to Drosophila.
Despite the inferred simple regulatory interaction between Ag-Pnr and Ag-ASH, it is remarkable that the effects of mis-expression of Ag-pnr in Drosophila are almost identical to those caused by mis-expression of Dm-pnr. For example, ectopic expression of either Dm-pnr or Ag-pnr on the lateral notum, causes the development of a tuft of ectopic dorso-central bristles. This is due to an expansion of the activity of the dorso-central enhancer element known to be regulated by Dm-Pnr (Garcia-Garcia et al., 1999). This result suggests that Ag-Pnr is able to recognise the relevant regulatory modules of the Drosophila ASC promoter which may indicate that these enhancers are derived from an ancestral regulatory sequence also present in Anopheles. Alternatively, a number of regulatory modules may in fact be present in the Anopheles promoter and govern expression in the various domains on the notum. Further understanding of the structure and regulation of Ag-ASH will require investigation of regulatory sequences from this organism. The ectopic expression assay also indicates that Ag-Pnr is probably able to associate with Drosophila co-factors such as U-shaped and Chip (Cubadda et al., 1997
; Ramain et al., 2000
). It has been shown that the N-terminal zinc finger of Dm-Pnr associates with U-shaped, while two C-terminal helical structures are components mediating association with Chip (Haenlin et al., 1997
; Ramain et al., 2000
). The two zinc fingers are strongly conserved in Ag-Pnr, and there is a single
helix. Thus Ag-Pnr appears to contain the relevant binding regions for these two factors. This complexity of the Ag-pnr protein may indicate association with endogenous co-factors, perhaps in a different tissue.
A conserved role for pannier in the specification of the dorsal pattern
It has been demonstrated, that, in Drosophila, pnr and the iro-C genes are selector genes involved in the subdivision of the dorsal component of segments of the head, thorax and abdomen of the adult into medial and lateral domains (Calleja et al., 2000; Mann and Morata, 2000
; Maurel-Zaffran and Treisman, 2000
). While pnr regulates the pattern of the medial domain of the dorsal mesonotum, patterning of the lateral half is regulated by the iro-C genes (Gomez-Skarmeta et al., 1996
; Calleja et al., 2000
; Cavodeassi et al., 2001
; Diez del Corral et al., 1999
; Kehl et al., 1998
). Thus, when either Dm-pnr or Ag-pnr is expressed from an early stage in the entire notum of Drosophila, only structures corresponding to the medial notum are formed, the lateral region fails to develop (Calleja et al., 2000
). Ubiquitous expression specifies a single medial domain thought to include cells originally destined to form the lateral region (Calleja et al., 2000
). In addition we find that Ag-pnr is expressed in the medial, but not the lateral, mesonotum of Anopheles, consistent with a conserved function in the medial domain. Thus the selector gene function of pnr may have been conserved. The function of proteins of other selector genes of Anopheles, such as engrailed, has been shown to be conserved (Whiteley and Kassis, 1997
).
The precursors of the sensory scales on the notum of Anopheles are distributed in a random fashion within the domains of expression of Ag-pnr/Ag-ASH. In some respects the sensory scales resemble the small bristles or microchaetes of cyclorraphous Diptera, which are often randomly distributed although sometimes lined up into rows (McAlpine, 1981; Simpson et al., 1999
). However, in the latter species they arise later than the large bristles or macrochaetes, from a second period of ac-sc expression, and are consequently positioned closer to one another than are the macrochaetes (Simpson et al., 1999
; Wülbeck and Simpson, 2000
; Pistillo et al., 2002
). In contrast, the precursors of scales and bristles appear to arise simultaneously in Anopheles, which is consistent with the fact that they are equidistant from each other in the imago. In cyclorraphous flies, the macrochaete pattern is the result of spatially complex sc (ac) expression: one (or a very small number) of bristle(s) develops from each small cluster (or stripe) of sc (ac) expression. In Anopheles, however, the patterning mechanism is different: remarkably, the precursors of the bristles are exclusively positioned along the borders of the expression domains. Thus the positions of the rows of AC and DC bristles, as well as the PST and SC bristles, are coincident with the borders of the four domains of Ag-pnr/Ag-ASH expression. This suggests that the boundaries of Ag-ASH/Ag-pnr expression convey specific positional information causing neural precursors to develop into bristles rather than sensory scales.
