Cell fate specification during Caenorhabditis elegans male tail development

The cells of the specialized mating structures of the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans adult male tail develop from sex-specific divisions of postembryonic blast cells. One male-specific blast cell, B, is the precursor to all the cells of the copulatory spicules. Both cell interactions and autonomous fate specification mechanisms are utilized in the B lineage to specify fate.

During development the anterior daughter of B, B.a, generates four distinct pairs of cells. Cell ablation experiments indicate that the cells of each pair respond to positional cues provided by other male-specific blast cells. F and U promote anterior fates, Y.p promotes some posterior fates, and the B.a progeny promote posterior fates. The cells within each pair may also interact.

The lin-3/let-23 signalling pathway, identified for its function in C. elegans hermaphrodite vulval induction, mediates the signal from F and U. Reduction-of-function mutations in lin-3 (EGF-like signal), let-23 (receptor), sem-5 (adaptor), let-60 (ras), or lin-45 (raf) disrupt the fates of the anterior cells, and mimic F and U ablation. In addition, ectopically expressed lin-3 disrupts the fates of the posterior cells, and can promote anterior fates even in the absence of F and U.

A genetic screen of over 9000 mutagenized gametes recovered 22 mutations in 20 loci that disrupt fate specification in male tail lineages. Seven of these mutations may represent new genes that play a role in male tail development.

The first division of the B cell is asymmetric. The gene vab-3 is required for specification of B.a fates, and it may represent a factor whose activity is localized to the B.a cell via the gene lin-17. lin-17 acts both at the first division of the B cell and at specific other cell divisions in the lineage.

The LIN-3 gene of the nematode C. elegans is the vulval-inducing signal

The development of the vulva of the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans is induced by a signal from the anchor cell of the somatic gonad. Activity of the gene lin-3 is required for the Vulval Precursor Cells (VPCs) to assume vulval fates. It is shown here that lin-3 encodes the vulval-inducing signal.

lin-3 was molecularly cloned by transposon-tagging and shown to encode a nematode member ofthe Epidermal Growth Factor (EGF) family. Genetic epistasis experiments indicate that lin-3 acts upstream of let-23, which encodes a homologue of the EGF-Receptor.

lin-3 transgenes that contain multiple copies of wild-type lin-3 genomic DNA clones confer a dominant multivulva phenotype in which up to all six of the VPCs assume vulval fates. The properties of these trans genes suggest that lin-3 can act in the anchor cell to induce vulval fates. Ablation of the gonadal precursors, which prevents the development of the AC, strongly reduces the ability of lin-3 transgenes to stimulate vulval development. A lin-3 recorder transgene that retains the ability to stimulate vulval development is expressed specifically in the anchor cell at the time of vulval induction.

Expression of an obligate secreted form of the EGF domain of Lin-S from a heterologous promoter is sufficient to induce vulval fates in the absence of the normal source of the inductive signal. This result suggests that Lin-S may act as a secreted factor, and that Lin-S may be the sole vulval-inducing signal made by the anchor cell.

lin-3 transgenes can cause adjacent VPCs to assume the 1° vulval fate and thus can override the action of the lateral signal mediated by lin-12 that normally prevents adjacent 1° fates. This indicates that the production of Lin-3 by the anchor cell must be limited to allow the VPCs to assume the proper pattern of fates of so 3° 3° 2° 1° 2° 3°.

Negative regulators of a growth factor-mediated signaling pathway in the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans

Vulval differentiation in C. elegans is mediated by an Epidermal growth factor (EGF)- EGF receptor (EGFR) signaling pathway. I have cloned unc-101, a negative regulator of vulval differentiation of the nematode C. elegans. unc-101 encodes a homolog of AP47, the medium chain of the trans-Golgi clathrin-associated protein complex. This identity was confirmed by cloning and comparing sequence of a C. elegans homolog of AP50, the medium chain of the plasma membrane clathrin-associated protein complex. I provided the first genetic evidence that the trans-Golgi clathrin-coated vesicles are involved in regulation of an EGF signaling pathway. Most of the unc-101 alleles are deletions or nonsense mutations, suggesting that these alleles severely reduce the unc-101 activity. A hybrid gene that contains parts of unc-101 and mouse AP4 7 rescued at least two phenotypes of unc-101 mutations, the Unc and the suppression of vulvaless phenotype of let-23(sy1) mutation. Therefore, the functions of AP47 are conserved between nematodes and mammals.

unc-101 mutations can cause a greater than wild-type vulval differentiation in combination with certain mutations in sli-1, another negative regulator of the vulval induction pathway. A mutation in a new gene, rok-1, causes no defect by itself, but causes a greater than wild-type vulval differentiation in the presence of a sli-1 mutation. The unc-101; rok-1; sli-1 triple mutants display a greater extent of vulval differentiation than any double mutant combinations of unc-101, rok-1 and sli-1. Therefore, rok-1 locus defines another negative regulator of the vulval induction pathway.

