Department of Zoology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario M5S 3G5, Canada
![]() |
Abstract |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Cadherins are involved in a variety of morphogenetic movements during animal development. However, it has been difficult to pinpoint the precise function of cadherins in morphogenetic processes due to the multifunctional nature of cadherin requirement. The data presented here indicate that homophilic adhesion promoted by Drosophila E-cadherin (DE-cadherin) mediates two cell migration events during Drosophila oogenesis. In Drosophila follicles, two groups of follicle cells, the border cells and the centripetal cells migrate on the surface of germline cells. We show that the border cells migrate as an epithelial patch in which two centrally located cells retain epithelial polarity and peripheral cells are partially depolarized. Both follicle cells and germline cells express DE-cadherin, and border cells and centripetal cells strongly upregulate the expression of DE-cadherin shortly before and during their migration. Removing DE-cadherin from either the follicle cells or the germline cells blocks migration of border cells and centripetal cells on the surface of germline cells. The function of DE-cadherin in border cells appears to be specific for migration as the formation of the border cell cluster and the adhesion between border cells are not disrupted in the absence of DE-cadherin. The speed of migration depends on the level of DE-cadherin expression, as border cells migrate more slowly when DE-cadherin activity is reduced. Finally, we show that the upregulation of DE-cadherin expression in border cells depends on the activity of the Drosophila C/EBP transcription factor that is essential for border cell migration.
Key words: cadherin; intercellular motility; cell migration; Drosophila; oogenesis ![]() |
Introduction |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
CELL motility plays a pivotal role in shaping the animal body. Adhesive interactions between cells and
extracellular matrix or between neighboring cells
are required to convert the forces produced by the cytoskeleton into actual cell motility. Among the most extensively studied cell movements are integrin mediated migration processes on extracellular substrates (Hynes, 1992; Lauffenburger and Horwitz, 1996
). Integrins, a family of
extracellular matrix receptors, are connected via cytoplasmic adaptor proteins to F-actin allowing to transmit forces
directly from the actin cytoskeleton to an extracellular
substrate. In contrast, adhesion mechanisms involved in
cell rearrangement movements in epithelia and other solid
tissues, as they occur, for example, during gastrulation in
many animals, are still very poorly understood. Cadherins
are major cell-cell adhesion molecules in epithelial tissues,
and, similar to integrins, cadherins are connected to the
actin cytoskeleton by cytoplasmic adaptor proteins. These
findings have led to the hypothesis that cadherins might
play a similar role in intercellular motility as integrins
in cell migration on extracellular substrates (Gumbiner,
1992
). The notion that cadherins can mediate intercellular motility is supported by the finding that cadherins can promote the migration of neuronal growth cones on cellular
substrates (Bixby and Zhang, 1990
; Riehl et al., 1996
; Iwai
et al., 1997
).
Cadherins are multifunctional transmembrane proteins
that have well-established roles in cell adhesion and in epithelial polarization. In animal morphogenesis, cadherins
act as Ca2+-dependent homophilic cell-cell adhesion molecules that mediate tissue-specific adhesion of embryonic
and adult cells (Takeichi, 1991, 1995
; Gumbiner 1996
). In
epithelial tissues cadherins are important regulators of epithelial cell structure. This function of cadherins has been
well studied for E-cadherin, which is important for the
assembly of the lateral cytocortex (McNeil et al., 1990; Eaton and Simmons, 1995; Drubin and Nelson, 1996
).
E-cadherin belongs to a subfamily of cadherins known as
classic cadherins. These molecules interact with cytoplasmic catenins to form the cadherin-catenin complex that is
concentrated at cell-cell adherens junctions at which it is
connected to microfilaments. The role of the cadherin-
catenin complex for epithelial adhesion and polarization explains its importance in transitions of mesenchymal cells
to epithelial cells and vice versa (e.g., Hirano et al., 1992
;
Burdsal et al., 1993
), and might account for its function as
tumor suppressor gene in human (Birchmeier, 1995
; Guilford et al., 1998
). Lack of cadherin function in epithelial
tissues typically compromises tissue integrity (e.g., Larue
et al., 1994
; Levine et al., 1994
; Riethmacher et al., 1995
;
Tepass et al., 1996
; Uemura et al., 1996
). This makes it difficult to determine whether the disruption of cell rearrangements in those tissues is a secondary effect of the
structural defects or a direct consequence of the loss of
cadherin function. To overcome such difficulties and to
study the function and regulation of cadherins in cell
movements, it is desirable to identify cell populations in
which a particular cadherin has a primary or sole function
in cell motility. The data presented in this paper suggest
that a group of cells in the Drosophila ovary known as border cells is such a cell population.
The recent isolation of mutations in the gene shotgun
(shg)1 that encodes the Drosophila E-cadherin homologue, DE-cadherin, has opened a fruitful avenue to test
the role classic cadherins play in animal morphogenesis.
Analysis of shg/DE-cadherin revealed that it is the major
epithelial cadherin in Drosophila and that its biochemical
properties and interactions with catenins, its subcellular
localization, and its requirement for epithelial differentiation are similar to vertebrate E-cadherin (Peifer, 1993;
Oda et al., 1993
, 1994
; Tepass et al., 1996
; Uemura et al.,
1996
). Analysis of the shg/DE-cadherin mutant phenotype
revealed a striking correlation between the degree of cell
rearrangement in a particular tissue and the amounts of
DE-cadherin that are required for maintaining the epithelial integrity during cell rearrangements. Experimental suppression of cell rearrangements leads to a reduced requirement for DE-cadherin in maintaining tissue integrity
(Tepass et al., 1996
). These findings demonstrate that DE-cadherin is important for stabilizing tissues during morphogenetic processes, and suggest the need for regulation
of cadherin activity during such events. However, these
data do not reveal whether cadherin function plays a permissive role or whether cadherins are directly involved in promoting intercellular motility.
Here, we study the function of shg/DE-cadherin in cell
rearrangement and cell migration processes during Drosophila oogenesis. In recent years, the Drosophila ovary
has been used to analyze the involvement of the cytoskeleton in pattern formation and morphogenesis (e.g., Cooley
and Theurkauf, 1994; Ray and Schüpbach, 1996
). Drosophila ovaries are composed of bundles of ovarioles that
each consist of an anteriorly located germarium and a series of follicles of increasing developmental age towards
posterior. Each follicle contains 16 germline cells, one of
which is the oocyte. The oocyte occupies the most posterior position among the germline cells of a follicle. Recently, it has been shown that the posterior localization of
the oocyte is controlled by a cell sorting process that is
driven by differential DE-cadherin-based adhesion (Godt and Tepass, 1998
). The germline cells are surrounded by
somatic follicle cells that initially form a uniform cuboidal
monolayered epithelium. Follicle cells undergo various
morphogenetic movements later in development. During
mid-oogenesis most follicle cells move posteriorly, and
form a highly columnar epithelium covering the oocyte.
The few cells that surround the nurse cells become squamous. Also during midoogenesis, two subpopulations of
follicle cells, the border cells and the centripetal cells undergo specific migration movements on the surface of
germline cells. The border cells migrate from the anterior
tip of a follicle in between nurse cells through the center of
a follicle towards the oocyte. The centripetal cells penetrate between the nurse cells and the oocyte and eventually cover the anterior side of the oocyte. Finally, during
late oogenesis, two groups of anterior-dorsal follicle cells
conduct conversion extension movements and form two
long tubes, the so-called dorsal appendages (for review on
oogenesis see King, 1970
; Spradling, 1993
). Thus, Drosophila follicle cells are an excellent model system to study
genetic mechanisms of morphogenesis.
The two morphogenetic processes that we analyze in
this study are the migration of border cells and centripetal
cells. In particular the work of Montell and colleagues has
established the border cells as a genetic model system for
the analysis of cell migration (Montell, 1994). A number of
genes were shown to be involved in border cell migration
including the Drosophila CCAAT/enhancer binding protein (DC/EBP) encoded by slow border cells (slbo; Montell et al., 1992
), a number of cytoplasmic factors, namely
the GTPases Drac1 (Murphy and Montell, 1996
), Dras1,
and ralA (Lee et al., 1996
), Myosin II (Edwards and Kiehart, 1996
), and the Drosophila FGF receptor encoded by
breathless (btl; Murphy et al., 1995
). However, a transmembrane adhesion receptor that provides adhesion and
traction during border cell migration has not been identified. Our data indicate that DE-cadherin fulfills this role in
border cell and centripetal cell migration. We show that
DE-cadherin expression is required in border cells and
centripetal cells as well as in germline cells for migration.