Two observations in Drosophila may be relevant to this phenomenon. First, some of the macrochaete precursors arise from the edges of the corresponding proneural clusters of ac-sc expression, an observation that has been linked to distance from the source of the signalling molecules Wingless and Decapentaplegic (Cubas et al., 1991; Phillips et al., 1999
). The expression pattern of these molecules in Anopheles is not yet known. Second, it has been demonstrated that the border between pnr-expressing and non-expressing cells does in fact display special properties. Cells of the medial domain manifest unique adhesive characteristics that prevent them from mixing with cells of the lateral domain (Calleja et al., 2000
). So, as for compartment boundaries, this interface between cells expressing pnr and those expressing iro may be an important patterning boundary (Dahmann and Basler, 1999
; Lawrence and Struhl, 1996
; Mann and Morata, 2000
). It has indeed been shown to be required for the growth and patterning of the Drosophila eye (Cavodeassi et al., 1999
; Cavodeassi et al., 2000
; McNeill et al., 1997
; Yang et al., 1999
). Interestingly, the five macrochaetes on the medial notum of Drosophila are pnr-dependent, and they are all positioned on the lateral border of the domain of pnr expression (Fig. 5). Experimentally contrived expression of ac-sc inside the pnr domain, however, results in the formation of ectopic macrochaetes, indicating that macrochaete formation in Drosophila, is not dependent on special properties at the border (Balcells et al., 1988
; Cubadda et al., 1997
; Haenlin et al., 1997
; Rodriguez et al., 1990
). Furthermore the prescutellar bristle of Ceratitis and the AC row of bristles in Calliphora, arise from sc-expressing cells situated inside the pnr expression domain (Pistillo et al., 2002
; Wülbeck and Simpson, 2000
).
Although the bristles on the notum of Anopheles are aligned into rows, the number and position of bristles within a row varies greatly between individuals, a feature that is thought to be ancestral (McAlpine, 1981; Simpson et al., 1999
). Species of cyclorraphous Schizophora in contrast, have very defined rows in which the number and position of bristles varies little if at all. The stereotyped notal bristle patterns of species such as Drosophila are thought to be derived from an ancestral pattern of four longitudinal rows of bristles, still present in many extant species of Schizophora (Simpson et al., 1999
; Pistillo et al., 2002
). These include the AC and DC bristle rows that are in the medial domain of the notum. So, for example, the two DC bristles of Drosophila would be vestiges of the DC row. Whether the rows of bristles seen in some families of Nematocera such as the Culicidae, are in any way related by ancestry to the four rows of Schizophoran flies, is more difficult to assess. Nevertheless the DC row of Anopheles is positioned on the lateral border of the Ag-pnr expression domain, as in Ceratitis, Calliphora and Drosophila, which may indicate a common origin for this row. If so, this would mean that an ancestral pattern of bristle rows was already present in a common ancestor of the Brachycera and at least some families of Nematocera.
Conclusions
Our results indicate a conserved function for pnr in the regulation of the bristle pattern on the medial notum. This argues in favour of an ancient role for pnr as a selector gene specifying the dorsal medial pattern. The nature of the regulatory interactions between Pnr and its target genes ac-sc appears to have changed, however, over evolutionary time. We hypothesise that in Culicid mosquitoes, which have fewer ac-sc genes, the regulatory regions of this locus may not be organised in a modular fashion. Evolution of the stereotyped bristle patterns characteristic of species such as Drosophila and Ceratitis may have entailed the acquisition of a number of additional factors. These would include gene duplication within the ASC and the co-option of cis-regulatory sequences. Co-factors for Pnr, such as Ush and Chip, are also likely to have been co-opted for use in constructing the notal pattern at a later evolutionary stage, although our results suggest that Ag-Pnr has the requisite domains for association with these proteins (Cubadda et al., 1997; Haenlin et al., 1997
; Ramain et al., 2000
). In the lineage leading to Drosophila, these different levels of regulation might have been superimposed onto an ancestral patterning mechanism, similar to that of Anopheles, at different times in the 200 million years separating Drosophila from the Nematocera.