I analyzed a second gene encoding an AP47 homolog in C. elegans. This gene, CEAP47, encodes a protein 72% identical to both unc-101 and mammalian AP47. A hybrid gene containing parts of unc-101 and CEAP47 sequences can rescue phenotypes of unc-101 mutants, indicating that UNC- 101 and CEAP47 proteins can be redundant if expressed in the same set of cells.

Pattern formation during Caenorhabditis Elegans vulval development

Pattern formation during animal development involves at least three processes: establishment of the competence of precursor cells to respond to intercellular signals, formation of a pattern of different cell fates adopted by precursor cells, and execution of the cell fate by generating a pattern of distinct descendants from precursor cells. I have analyzed the fundamental mechanisms of pattern formation by studying the development of Caenorhabditis elegans vulva.

In C. elegans, six multipotential vulval precursor cells (VPCs) are competent to respond to an inductive signal LIN-3 (EGF) mediated by LET- 23 (RTK) and a lateral signal via LIN-12 (Notch) to form a fixed pattern of 3°-3°-2°-1°-2°-3°. Results from expressing LIN-3 as a function of time in animals lacking endogenous LIN-3 indicate that both VPCs and VPC daughters are competent to respond to LIN-3. Although the daughters of VPCs specified to be 2° or 3° can be redirected to adopt the 1°fate, the decision to adopt the 1° fate is irreversible. Coupling of VPC competence to cell cycle progression reveals that VPC competence may be periodic during each cell cycle and involve LIN-39 (HOM-C). These mechanisms are essential to ensure a bias towards the 1° fate, while preventing an excessive response.

After adopting the 1° fate, the VPC executes its fate by dividing three rounds to form a fixed pattern of four inner vulF and four outer vulE descendants. These two types of descendants can be distinguished by a molecular marker zmp-1::GFP. A short-range signal from the anchor cell (AC), along with signaling between the inner and outer 1° VPC descendants and intrinsic polarity of 1° VPC daughters, patterns the 1° lineage. The Ras and the Wnt signaling pathways may be involved in these mechanisms.

The temporal expression pattern of egl-17::GFP, another marker ofthe 1° fate, correlates with three different steps of 1° fate execution: the commitment to the 1° fate, as well as later steps before and after establishment of the uterine-vulval connection. Six transcription factors, including LIN-1(ETS), LIN-39 (HOM-C), LIN-11(LIM), LIN-29 (zinc finger), COG-1 (homeobox) and EGL-38 (PAX2/5/8), are involved in different steps during 1° fate execution.

Signal transduction, regulation, and developmental logic of EGFR signalling in C. elegans

RTKs-mediated signaling systems and the pathways with which they interact (e.g., those initiated by G protein-mediated signaling) involve a highly cooperative network that sense a large number of cellular inputs and then integrate, amplify, and process this information to orchestrate an appropriate set of cellular responses. The responses include virtually all aspects of cell function, from the most fundamental (proliferation, differentiation) to the most specialized (movement, metabolism, chemosensation). The basic tenets of RTK signaling system seem rather well established. Yet, new pathways and even new molecular players continue to be discovered. Although we believe that many of the essential modules of RTK signaling system are rather well understood, we have relatively little knowledge of the extent of interaction among these modules and their overall quantitative importance.

My research has encompassed the study of both positive and negative signaling by RTKs in C. elegans. I identified the C. elegans S0S-1 gene and showed that it is necessary for multiple RAS-mediated developmental signals. In addition, I demonstrated that there is a SOS-1-independent signaling during RAS-mediated vulval differentiation. By assessing signal outputs from various triple mutants, I have concluded that this SOS-1-independent signaling is not mediated by PTP-2/SHP-2 or the removal of inhibition by GAP-1/ RasGAP and it is not under regulation by SLI-1/Cb1. I speculate that there is either another exchange factor for RASor an as yet unidentified signaling pathway operating during RAS-mediated vulval induction in C. elegans.

In an attempt to uncover the molecular mechanisms of negative regulation of EGFR signaling by SLI-1/Cb1, I and two other colleagues codiscovered that RING finger domain of SLI-1 is partially dispensable for activity. This structure-function analysis shows that there is an ubiquitin protein ligase-independent activity for SLI-1 in regulating EGFR signaling. Further, we identified an inhibitory tyrosine of LET-23/ EGFR requiring sli-1(+)for its effects: removal of this tyrosine closely mimics loss of sli-1 but not loss of other negative regulator function.

By comparative analysis of two RTK pathways with similar signaling mechanisms, I have found that clr-1, a previously identified negative regulator of egl-15 mediated FGFR signaling, is also involved in let-23 EGFR signaling. The success of this approach promises a similar reciprocal test and could potentially extend to the study of other signaling pathways with similar signaling logic.

Finally, by correlating the developmental expression of lin-3 EGF to let-23 EGFR signaling activity, I demonstrated the existence of reciprocal EGF signaling in coordinating the morphogenesis of epithelia. This developmental logic of EGF signaling could provide a basis to understand a universal mechanism for organogenesis.