In case of the border cells we find that the speed of migration depends on the level at which DE-cadherin is expressed. Our analysis also shows that DE-cadherin has no
essential role in border cell formation, or in adhesion between border cells during migration. Taken together, our
results indicate a specific requirement of DE-cadherin for border cell migration that is mediated by homophilic interactions between cell surfaces of border cells and germline
cells. Our observations also suggest that the border cell
cluster is not a mesenchymal group of cells, as previously
believed, but an epithelial patch in which two central cells
retain epithelial polarity and peripheral cells are partially
depolarized similar to epithelia that have a free edge.
![]() |
Materials and Methods |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Drosophila Strains
shg alleles used are shgP34-1, shgR69, and shgR6 (Tepass et al., 1996; Godt
and Tepass, 1998
). slbo alleles used are slbo1, slboe2b, and slboe7b (Montell
et al., 1992
; Murphy et al., 1995
). P[ry+; hs-neo; FRT]42D (FRT42D) and
hsFLP1 lines (Xu and Harrison, 1994
) were used for mosaic analysis. Oregon R was used as a wild-type strain. Flies were raised at 25°C if not otherwise indicated.
Mosaic Analysis
Site-directed mitotic recombination was catalyzed by the heat shock inducible FLP yeast recombinase at a FRT target element (Golic, 1991; Xu
and Harrison, 1994
). For the experiment FRT42D homozygous females
were crossed to hsFLP1/Y; FRT42D shgR69/+ males. Eggs were collected
on apple juice agar plates for 2 h each, and the developing animals were
kept at 25°C before and after the 2 h heat shock in a 37°C air incubator. To
induce shg mutant germline and follicle stem cells heat shocks were applied at 50 and 68 h after oviposition, which corresponds to the early and
late second larval instar, respectively. Larvae were transferred to vials at
late third instar. Adult females of the genotype hsFLP1/+; FRT42D
shgR69/+FRT42D were easily recognized because they display a rough eye phenotype due to shg mutant patches in the eye. To induce shg mutant
clones during oogenesis heat shocks were applied to adult females that
were dissected 48-72 h later.
Tissue In Situ Hybridization
In situ hybridizations to adult ovaries of the genotypes wild-type, slbo1/
slbo1, slbo1/slboe7b, and slboe2b/slboe7b were performed using a full-length
shg cDNA (Oda et al., 1994). Ovaries from 2-4-d-old well-fed female flies
were dissected in PBS, and fixed in PBS containing 10% formaldehyde,
5% dimethylsulfoxide, and 50 mM EGTA for 30 min. The following steps
were done according to a standard protocol for in situ hybridization
(Tautz and Pfeifle, 1989
), with the following modifications. Proteinase K
treatment was done for 10 min. Hybridization with a digoxygenin-labeled DNA probe (50 ng DNA/100 µl hybridization solution), prepared as suggested by the manufacturer (), was performed at 50°C for 48 h
and followed by washes in hybridization solution, 1:1 mixture of hybridization solution and PBT (PBS, 0.1% Tween-20), and PBT at 50°C for 1 h
each. The stained ovaries were mounted in 50% glycerol in PBS.
Staining Procedures
For immunostainings the following primary antibodies were used: rat
monoclonal antibody anti-DE-cadherin (DCAD2, 1:50; Oda et al., 1994),
mouse monoclonal antibodies anti-Crumbs (Cq4, 1:25; Tepass and Knust,
1993
), anti-Fasciclin III (7G10, 1:50, Patel et al., 1987
), and anti-Armadillo (N2-7A1, 1:100; Peifer, et al., 1994), and the rabbit polyclonal antibody anti-DC/EBP (C143, 1:100; Montell et al., 1992
). Ovaries from
2-4-d-old well-fed female flies were dissected in PBS and fixed in 5%
formaldehyde in phosphate buffer (PB), pH 7.4 for 10 min. For anti-Crumbs stainings ovaries were treated with methanol for 5 min after fixation. Tissues were washed in PB-T (PB, 0.3% Triton X-100) for 2× 15 min, followed by an 1 h incubation in PB-TB (PB-T, 0.2% BSA, 5% goat
serum). Incubation with primary antibody, diluted in PB-TB was done at 4°C overnight. Ovaries were washed in PB-T for 4× 15 min and blocked in
PB-TB for 1 h. Secondary antibodies conjugated with Cy3 or FITC () were used at a dilution of 1:400 in PB-TB at 4°C overnight. Ovaries were washed in PB-T for 4× 15 minutes and mounted in
Antifade (70% glycerol + 2.5% DABCO [] in PBS).
To monitor lacZ expression of the P-lacZ insertion mutations shgP34-1
and shgR69 ovaries were fixed in 1% glutaraldehyde in PBS for 5 min,
washed in PBT (PBS, 0.1% Triton X-100), and incubated in prewarmed
X-gal staining solution (Bellen et al., 1989) containing 0.2% X-gal (US-Biological) at 37°C for 4-5 h. Tissues were washed in PBT and mounted in
50% glycerol in PBS.
F-actin filaments were detected with phalloidin. After antibody staining ovaries were washed with PBS, incubated in Oregon Green 488-phalloidin (Molecular Probes) at a dilution of 1:20 in PBS at 4°C overnight, washed in PBS, and mounted in Antifade.
Cell nuclei were visualized with Picogreen. After antibody staining ovaries were treated with 0.4 mg RNase A/ml PB-T for 1 h, rinsed with PB-T, incubated with Picogreen (Molecular Probes) at a dilution of 1:1,000 in PB-T at 4°C overnight, washed in PB-T and mounted in Antifade.
Light microscopic images were taken with a Axiophot 2 microscope equipped with differential interference contrast optics using a Plan-Neofluar 20×/0.5 or a Plan-Neofluar 40×/1.30 oil objective and a condenser with a numerical aperture of 0.9. Confocal images were obtained with a LSM420 laser confocal scanning microscope equipped with an Argon/Krypton laser (488/568 nm), 480 nm or 568 nm excitation filters, and 515- or 590-nm emission filters, respectively. Objectives used were Plan-Neofluar 40×/1.30 oil and Plan-Apochromat 100×/1.40 oil.
![]() |
Results |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
DE-Cadherin Expression during Follicular Morphogenesis
DE-cadherin shows a dynamic expression pattern during
follicular morphogenesis. DE-cadherin is expressed in the
germline throughout oogenesis, with the possible exception of the germline stem cells and early cystoblasts in the
germarium. Furthermore, DE-cadherin is expressed in all
somatic cells in the germarium and the follicles, except for
the terminal filaments in which DE-cadherin was not detected (Fig. 1, A-D). High levels of DE-cadherin are
found in a honeycomb pattern in the follicular epithelium
that corresponds to the zonulae adherentes (Fig. 1 E).
Lower levels of DE-cadherin are seen along the lateral
surfaces of follicle cells and on the surfaces of the germ-line cells (Fig. 1, C and D). Expression of DE-cadherin is
upregulated in various cell populations during oogenesis.
In the germarium increased concentrations of DE-cadherin are seen in the oocyte and the anterior and posterior
follicle cells. This differential expression of DE-cadherin
promotes a cell sorting process that is responsible for posterior oocyte localization (Godt and Tepass, 1998). From
stage 4/5 of oogenesis onwards increased levels of DE-cadherin are seen in a pair of follicle cells at the anterior and
posterior pole, respectively, called the polar cells (Fig. 1
C). The anterior polar cells become part of the border cell
cluster that forms during stage 8. The border cells and the
centripetal cells express high levels of DE-cadherin during
their migration as described in more detail below (Fig. 1
D). The distribution of the shg transcript as assayed by tissue in situ hybridization and a lacZ reporter (shgP34-1; Tepass et al., 1996
; Godt and Tepass, 1998
) is similar to the protein distribution. An exception are the dorsal appendages in which only the level of the mRNA but not the level
of the protein is increased (Fig. 1 F; data not shown).