![]() |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
---|
![]() |
REFERENCES |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Alonso, M. C. and Cabrera, C. V. (1988). The achaete-scute gene complex of Drosophila melanogaster comprises four homologous genes. EMBO J. 7, 2585-2591.[Abstract]
Balcells, L., Modolell, J. and Ruiz-Gomez, M. (1988). A unitary basis for different Hairy-wing mutations of Drosophila melanogaster. EMBO J. 7, 3899-3906.[Abstract]
Blair, S. S. (1993). Mechanisms of compartment formation: evidence that non-proliferating cells do not play a critical role in defining the D/V lineage restriction in the developing wing of Drosophila. Development 119, 339-351.
Brand, A. H. and Perrimon, N. (1993). Targeted gene expression as a means of altering cell fates and generating dominant phenotypes. Development 118, 401-415.
Brand, M., Jarman, A. P., Jan, L. Y. and Jan, Y. N. (1993). asense is a Drosophila neural precursor gene and is capable of initiating sense organ formation. Development 119, 1-17.
Calleja, M., Herranz, H., Estella, C., Casal, J., Lawrence, P., Simpson, P. and Morata, G. (2000). Generation of medial and lateral dorsal body domains by the pannier gene of Drosophila. Development 127, 3971-3980.
Calleja, M., Moreno, E., Pelaz, S. and Morata, G. (1996). Visualization of gene expression in living adult Drosophila. Science 274, 252-255.
Cavodeassi, F., Diez del Corral, R., Campuzano, S. and Dominguez, M. (1999). Compartments and organising boundaries in the Drosophila eye: the role of the homeodomain Iroquois proteins. Development 126, 4933-4942.
Cavodeassi, F., Modolell, J. and Campuzano, S. (2000). The Iroquois homeobox genes function as dorsal selectors in the Drosophila head. Development 127, 1921-1929.
Cavodeassi, F., Modolell, J. and Gomez-Skarmeta, J. L. (2001). The Iroquois family of genes: from body building to neural patterning. Development 128, 2847-2855.
Clements, A. N. (1992), The Biology of Mosquitos. Volume I Development, Nutrition and Reproduction. London: Chapman and Hall.
Crick, F. H. and Lawrence, P. A. (1975). Compartments and polyclones in insect development. Science 189, 340-347.[Medline]
Cubadda, Y., Heitzler, P., Ray, R. P., Bourouis, M., Ramain, P., Gelbart, W., Simpson, P. and Haenlin, M. (1997). u-shaped encodes a zinc finger protein that regulates the proneural genes achaete and scute during the formation of bristles in Drosophila. Genes Dev. 11, 3083-3095.
Cubas, P., de Celis, J. F., Campuzano, S. and Modolell, J. (1991). Proneural clusters of achaete-scute expression and the generation of sensory organs in the Drosophila imaginal wing disc. Genes Dev. 5, 996-1008.[Abstract]
Dahmann, C. and Basler, K. (1999). Compartment boundaries: at the edge of development. Trends Genet. 15, 320-326.[Medline]
Diaz-Benjumea, F. J. and Cohen, S. M. (1993). Interaction between dorsal and ventral cells in the imaginal disc directs wing development in Drosophila. Cell 75, 741-752.[Medline]
Diez del Corral, R., Aroca, P., Gomez-Skarmeta, J. L., Cavodeassi, F. and Modolell, J. (1999). The Iroquois homeodomain proteins are required to specify body wall identity in Drosophila. Genes Dev. 13, 1754-1761.
Dominguez, M. and Campuzano, S. (1993). asense, a member of the Drosophila achaete-scute complex, is a proneural and neural differentiation gene. EMBO J. 12, 2049-2060.[Abstract]
Galant, R., Skeath, J. B., Paddock, S., Lewis, D. L. and Carroll, S. B. (1998). Expression pattern of a butterfly achaete-scute homolog reveals the homology of butterfly wing scales and insect sensory bristles. Curr. Biol. 8, 807-813.[Medline]
Garcia-Bellido, A. (1975). Genetic control of wing disc development in Drosophila. Ciba Found. Symp. 29, 161-182.[Medline]
Garcia-Bellido, A., Ripoll, P. and Morata, G. (1973). Developmental compartmentalisation of the wing disk of Drosophila. Nat. New Biol. 245, 251-253.[Medline]
Garcia-Garcia, M. J., Ramain, P., Simpson, P. and Modolell, J. (1999). Different contributions of pannier and wingless to the patterning of the dorsal mesothorax of Drosophila. Development 126, 3523-3532.