Taken together, the shg/DE-cadherin expression profile
during oogenesis suggests a possible role for DE-cadherin
in maintaining the integrity of the follicular epithelium and, in particular, in the dynamic movements of border
cells and centripetal cells.
|
Border Cells Migrate as an Epithelial Patch
The border cells consist of the two anterior polar cells and
an average of 6 additional follicle cells. DE-cadherin expression increases in these cells shortly before they segregate from the follicular epithelium (Fig. 2). Closer examination of migrating border cells revealed that the polar
cells behave very differently from the other cells in the
cluster. The polar cells upregulate DE-cadherin expression, constrict their apical surfaces, and assume a round
shape at stage 4/5, long before the border cell cluster forms
(Fig. 2 D). At stage 8, follicle cells next to the polar cells
upregulate DE-cadherin expression (Fig. 2 E). At late
stage 8, the border cells segregate from the follicular epithelium and DE-cadherin becomes distributed rather uniformly over the surface of the border cells (Fig. 2 F). At
early stage 9, border cell migration is initiated by a single
border cell that extends a process between nurse cells.
This border cell is never a polar cell (Fig. 2, G and J). In
fact, here and during the entire migration process the polar cells occupy a central position in the border cell cluster
(see also Edwards et al., 1997), and maintain their constricted apical surface and round shapes (Fig. 2, H and
J-L'). The polar cells can be specifically addressed with
anti-Fasciclin III antibodies (Brower et al., 1980
; Patel et
al., 1987
) that label most prominently the contact surface
of the two polar cells (Fig. 2, F and H). The other border
cells in the cluster form a single layered rosette that surrounds the polar cells (we will refer to these cells as rosette
cells; Fig. 2, H, K, and L). In the migrating border cell cluster the highest concentration of DE-cadherin is found at
the contact sites between rosette cells and polar cells and
between adjacent rosette cells (Fig. 2 H). At the interface
between rosette cells and nurse cells substantially lower
amounts of DE-cadherin are seen. Here, DE-cadherin is
distributed in a punctate pattern that might represent surface clusters or intracellular vesicles (Fig. 2 H), and might
be a consequence of a high turn-over rate of DE-cadherin
at the interface between rosette cells and nurse cells. In
contrast to DE-cadherin, the highest concentration of F-actin
in rosette cells is found in the region of the cytocortex that
contacts the nurse cells whereas lower levels of F-actin are
seen at contact sites between border cells (Fig. 2, J-L).
The high concentration of F-actin in the periphery of the
border cell cluster is consistent with a role of actin polymerization in border cell migration (see also Murphy and
Montell, 1996
; Oda et al., 1997
). Our results show that the border cell cluster has a two-dimensional organization and
suggest that the polar cells maintain aspects of epithelial
polarity during migration.
|
To further analyze border cell structure we examined
border cells with antibodies recognizing the Crumbs protein, a marker for the apical membrane of epithelial cells
including the follicular epithelium (Tepass and Knust,
1990; Tepass et al., 1990
). Crumbs is expressed in the border cells during migration (Fig. 3). Similar to DE-cadherin,
increased levels of Crumbs are seen in the polar cells and
in surrounding follicle cells before border cells segregate from the epithelium (Fig. 3, A and B). Upon segregation
of the border cells Crumbs distribution depolarizes in rosette cells (Fig. 3, C and D). Crumbs is highly expressed at
the interface of adjacent rosette cells, and at lower levels
at the interface of rosette cells and nurse cells, a pattern
similar to DE-cadherin. Crumbs remains restricted to the
apical surface of polar cells during migration. Crumbs is
not found at the lateral surface of polar cells or at the cell
surface of the rosette cells that are in contact with the polar cells (Fig. 3, D and D'). At the end of migration when
the border cell cluster contacts the oocyte, the apical surface of the polar cells faces the oocyte. The distribution of
Crumbs in the rosette cells becomes restricted again to the apical cell surface before these cells become confluent
with the ingrowing centripetal cells (Fig. 3 E). These results indicate that polar cells and, to a lesser degree, rosette cells retain epithelial polarization during migration.
Fig. 4 summarizes the expression and distribution of molecular markers that together with the morphology of the
border cells suggest that these cells form a migrating epithelial patch rather than a mesenchymal cluster. Our findings suggest that only the rosette cells are actively migrating and that the polar cells are carried by the rosette cells
during the migration process.
|
|
DE-Cadherin Expression in Border Cells Is Required for Migration
To study the role of shg/DE-cadherin in border cells we
generated homozygous shg mutant follicle cell clones using the FLP/FRT system and the embryonic lethal null allele shgR69 (see Materials and Methods). Cells mutant for
shgR69 do not express detectable levels of protein allowing
the identification of shg mutant cell clones by assaying for
DE-cadherin expression (Godt and Tepass, 1998). In a first
set of experiments clones were induced in the second larval
instar to generate shg mutant follicle stem cell precursors.
As each germarium in adult females contains only two follicle stem cells, cell clones derived from a single stem cell
populate large portions of the follicular epithelium or in
many cases the entire follicular epithelium of a single follicle (Margolis and Spradling, 1995
). Follicles that do not express DE-cadherin in follicle cells show a variety of defects, and such follicles eventually degenerate. One prominent defect is a mispositioning of the oocyte that normally
is the most posterior germline cell in a follicle (Godt and
Tepass, 1998
; González-Reyes and St. Johnston, 1998b
).
Surprisingly, many follicles do not show defects in the integrity of the follicular epithelium until late oogenesis. A
reduced but significant amount of Armadillo/
-catenin is
found at the level of the zonula adherens in shg mutant
follicle cells suggesting that Armadillo interacts with a different cadherin than DE-cadherin which might account
for the maintenance of epithelial cell structure (Godt and
Tepass, 1998
).
Border cell clusters in which all cells lack DE-cadherin do not migrate between nurse cells towards the oocyte. We examined a total of 62 shg mutant follicle cell clones. shg mutant border cell clusters formed in all clones and segregated from the follicular epithelium as revealed, for example, by the expression of the border cell specific marker DC/EBP (Fig. 5, A-C). shg mutant clusters contain a normal number of DC/EBP positive border cells (8.3; n = 15) as compared with wild-type clusters (8.0; n = 40), and show an overall normal cell arrangement with a pair of Fasciclin III positive central polar cells (Fig. 5, D-F). In all follicles examined, the border cell cluster was located between follicular epithelium and nurse cells indicating that shg mutant border cell clusters cannot penetrate between nurse cells. The clusters were located either near the anterior tip of the follicle or at the boundary between the first and second nurse cell. These findings indicate that DE-cadherin expression in border cells is required for border cell migration.
|
A few border cell clusters (n = 11) were found that contained DE-cadherin positive and negative cells (Fig. 6). These clusters emerged in mosaic follicles in which the clone boundary separating DE-cadherin positive and negative cells runs along the anterior tip of the follicle from where the border cells derive. These clusters, which contained 3-5 DE-cadherin positive and 2-4 DE-cadherin negative cells, migrated between the nurse cells towards the oocyte. The DE-cadherin expressing cells were always found at the leading edge of the cluster while the cells that lack DE-cadherin were trailing behind (Fig. 6, D-F). This cell behavior suggests that the DE-cadherin positive cells are actively migrating whereas the DE-cadherin negative cells are pulled along. It also indicates that DE-cadherin is not essential for maintaining adhesion between border cells during migration despite its prominent accumulation between these cells. These results indicate that in border cells DE-cadherin might have a specific role in cell migration.
|
Differences in the Expression Level of DE-Cadherin Might Play a Role in Border Cell Recruitment
In a second set of experiments, clones were induced in adult females in order to generate a higher clone frequency and hence a larger number of border cell clusters that are composed of shg mutant and wild-type cells (see Materials and Methods). To determine the clone frequency in border cells we took advantage of the fact that the shgR69 allele contains a lacZ reporter gene in the shg locus that is expressed in follicle cells including all border cells. We find that 75% of border cell clusters (n = 79) contain lacZ negative wild-type cells. Surprisingly, no migrating border cell clusters were found that contained shg mutant cells as assayed by anti-DE-cadherin staining, although there were numerous DE-cadherin negative clones in the follicular epithelium that ranged in size from 2-3 to more than 25 cells. In this experiment the number of cells in border cell clusters (7.8 cells per cluster, n = 166) was not significantly reduced in comparison to wild-type (8.0 cells per cluster, n = 40). This finding suggests that during recruitment of follicle cells into a border cell cluster the DE-cadherin negative follicle cells are discriminated against the DE-cadherin positive follicle cells.
One possible explanation for the differences in cell behavior of shg mutant cells derived from follicle stem cell clones as opposed to clones induced during oogenesis are differences in the availability of DE-cadherin positive cells at the anterior tip of a follicle. If the clone boundary of a large clone, derived from a mutant stem cell passes through the anterior tip of a follicle the number of DE-cadherin positive cells competent to form border cells might be below 8. Since DE-cadherin is not essential for the formation of a border cell cluster as shown above, a cluster forms and migrates that contains both DE-cadherin positive and negative cells (Fig. 6). On the other hand, if only a small shg mutant patch is present at the anterior tip of the follicle enough DE-cadherin positive cells might still exist at this position to form a normal cluster. Our results indicate that DE-cadherin positive cells are preferentially recruited into the border cell cluster and suggests a possible role of a sorting process in border cell recruitment that depends on the level of DE-cadherin expression.
Expression of DE-Cadherin in the Germline Is Required for Border Cell Migration
DE-cadherin like other classic cadherins is a homophilic
adhesion molecule (Oda et al., 1994). The lack of DE-cadherin in border cells prevents penetration and migration of
border cells between nurse cells. This suggests that DE-cadherin on the surface of border cells might directly interact with DE-cadherin expressed by nurse cells to promote migration. To examine this possibility we generated
follicles that contain a shgR69 mutant germline (Fig. 7; see
Materials and Methods). Follicles with a shg mutant germ-line show a variety of defects including a mislocalization of
the oocyte similar to follicle cell clones (Oda et al., 1997
;
White et al., 1998
; Godt and Tepass, 1998
; González-Reyes and St. Johnston, 1998b
). All follicles eventually degenerate. Among the examined 99 shg germline clones
with normally localized oocyte there was no follicle in
which the border cell cluster had penetrated between
nurse cells. Instead, the border cell clusters always remain
attached to the follicular epithelium. Typically, they are
found at the boundary between the first and second nurse
cell as shown in Fig. 7 B. Sometimes, they move even further posteriorly, and a single case was observed where the border cells had reached the oocyte.
|
In follicles that contain a shg mutant germline with centrally localized oocyte a border cell cluster forms at both
poles of the follicle. This was also shown for other mutants
that cause mislocalization of the oocyte (Gonzáles-Reyes
and St. Johnston, 1994). In shg mutant germline clones
with central oocyte position (n = 75) border cells are
never observed between nurse cells (Fig. 7 C). However,
the fraction of clusters that have reached the oocyte is
higher (35%, n = 124) than in shg germline clones with posterior oocyte (1%, n = 99). The shorter migration distance in follicles with central oocyte is presumably responsible for the higher fraction of border cell clusters that
have reached the oocyte. Clusters that reach the oocyte
are still in contact to the follicular epithelium (Fig. 7 D).
This observation, together with the finding that border
cells in shg mutant germline clones do not penetrate between nurse cells, suggests that the clusters which have
reached the oocyte migrated along the follicular epithelium. Taken together, our analysis of shg germline clones
is consistent with the results of a previous study on shg
mutant germline clones (Oda et al., 1997) and demonstrates that DE-cadherin on the surface of nurse cells is required for border cells to penetrate between nurse cells
and to migrate along their normal route.
Reduced Expression of DE-Cadherin Slows Down Border Cell Migration
The level of DE-cadherin expression in border cells is extremely high compared with most other cells in ovaries or
elsewhere. To address the question whether the high levels
of DE-cadherin expression are required to sustain normal
migration we reduced DE-cadherin activity in follicles. We
examined border cells in animals that carry the heteroallelic combination shgP34-1/shgR6. shgP34-1 is an allele of
moderate strength that causes complete embryonic lethality with an intermediate cuticle phenotype (Tepass et al., 1996). shgR6 is a homozygous viable shg allele that displays
an adult wing phenotype. shgP34-1/shgR6 animals are semiviable and ovaries show a substantial reduction in levels of
DE-cadherin expression (Godt and Tepass, 1998
; data not
shown). In shgP34-1/shgR6 follicles border cell migration is
in many cases substantially delayed (Fig. 8; Table I). In
contrast to shgR69 mutant follicles, ~65% of border cell
clusters that had not reached the oocyte at stage 10 in
shgP34-1/shgR6 mutant follicles were located between nurse
cells and only 35% of the clusters did not penetrate between nurse cells. Thus, in shgP34-1/shgR6 mutant follicles
most clusters migrate along their normal route but many
clusters show a substantial decrease in the speed of migration suggesting that the level of DE-cadherin expression determines the speed of border cell migration.
|
|
DE-Cadherin Expression in Border Cells Is Controlled by DC/EBP
A number of genes have been implicated in border cell migration most notably the gene slbo that encodes a C/EBP
transcription factor (Montell et al., 1992). In follicles mutant for strong slbo alleles the border cell cluster forms but
does not migrate. Among genes or genetic markers that
are expressed in border cells some depend on slbo, as for
example btl that encodes a Drosophila FGF-receptor homologue, while others do not (Murphy et al., 1995
). To
study interactions between shg and slbo, we analyzed the
shg/DE-cadherin expression in slbo mutant follicles (Fig.
9). In anterior polar cells both shg transcript and protein
are upregulated in slbo mutants similar to wild-type. This
result is not surprising as shg/DE-cadherin expression in
polar cells increases before slbo is expressed at stage 8. In
rosette cells, on the other hand, transcript and protein concentrations remain at the same level as in the follicular epithelium (Fig. 9, A-D) whereas in wild-type a dramatic increase in shg expression is seen as described above. In
contrast, Crumbs expression in slbo mutant follicles is elevated in all border cells as in wild-type (data not shown).
This finding indicates that the upregulation of shg/DE-cadherin expression in rosette cells at the transcriptional
level depends on DC/EBP.
|
Occasionally, border cell clusters penetrate between nurse cells in slbo mutant follicles at stage 10b or 11. Typically, only a few border cells slide between nurse cells while other cells of the same cluster remain at the periphery of the follicle. The cells that initiate migration show intense staining for DE-cadherin (Fig. 9, E and F). This correlation between DE-cadherin expression level and degree of motility of border cells further supports the hypothesis that DE-cadherin plays a key role in border cell migration.
DE-Cadherin Is Required for Centripetal Cell Migration
The centripetal cells are a second migratory cell population in Drosophila follicles that expresses high levels of DE-cadherin during migration (Fig. 10, A and B). During stage 10b of oogenesis the anterior most columnar follicle cells, the centripetal cells undergo a strong apical-basal cell elongation while penetrating between nurse cells and oocyte. Their leading apical edges that penetrate between the oocyte and the nurse cells are rich in DE-cadherin and F-actin (Fig. 10, A-B'). The centripetal cells migrate along the surface of the oocyte towards the border cells. They make lateral contact with the border cells later during oogenesis to form a confluent epithelium that covers the anterior side of the oocyte.
|
To analyze the role of DE-cadherin in the migration of
centripetal cells we examined shgR69 mutant follicle cell
and germline clones. Centripetal cells showed no or only
rudimentary movement in stage 10b follicles that expressed DE-cadherin in the germline but not in the follicle
cells (17 follicles examined). A few shg mutant centripetal
cells segregate from the follicular epithelium but remain in
the periphery of the follicle. These cells neither elongate
nor form protrusive ends, and instead take on a rounded
shape (Fig. 10, C and C'). Four mosaic follicles were analyzed that contained shg mutant and wild-type centripetal
cells. Again, the shg mutant centripetal cells fail to migrate
and display a rounded shape, in contrast to the DE-cadherin expressing cells that migrate between nurse cells and
oocyte (Fig. 10, D and D'). However, the migrating DE-cadherin positive centripetal cells do not behave completely normal. They display a shorter and bulkier morphology compared with wild-type follicles in which
centripetal cells are thin and very elongated (Fig. 10, B
and D). This suggests that the migration of centripetal cells is not fully cell-autonomous but depends on a coordinated movement of the centripetal cells. Lack of DE-cadherin in the germline also causes a failure in centripetal
cell migration in most follicles (Fig. 10, E-F'). In follicles
in which centripetal cells penetrated between germline
cells (2 out of 10 germline clones) the morphology of the
invading cells was highly abnormal and they formed irregular clusters (Fig. 10, F-F'). In contrast to rosette cells, expression of DE-cadherin in centripetal cells does not depend on slbo (data not shown), consistent with the fact
that slbo mutations do not interfere with centripetal cell migration (Montell et al., 1992). Taken together, these results indicate that DE-cadherin mediated contact between
centripetal and germline cells is required for centripetal
cell migration.