Ghysen, A. and Dambly-Chaudiere, C. (1988). From DNA to form: the achaete-scute complex. Genes Dev. 2, 495-501.[Medline]
Gomez-Skarmeta, J. L., del Corral, R. D., de la Calle-Mustienes, E., Ferre-Marco, D. and Modolell, J. (1996). Araucan and caupolican, two members of the novel iroquois complex, encode homeoproteins that control proneural and vein-forming genes. Cell 85, 95-105.[Medline]
Gomez-Skarmeta, J. L., Glavic, A., de la Calle-Mustienes, E., Modolell, J. and Mayor, R. (1998). Xiro, a Xenopus homolog of the Drosophila Iroquois complex genes, controls development at the neural plate. EMBO J. 17, 181-190.
Gomez-Skarmeta, J. L., Rodriguez, I., Martinez, C., Culi, J., Ferres-Marco, D., Beamonte, D. and Modolell, J. (1995). Cis-regulation of achaete and scute: shared enhancer-like elements drive their coexpression in proneural clusters of the imaginal discs. Genes Dev. 9, 1869-1882.[Abstract]
Gonzalez, F., Romani, S., Cubas, P., Modolell, J. and Campuzano, S. (1989). Molecular analysis of the asense gene, a member of the achaete-scute complex of Drosophila melanogaster, and its novel role in optic lobe development. EMBO J. 8, 3553-3562.[Abstract]
Gorfinkiel, N., Morata, G. and Guerrero, I. (1997). The homeobox gene Distal-less induces ventral appendage development in Drosophila. Genes Dev. 11, 2259-2271.
Haenlin, M., Cubadda, Y., Blondeau, F., Heitzler, P., Lutz, Y., Simpson, P. and Ramain, P. (1997). Transcriptional activity of pannier is regulated negatively by heterodimerization of the GATA DNA-binding domain with a cofactor encoded by the u-shaped gene of Drosophila. Genes Dev. 11, 3096-3108.
Heitzler, P., Haenlin, M., Ramain, P., Calleja, M. and Simpson, P. (1996). A genetic analysis of pannier, a gene necessary for viability of dorsal tissues and bristle positioning in Drosophila. Genetics 143, 1271-1286.
Hinz, U., Giebel, B. and Campos-Ortega, J. A. (1994). The basic-helix-loop-helix domain of Drosophila lethal of scute protein is sufficient for proneural function and activates neurogenic genes. Cell 76, 77-87.[Medline]
Jan, L. Y. and Jan, Y. N. (1982). Antibodies to horseradish peroxidase as specific neuronal markers in Drosophila and in grasshopper embryos. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 79, 2700-2704.[Abstract]
Kehl, B. T., Cho, K. O. and Choi, K. W. (1998). mirror, a Drosophila homeobox gene in the Iroquois complex, is required for sensory organ and alula formation. Development 125, 1217-1227.
Lawrence, P. A. and Struhl, G. (1996). Morphogens, compartments, and pattern: lessons from Drosophila? Cell 85, 951-961.[Medline]
Lewis, E. B. (1978). A gene complex controlling segmentation in Drosophila. Nature 276, 565-570.[Medline]
Mann, R. S. and Morata, G. (2000). The developmental and molecular biology of genes that subdivide the body of Drosophila. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 16, 243-271.[Medline]
Martin-Bermudo, M. D., Martinez, C., Rodriguez, A. and Jimenez, F. (1991). Distribution and function of the lethal of scute gene product during early neurogenesis in Drosophila. Development 113, 445-454.[Abstract]
Maurel-Zaffran, C. and Treisman, J. E. (2000). pannier acts upstream of wingless to direct dorsal eye disc development in Drosophila. Development 127, 1007-1016.
McAlpine, J. F. (1981). Manual of Nearctic Diptera. Research Branch Agriculture Canada.