![]() |
Discussion |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
The multifunctionality of cadherins complicates the analysis of the role cadherins play in specific morphogenetic processes in vivo. Breakdown of cell or tissue structure might result from a failure of cadherin function in adhesion, linkage of the cytoskeleton to the cell surface, or cell polarization. Lack of cadherin activity resulting in such structural defects is likely to mask cadherin activity in morphogenetic movements that normally take place in these tissues. In this study we have investigated the role of DE-cadherin in two cell migration processes in Drosophila follicles. The border cells and the centripetal cells migrate on the surface of germline cells towards specific targets. The removal of DE-cadherin from the germline cells or from both groups of follicle cells blocks migration demonstrating that DE-cadherin controls intercellular motility in this system.
Formation and Organization of the Border Cell Cluster
The mechanisms that lead to the formation of the border
cell cluster are still largely unknown. The anterior and posterior polar cells are apparently specified very early during
oogenesis (Margolis and Spradling, 1995) and are morphologically distinct at stage 4. These cells might emit a signal
that contributes to the patterning of the terminal follicle
cells (Gonzáles-Reyes and St. Johnston, 1998a), and in
case of the anterior polar cells to the recruitment of adjacent follicle cells (the future rosette cells) into the border
cell cluster. The finding that the level of expression of DE-cadherin and Crumbs (this work) as well as Armadillo
(Peifer et al., 1993
) is upregulated in follicle cells adjacent
to the polar cells is consistent with this model. Thus, the
shg and crumbs promoters are presumably targets of a signaling pathway that responds to a putative signal emitted
by the polar cells. In fact, there must be two different transcriptional mechanisms that respond to the putative polar
cell signal as only DE-cadherin expression but not Crumbs
expression requires DC/EBP. DC/EBP is also needed for
the expression of the btl FGF receptor, another factor involved in border cell migration, but it is not required for
the expression of a variety of other molecular markers expressed in border cells (Murphy et al., 1995
) suggesting
that DC/EBP might specifically target genes that are required for migration.
Border cell clusters can form in the absence of DE-cadherin suggesting that DE-cadherin is not essential for this
process. However, if small DE-cadherin negative follicle
cell clones are induced in potential rosette cells, such cells
are not recruited into the cluster. This finding suggests that
cells with higher levels of DE-cadherin expression are
preferentially recruited. We recently found that different
DE-cadherin concentrations can promote cell sorting during early oogenesis (Godt and Tepass, 1998). Such a mechanism might ensure that cells with the higher level of
DE-cadherin are integrated into the border cell cluster. Ensuring that only those cells that show the highest level
of DE-cadherin expression become rosette cells might be
important for reaching optimal migration speed as we
have shown that a reduction in DE-cadherin expression
reduces border cell velocity.
The morphological differentiation and the distribution
of markers suggest that the border cell cluster migrates as
an epithelial patch that has a two-dimensional organization and that retains its apical basal axis throughout migration. Before migration is initiated, the apical-basal axis of
the border cell cluster is oriented parallel to the anterior-posterior axis of the follicle. When the cluster penetrates
between nurse cells, it turns by 90° and migrates with its
apical-basal axis perpendicular to the anterior-posterior axis of the follicle. As the border cells approach the oocyte a second 90° turn occurs, and the cluster attaches to the
oocyte with its apical side. Why epithelial polarity is maintained during migration is not understood. Maintenance of
polarity during migration would have the advantage that
epithelial polarity does not need to be established de novo
when the border cells reach the oocyte. The polar cells are
located centrally in the cluster and retain epithelial polarity. Rosette cells surround the polar cells and retain polarity at the contact surface to polar cells but have depolarized their remaining surface area as indicated by the
overlapping distribution of an apical marker (Crumbs)
and a lateral marker (DE-cadherin). Thus, rosette cells
show a mixed cellular morphology that is typical for epithelial cells located at the free edge of an epithelium (e.g.,
Odland and Ross, 1968; Radice, 1980
). The polar cells apparently do not actively migrate but are carried by the rosette cells during the migration process.
Role of DE-Cadherin in Border Cell Migration
We examined a large number of follicles that either had
shg mutant follicle cells or a shg mutant germline. In none
of these follicles did border cells penetrate or migrate between the nurse cells towards the oocyte. This finding not
only strongly suggests that DE-cadherin is the key adhesion molecule that mediates adhesion and traction during
border cell migration, but also indicates that no other adhesion system is present that can support border cell migration on the surface of germline cells. In contrast, many
other morphogenetic processes are promoted by multiple,
at least partially redundant adhesion systems (e.g., Hynes,
1996). Defects in border cell migration have also been observed in arm germline clones (Peifer et al., 1993
; Oda et
al., 1997
) suggesting that border cell migration is mediated
by the DE-cadherin-catenin complex. In the absence of
DE-cadherin from follicle cells, a border cell cluster of
normal size forms that contains two polar cells. Moreover,
although DE-cadherin (this work) and Armadillo (Peifer
et al., 1993
) strongly accumulate at the contact sites between border cells, DE-cadherin appears not to be required for maintaining contact between border cells during migration as shg mosaic border cell clusters migrate as
coherent clusters. Taken together, these results suggest
that the function of DE-cadherin in border cells might be
specific for migration. The clear cut phenotype observed
in shg mutant follicles, that in the absence of DE-cadherin
border cells cannot use the germline cells as a substratum
for migration, makes border cell migration a unique system to study cadherin-based intercellular motility.
The fact that DE-cadherin concentration influences migration speed supports the model that DE-cadherin is the
key adhesion receptor that mediates border cell migration.
A similar connection has been demonstrated for the role
of integrins in cell migration on an extracellular substratum (see Palecek et al., 1997; Huttenlocher et al., 1995
and
references therein). A final observation that indicates a direct role for DE-cadherin in border cell migration is that
in a few slbo mutant follicles some border cells penetrate between nurse cells. These border cells show high levels of
DE-cadherin expression whereas border cells of the same
cluster that remained outside of the nurse cells express low
levels of DE-cadherin.
Border cells seem to retain a low degree of motility if
DE-cadherin is absent from either the germline or the
border cells. In particular in follicles containing a shg mutant germline some border cells clusters moved a considerable distance towards the oocyte along the follicular epithelium as we and others (Oda et al., 1997) have observed.
This suggests that in the absence of DE-cadherin some aspects of the motility apparatus are still functioning in contrast to slbo mutant follicles in which border cells do not
move away from the anterior tip of the follicle (Montell
et al., 1992
). The higher motility observed in germline
clones as compared with follicle cell clones might result
from DE-cadherin mediated interactions between border
cells and follicular epithelium. That border cells in shg mutant follicles show a low level of motility but move along a
different pathway also emphasizes that by allowing the
border cells to penetrate between nurse cells, DE-cadherin contributes to the choice of the route of migration taken by the border cells (Oda et al., 1997
).
DC/EBP causes a transcriptional upregulation of shg/
DE-cadherin. Whether DC/EBP interacts directly with the
shg promoter remains to be determined. In addition to
DC/EBP, a number of other factors that might modulate
cadherin mediated adhesion were shown to effect border
cell migration. For example, activity of the small GTPase
Drac1 is required for border cell migration (Murphy and
Montell, 1996). This finding is not surprising as the activation of vertebrate rac causes the formation of lamellipodia
in fibroblasts. In this process rac regulates actin polymerization and the formation of integrin-based adhesive contacts (Van Aelst and D'Souza-Schorey, 1997
; Hall, 1998
).
rac is also needed for the formation of cadherin based adherens junctions in epithelial cell culture (Braga et al.,
1997
; Takaishi et al., 1997
). Thus, Drac1 might exert its effect on border cell migration at least in part by promoting DE-cadherin mediated adhesion.
A function for the btl FGF receptor in border cell migration was revealed through genetic interactions with slbo.
The phenotype of weak slbo mutations is enhanced by btl
loss of function mutations and suppressed by overexpression of btl. The function of btl in border cell migration
might be redundant, however, as loss of btl in a wild-type
background does not interfere with migration (Murphy
et al., 1995). In addition, the overexpression of other tyrosine kinase receptors can rescue delays in border cell migration caused by slbo mutations suggesting that the effect
of the FGF receptor on border cell migration is mediated
by a common downstream target of tyrosine kinase receptors (Murphy et al., 1995
). This is supported by the finding
that the activity of Dras1 is required for border cell migration. However, Dras1 appears not to act through activation of the MAP kinase pathway to promote migration
(Lee et al., 1996
). As ras was shown to activate rac (Ridley
et al., 1992
; Nobes et al., 1995
), this raises the intriguing
possibility that the btl FGF receptor might modulate DE-cadherin activity during migration via a pathway that involves Dras1 and Drac1. Whether this is a valid model
needs to be addressed in future experiments.
Mechanism of Centripetal Cell Migration
The ingrowing edges of centripetal cells are rich in F-actin
and Myosin II, and Myosin II mutants are known to block
centripetal cell migration (Edwards and Kiehard, 1996).
Based on these observations, it was suggested that the circumferential inwards movement of the centripetal cells is
driven by a purse string mechanism (Edwards and Kiehard, 1996) similar to epithelial wound healing (Bement et al., 1993) or dorsal closure of the embryonic ectoderm
in Drosophila (Young et al., 1993
). High levels of DE-cadherin expression in centripetal cells might contribute to a
purse string-type movement by providing strong adhesion
between centripetal cells. However, our findings are inconsistent with a model in which a purse string mechanism
is the only driving force of centripetal cell movement. First, we find that in follicles with a shg mosaic follicular epithelium the DE-cadherin positive centripetal cells migrate although the DE-cadherin negative centripetal cells
stay behind. Such a cell-autonomous migratory behavior
argues against a purse string mechanism as the latter requires the coordinated movement of all centripetal cells.
Second, we find that removal of DE-cadherin from the
germline interferes with centripetal cell movement. Adhesion between the germline and the centripetal cells would
be expected to counteract but not to promote centripetal
cell movement if it is driven by a purse string. On the other
hand, in follicles in which a fraction of the centripetal cells
does not express DE-cadherin, the migrating DE-cadherin
positive centripetal cells are broader and shorter than in
wild-type follicles suggesting that their penetration between germline cells might be less efficient. This finding
suggests that a coordinated movement of the centripetal cells is required for an orderly migration process.
Taken together, our results suggest that centripetal cell migration is mechanistically similar to border cell migration. In both cases do follicle cells move on the surface of germline cells, express high levels of DE-cadherin, and require DE-cadherin in germ line and soma for migration. Whereas we consider adhesion and traction provided by DE-cadherin as the main mechanism for centripetal cell migration, a purse string-type mechanism might coordinate this migration process. Similar to shg, also Myosin II mutations block both border cell and centripetal cell migration (Edwards and Kiehard, 1996) suggesting that Myosin II cooperates with DE-cadherin in follicle cell motility. The mechanism of this interaction remains to be determined.
Cadherins and Intercellular Motility
Recent genetic studies have emphasized roles of cadherins
in specific aspects of animal morphogenesis. The characterization of a cadherin-catenin complex from Caenorhabditis elegans suggests that this complex is required for morphogenetic events that occur in the hypodermis during
embryogenesis (Costa et al., 1998). Hypodermal cells in C.
elegans migrate ventrally to enclose the body and, later on,
undergo cell shape changes that cause an elongation of the
body. Cadherin or catenin mutants do not prevent the ventral migration of hypodermal cells but prevent stable adhesion at the ventral midline that causes ventral openings
in the hypodermis. Moreover, in cadherin and catenin mutants force generating contractile bundles of microfilaments detach from the cell surface causing cell shape
changes to fail during body elongation. A similar role to C.
elegans cadherin during body closure was found for DE-cadherin in the fusion of tracheal branches in the Drosophila embryo (Tanaka-Matakatsu et al., 1996
). Here, individual cells located at the tip of each branch (fusion
cells) migrate, approach each other, and form a continuous lumen after establishing a stable contact. Reduction of
DE-cadherin activity does not interfere with the motility
of fusion cells. However, fusion cells do not establish stable contacts, and no continuous lumen is formed. Further
analysis of DE-cadherin mutants (Tepass et al., 1996
; Uemura et al., 1996
) and dominant negative and knock out
experiments for vertebrate cadherins (e.g., Kintner, 1992
;
Larue et al., 1994
; Levine et al., 1994
; Riethmacher et al.,
1995
; Radice et al., 1997
) have uncovered a function for cadherins in the formation and maintenance of various
embryonic epithelia. Taken together, these and other genetic studies have revealed important functions for cadherins in a number of morphogenetic processes. However,
the analysis of cadherin function in these studies did not
reveal a direct role of cadherins in promoting intercellular
motility because the observed morphogenetic defects can
be explained by a lack of stable adhesion or by defects in cytoarchitecture.
The hypothesis that cadherins mediate intercellular
motility, where cells move on the surface of neighboring
cells, was supported by two observations (Gumbiner, 1992,
1996
). First, the actin cytoskeleton is the main force generating system that promotes cell migration and cell rearrangement movements. Second, cadherin based cellular junctions are major anchor points for actin filaments at
cell-cell contact sites. This is similar to the role integrins
have in providing anchor points for the actin cytoskeleton
at contact sites between cell surface and extracellular matrix. Therefore, cadherins are attractive candidates for mediating cell migration or rearrangement by direct cell to
cell contact. Experimental evidence for a potentially more
direct role for cadherins in cell motility was revealed in cell culture studies. L-cell fibroblasts transfected with
E-cadherin show increased intercellular motility (Nagafushi et al., 1994), and growth cone extension of chick
brain neurons is promoted on substrates containing N-cadherin (Bixby and Zhang, 1990
). A role for both vertebrate
and Drosophila N-cadherin in growth cone motility has
recently been supported by in vivo studies (Riehl et al., 1996
; Iwai et al., 1997
). Moreover, the analysis of Xenopus
C-cadherin suggests a role for this cadherin in promoting
motility in gastrulating embryos (Brieher and Gumbiner,
1994
; Lee and Gumbiner, 1995
). Reduction in C-cadherin
activity blocks gastrulation movements presumably as a
consequence of disrupting the conversion extension movement of the dorsal marginal zone that is driven by motile intercalating cells (Shih and Keller, 1992
). Our investigation of the function of DE-cadherin in border cell migration strongly supports the hypothesis that classic cadherins
can directly participate in intercellular motility in vivo.
Border cell migration is an excellent system for the further
analysis of cadherin-based intercellular motility as DE-cadherin appears to be the sole adhesion receptor that
promotes border cell migration on the surface of germline cells. Since the border cells are intensely studied as a genetic model for cell migration this system is likely to provide insights into function and regulation of cadherin
based motility in the near future.
![]() |
Footnotes |
---|
Address correspondence to U. Tepass, Department of Zoology, University of Toronto, 25 Harbord Street, Toronto, Ontario M5S 3G5, Canada. Tel.: (416) 978-5712. Fax: (416) 978-8532. E-mail: utepass{at}zoo.utoronto.ca
Received for publication 24 August 1998 and in revised form 11 November 1998.