McIver, S. B. (1975). Structure of cuticular mechanoreceptors of arthropods. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 20, 381-397.[Medline]
McNeill, H., Yang, C. H., Brodsky, M., Ungos, J. and Simon, M. A. (1997). mirror encodes a novel PBX-class homeoprotein that functions in the definition of the dorsal-ventral border in the Drosophila eye. Genes Dev. 11, 1073-1082.[Abstract]
Morata, G. and Lawrence, P. A. (1975). Control of compartment development by the engrailed gene in Drosophila. Nature 255, 614-617.[Medline]
Phillips, R. G., Warner, N. L. and Whittle, J. R. (1999). Wingless signaling leads to an asymmetric response to decapentaplegic- dependent signaling during sense organ patterning on the notum of Drosophila melanogaster. Dev. Biol. 207, 150-162.[Medline]
Pistillo, D., Skaer, N. and Simpson, P. (2002). scute expression in Calliphora vicina reveals an ancestral pattern of longitudinal stripes on the thorax of higher Diptera. Development 129, 563-572.
Ramain, P., Heitzler, P., Haenlin, M. and Simpson, P. (1993). pannier, a negative regulator of achaete and scute in Drosophila, encodes a zinc finger protein with homology to the vertebrate transcription factor GATA-1. Development 119, 1277-1291.
Ramain, P., Khechumian, R., Khechumian, K., Arbogast, N., Ackermann, C. and Heitzler, P. (2000). Interactions between chip and the achaete/scute-daughterless heterodimers are required for pannier-driven proneural patterning. Mol. Cell 6, 781-790.[Medline]
Rodriguez, I., Hernandez, R., Modolell, J. and Ruiz-Gomez, M. (1990). Competence to develop sensory organs is temporally and spatially regulated in Drosophila epidermal primordia. EMBO J. 9, 3583-3592.[Abstract]
Romani, S., Campuzano, S., Macagno, E. R. and Modolell, J. (1989). Expression of achaete and scute genes in Drosophila imaginal discs and their function in sensory organ development. Genes Dev. 3, 997-1007.[Abstract]
Rubin, G. M. and Spradling, A. C. (1982). Genetic transformation of Drosophila with transposable element vectors. Science 218, 348-353.[Medline]
Ruiz-Gomez, M. and Ghysen, A. (1993). The expression and role of a proneural gene, achaete, in the development of the larval nervous system of Drosophila. EMBO J. 12, 1121-1130.[Abstract]
Ruiz-Gomez, M. and Modolell, J. (1987). Deletion analysis of the achaete-scute locus of Drosophila melanogaster. Genes Dev. 1, 1238-1246.[Abstract]
Simpson, P., Woehl, R. and Usui, K. (1999). The development and evolution of bristle patterns in Diptera. Development 126, 1349-1364.
Skaer, N., Pistillo, D., Gibert, J.-M., Lio, P., Wulbeck, C. and Simpson, P. (2002). Gene duplication at the achaete-scute complex and morphological complexity of the peripheral nervous system in Diptera. Trends Genet. (in press).
Skeath, J. B. and Carroll, S. B. (1991). Regulation of achaete-scute gene expression and sensory organ pattern formation in the Drosophila wing. Genes Dev. 5, 984-995.[Abstract]
Skeath, J. B. and Doe, C. Q. (1996). The achaete-scute complex proneural genes contribute to neural precursor specification in the Drosophila CNS. Curr. Biol. 6, 1146-1152.[Medline]
Stone, A. (1981). Culicidae. In Manual of Nearctic Diptera. (ed. J. F. McAlpine). Research Branch Agriculture Canada. Monograph No. 28, vol. 1.
Sturtevant, A. H. (1970). Studies on the bristle pattern of Drosophila. Dev. Biol. 21, 48-61.[Medline]
Villares, R. and Cabrera, C. V. (1987). The achaete-scute gene complex of D. melanogaster: conserved domains in a subset of genes required for neurogenesis and their homology to myc. Cell 50, 415-424.[Medline]
Whiteley, M. and Kassis, J. A. (1997). Rescue of Drosophila engrailed mutants with a highly divergent mosquito engrailed cDNA using a homing, enhancer-trapping transposon. Development 124, 1531-1541.
Wülbeck, C. and Simpson, P. (2000). Expression of achaete-scute homologues in discrete proneural clusters on the developing notum of the medfly Ceratitis capitata, suggests a common origin for the stereotyped bristle patterns of higher Diptera. Development 127, 1411-1420.
Yang, C. H., Simon, M. A. and McNeill, H. (1999). mirror controls planar polarity and equator formation through repression of fringe expression and through control of cell affinities. Development 126, 5857-5866.