This research was supported by a grant to U. Tepass by the National
Cancer Institute of Canada with funds from the Terry Fox run.
The first two authors contributed equally to this work.
We thank Tadashi Uemura, Denise Montell, Mark Peifer, and Pernille Rørth for providing reagents, and the Developmental Studies Hybridoma Bank for the 7G10 antibody. We thank Isabella Stüttem for critical reading of the manuscript.
![]() |
Abbreviations used in this paper: arm |
---|
, armadillo; btl, breathless; DE-cadherin, Drosophila E-cadherin; DC/EBP, Drosophila CCAAT/enhancer binding protein; FGF, fibroblast growth factor; shg, shotgun; slbo, slow border cells.
![]() |
References |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
1. | Bellen, H.J., C.J. O'Kane, C. Wilson, U. Grossniklaus, R.K. Pearson, and W.J. Gehring. 1989. P-element-mediated enhancer detection: a versatile method to study development in Drosophila. Genes Dev. 3: 1288-1300 [Abstract]. |
2. | Bement, W.M., P. Forscher, and M.S. Mooseker. 1993. A novel cytoskeletal structure involved in purse string wound closure and cell polarity maintenance. J. Cell Biol. 121: 565-578 [Abstract]. |
3. | Birchmeier, W.. 1995. E-cadherin as a tumor (invasion) suppressor gene. BioEssays. 17: 97-99 |
4. | Bixby, J.L., and R. Zhang. 1990. Purified N-cadherin is a potent substrate for the rapid induction of neurite outgrowth. J. Cell Biol. 110: 1253-1260 [Abstract]. |
5. |
Braga, V.M.,
L.M. Machesky,
A. Hall, and
N.A. Hotchin.
1997.
The small
GTPases Rho and Rac are required for the establishment of cadherin-dependent cell-cell contacts.
J. Cell Biol.
137:
1421-1431
|
6. | Brieher, W.M., and B.M. Gumbiner. 1994. Regulation of C-cadherin function during activin induced morphogenesis of Xenopus animal caps. J. Cell Biol. 126: 519-527 [Abstract]. |
7. | Brower, D.L., R.L. Smith, and M. Wilcox. 1980. A monoclonal antibody specific for diploid epithelial cells in Drosophila. Nature. 285: 403-405 |
8. |
Burdsal, C.A.,
C.H. Damsky, and
R.A. Petersen.
1993.
The role of E-cadherin
and integrins in mesoderm differentiation and migration at the mammalian
primitive streak.
Development.
118:
829-844
|
9. | Cooley, L., and W.E. Theurkauf. 1994. Cytoskeletal functions during Drosophila oogenesis. Science. 266: 590-595 |
10. |
Costa, M.,
W. Raich,
C. Agbunag,
B. Leung,
J. Hardin, and
J.R. Priess.
1998.
A putative catenin-cadherin system mediates morphogenesis of the Caenorhabditis elegans embryo.
J. Cell Biol.
141:
297-308
|
11. | Drubin, D.G., and W.J. Nelson. 1996. Origins of cell polarity. Cell. 84: 335-344 |
12. | Eaton, S., and K. Simons. 1995. Apical, basal, and lateral cues for epithelial polarization. Cell. 82: 5-8 |
13. |
Edwards, K.A., and
D.P. Kiehart.
1996.
Drosophila nonmuscle myosin II has
multiple essential roles in imaginal disc and egg chamber morphogenesis.
Development.
122:
1499-1511
|
14. | Edwards, K.A., M. Demsky, R.A. Montague, N. Weymouth, and D.P. Kiehart. 1997. GFP-moesin illuminates actin cytoskeleton dynamics in living tissue and demonstrates cell shape changes during morphogenesis in Drosophila. Dev. Biol. 191: 103-117 |
15. | Godt, D., and U. Tepass. 1998. Drosophila oocyte localization is mediated by differential cadherin-based adhesion. Nature. 395: 387-391 |
16. | Golic, K.G.. 1991. Site-specific recombination between homologous chromosomes in Drosophila. Science. 252: 958-961 |
17. | González-Reyes, A., and D. St. Johnston. 1994. Role of oocyte position in establishment of anterior-posterior polarity in Drosophila. Science. 266: 639-642 |
18. |
González-Reyes, A., and
D. St. Johnston.
1998a.
Patterning of the follicle cell
epithelium along the anterior-posterior axis during Drosophila oogenesis.
Development.
125:
2837-2846
|
19. |
González-Reyes, A., and
D. St. Johnston.
1998b.
The Drosophila AP axis is polarized by the cadherin-mediated positioning of the oocyte.
Development.
125:
3635-3644
|
20. | Guilford, P., J. Hopkins, J. Harraway, M. McLeod, N. McLeod, P. Harawira, H. Taite, R. Scoular, A. Miller, and A.E. Reeve. 1998. E-cadherin germline mutations in familiar gastric cancer. Nature. 392: 402-405 |
21. | Gumbiner, B.M.. 1992. Epithelial morphogenesis. Cell. 69: 385-387 |
22. | Gumbiner, B.M.. 1996. Cell adhesion: the molecular basis of tissue architecture and morphogenesis. Cell. 84: 345-357 |
23. |
Hall, A..
1998.
Rho GTPases and the actin cytoskeleton.
Science.
279:
509-514
|
24. | Hirano, S., N. Kimoto, Y. Shimoyama, S. Hirohashi, and M. Takeichi. 1992. Identification of a neural alpha-catenin as a key regulator of cadherin function and multicellular organization. Cell. 70: 293-301 |
25. | Huttenlocher, A., R.R. Sandborg, and A.F. Horwitz. 1995. Adhesion in cell migration. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 7: 697-706 |
26. | Hynes, R.O.. 1992. Integrins: versatility, modulation, and signaling in cell adhesion. Cell. 69: 11-25 |
27. | Hynes, R.O.. 1996. Targeted mutations in cell adhesion genes: what have we learned from them? Dev. Biol. 180: 402-412 |
28. | Iwai, Y., T. Usui, S. Hirano, R. Steward, M. Takeichi, and T. Uemura. 1997. Axon patterning requires DN-cadherin, a novel neuronal adhesion receptor, in the Drosophila embryonic CNS. Neuron. 19: 77-89 |
29. | King, R.C. 1970. Ovarian Development in Drosophila melanogaster. Academic Press, New York. |
30. | Kintner, C.. 1992. Regulation of embryonic cell adhesion by the cadherin cytoplasmic domain. Cell. 69: 225-236 |
31. | Larue, L., M. Ohsugi, J. Hirchenhain, and R. Kemler. 1994. E-cadherin null mutant embryos fail to form a trophectodermal epithelium. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 91: 8263-8267 [Abstract]. |
32. | Lauffenburger, D.A., and A.F. Horwitz. 1996. Cell migration: a physically integrated molecular process. Cell. 84: 359-369 |
33. | Lee, C.-H., and B.M. Gumbiner. 1995. Disruption of gastrulation movements in Xenopus by a dominant-negative mutant for C-cadherin. Dev. Biol. 171: 363-373 |
34. |
Lee, T.,
L. Feig, and
D.J. Montell.
1996.
Two distinct roles for Ras in a developmentally regulated cell migration.
Development.
122:
409-418
|
35. |
Levine, E.,
C.H. Lee,
C. Kintner, and
B.M. Gumbiner.
1994.
Selective disruption of E-cadherin function in early Xenopus embryos by a dominant negative mutant.
Development.
120:
901-909
|
36. |
Margolis, J., and
A. Spradling.
1995.
Identification and behavior of epithelial
stem cells in the Drosophila ovary.
Development.
121:
3797-3807
|
37. | McNeill, H., M. Ozawa, R. Kemler, and W.J. Nelson. 1990. Novel function of the cell adhesion molecule uvomorulin as an inducer of cell surface polarity. Cell. 62: 309-316 |
38. | Montell, D.J., P. Rørth, and A.C. Spradling. 1992. slow border cells, a locus required for a developmentally regulated cell migration during oogenesis, encodes Drosophila C/EBP. Cell. 71: 51-62 |
39. | Montell, D.J.. 1994. Moving right along: regulation of cell migration during Drosophila development. Trends Genet. 10: 59-62 |
40. | Murphy, A.M., and D.J. Montell. 1996. Cell type-specific roles for cdc42, Rac, and RhoL in Drosophila oogenesis. J. Cell Biol. 133: 617-630 [Abstract]. |
41. |
Murphy, A.M.,
T. Lee,
C.M. Andrews,
B.-Z. Shilo, and
D.J. Montell.
1995.
The
breathless FGF receptor homolog, a downstream target of Drosophila
C/EBP in the developmental control of cell migration.
Development.
121:
2255-2263
|
42. |
Nagafuchi, A.,
S. Ishihara, and
S. Tsukita.
1994.
The roles of catenins in the cadherin-mediated cell adhesion: functional analysis of E-cadherin-![]() |
43. |
Nobes, C.D.,
P. Hawkins,
L. Stephens, and
A. Hall.
1995.
Activation of the
small GTP-binding proteins rho and rac by growth factor receptors.
J. Cell
Sci.
108:
225-233
|
44. |
Oda, H.,
T. Uemura, and
M. Takeichi.
1997.
Phenotypic analysis of null mutants of DE-cadherin and Armadillo in Drosophila ovaries reveals distinct
aspects of their functions in cell adhesion and cytoskeletal organization.
Genes Cells.
2:
29-40
.
|
45. |
Oda, H.,
T. Uemura,
T. Shiomi,
A. Nagafuchi,
S. Tsukita, and
M. Takeichi.
1993.
Identification of a Drosophila homologue of ![]() |
46. | Oda, H., T. Uemura, Y. Harada, Y. Iwai, and M. Takeichi. 1994. A Drosophila homolog of cadherin associated with Armadillo and essential for embryonic cell-cell adhesion. Dev. Biol. 165: 716-726 |
47. |
Odland, G., and
R. Ross.
1968.
Human wound repair. I. Epidermal regeneration.
J. Cell Biol.
39:
135-151
|
48. | Palecek, S.P., J.C. Loftus, M.H. Ginsberg, D.A. Lauffenburger, and A.F. Horwitz. 1997. Integrin-ligand binding properties govern cell migration speed through cell-substratum adhesiveness. Nature. 385: 537-540 |
49. | Patel, N.H., P.M. Snow, and C.S. Goodman. 1987. Characterization and cloning of Fasciclin III: A glycoprotein expressed on a subset of neurons and axon pathways in Drosophila. Cell. 48: 975-988 |
50. |
Peifer, M.,
D. Sweeton,
M. Casey, and
E. Wieschaus.
1994.
Wingless signal and
Zeste-white 3 kinase trigger opposing changes in the intracellular distribution of Armadillo.
Development.
120:
369-380
|
51. |
Peifer, M..
1993.
The product of the Drosophila segment polarity gene armadillo
is part of a protein complex resembling the vertebrate adherens junction.
J.
Cell Sci.
105:
993-1000
|
52. |
Peifer, M.,
S. Orsulic,
D. Sweeton, and
E. Wieschaus.
1993.
A role for the
Drosophila segment polarity gene armadillo in cell adhesion and cytoskeletal integrity during oogenesis.
Development.
118:
1191-1207
|
53. | Radice, G.L., H. Rayburn, H. Matsunami, K.A. Knunden, M. Takeichi, and R.O. Hynes. 1997. Developmental defects in mouse embryos lacking N-cadherin. Dev. Biol. 181: 64-78 |
54. | Radice, G.P.. 1980. The spreading of epithelial cells during wound closure in Xenopus larvae. Dev. Biol. 76: 26-46 |
55. | Ray, R., and T. Schüpbach. 1996. Intercellular signaling and the polarization of body axes during Drosophila oogenesis. Genes Dev. 10: 1711-1723 |
56. | Ridley, A.J., H.F. Paterson, C.L. Johnston, D. Diekmann, and A. Hall. 1992. The small GTP-binding protein rac regulates growth factor-induced membrane ruffling. Cell. 70: 401-410 |
57. | Riehl, R., K. Johnston, R. Bradley, G.B. Grunwald, E. Cornel, A. Lilienbaum, and C.E. Holt. 1996. Cadherin function is required for axon outgrowth in retinal ganglion cells in vivo. Neuron. 17: 837-848 |
58. | Riethmacher, D., V. Brinkmann, and C. Birchmeier. 1995. A targeted mutation in the mouse E-cadherin gene results in defective preimplantation development. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 92: 855-859 [Abstract]. |
59. |
Shih, J., and
R. Keller.
1992.
Patterns of cell motility in the organizer and dorsal
mesoderm of Xenopus laevis.
Development.
116:
915-930
|
60. | Spradling, A.C. 1993. Developmental genetics of oogenesis. In The Development of Drosophila melanogaster. M. Bate and A. Martinez-Arias, editors. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, NY. 1-70. |
61. |
Takaishi, K.,
T. Sasaki,
H. Kotani,
H. Nishioka, and
Y. Takai.
1997.
Regulation
of cell-cell adhesion by rac and rho small G proteins in MDCK cells.
J. Cell
Biol.
139:
1047-1059
|
62. | Takeichi, M.. 1991. Cadherin cell adhesion receptors as a morphogenetic regulator. Science. 251: 1451-1455 |
63. | Takeichi, M.. 1995. Morphogenetic roles of classic cadherins. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 7: 619-627 |
64. |
Tanaka-Matakatsu, M.,
T. Uemura,
H. Oda,
M. Takeichi, and
S. Hayashi.
1996.
Cadherin-mediated cell adhesion and cell motility in Drosophila trachea regulated by the transcription factor Escargot.
Development.
122:
3697-3705
|
65. | Tautz, D., and C. Pfeifle. 1989. A non-radioactive in situ hybridization method for the localization of specific RNAs in Drosophila embryos reveals a translational control of the segmentation gene hunchback. Chromosoma. 98: 81-85 |
66. | Tepass, U., C. Theres, and E. Knust. 1990. crumbs encodes an EGF-like protein expressed on apical membranes of Drosophila epithelial cells and required for organization of epithelia. Cell. 61: 787-799 |
67. | Tepass, U., and E. Knust. 1990. Phenotypic and developmental analysis of mutations at the crumbs locus, a gene required for the development of epithelia in Drosophila melanogaster. Roux's Arch. Dev. Biol. 199: 189-206 . |
68. | Tepass, U., and E. Knust. 1993. crumbs and stardust act in a genetic pathway that controls the organization of epithelia in Drosophila melanogaster. Dev. Biol. 159: 311-326 |
69. | Tepass, U., E. Gruszynski-de Feo, T.A. Haag, L. Omatyar, T. Török, and V. Hartenstein. 1996. shotgun encodes Drosophila E-cadherin and is preferentially required during cell rearrangement in the neuroectoderm and other morphogenetically active epithelia. Genes Dev. 10: 672-685 [Abstract]. |
70. | Uemura, T., H. Oda, R. Kraut, S. Hayashi, and M. Takeichi. 1996. Processes of dynamic epithelial cell rearrangement are the major targets of cadE/shotgun mutations in the Drosophila embryo. Genes Dev. 10: 659-671 [Abstract]. |
71. |
Van Aelst, L., and
C. D'Souza-Schorey.
1997.
Rho GTPases and signaling networks.
Genes Dev.
11:
2295-2322
|
72. |
White, P.,
H. Aberle, and
J.-P. Vincent.
1998.
Signaling and adhesion activities
of mammalian ![]() |
73. | Xu, T., and S.D. Harrison. 1994. Mosaic analysis using FLP recombinase. In Drosophila melanogaster: Practical Uses in Cell and Molecular Biology. L.S.B. Goldstein and E.A. Fyrberg, editors. Academic Press, San Diego. 655-682. |
74. | Young, P.E., A.M. Richman, A.S. Ketchum, and D.P. Kiehart. 1993. Morphogenesis in Drosophila requires myosin heavy chain function. Genes Dev. 7: 29-41 [Abstract]. |