QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s):
Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents

First published online 15 March 2006
doi: 10.1242/dev.02334

This Article Summary Figures Only Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: dev.02334v1 133/8/1485    most recent Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Vrailas, A. D. Articles by Moses, K. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Vrailas, A. D. Articles by Moses, K.

smoothened and thickveins regulate Moleskin/Importin 7-mediated MAP kinase signaling in the developing Drosophila eye

Alysia D. Vrailas¹, Daniel R. Marenda¹, Summer E. Cook¹, Maureen A. Powers¹, James A. Lorenzen^2,3, Lizabeth A. Perkins² and Kevin Moses^1,*,

¹ Department of Cell Biology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA.
² Pediatric Surgical Research Laboratories, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School Boston, MA 02114, USA.
³ Department of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI 53226, USA.

Author for correspondence (e-mail: mosesk{at}hhmi.org)

Accepted 17 February 2006

	SUMMARY

TOP SUMMARY INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
The Drosophila Mitogen Activated Protein Kinase (MAPK) Rolled is a key regulator of developmental signaling, relaying information from the cytoplasm into the nucleus. Cytoplasmic MEK phosphorylates MAPK (pMAPK), which then dimerizes and translocates to the nucleus where it regulates transcription factors. In cell culture, MAPK nuclear translocation directly follows phosphorylation, but in developing tissues pMAPK can be held in the cytoplasm for extended periods (hours). Here, we show that Moleskin antigen (Drosophila Importin 7/Msk), a MAPK transport factor, is sequestered apically at a time when lateral inhibition is required for patterning in the developing eye. We suggest that this apical restriction of Msk limits MAPK nuclear translocation and blocks Ras pathway nuclear signaling. Ectopic expression of Msk overcomes this block and disrupts patterning. Additionally, the MAPK cytoplasmic hold is genetically dependent on the presence of Decapentaplegic (Dpp) and Hedgehog receptors.

Key words: Drosophila, moleskin, Importin 7, Morphogenetic furrow, MAP kinase, Cell cycle, Nuclear translocation, ERK, Hedgehog, Dpp, Egfr

	INTRODUCTION

TOP SUMMARY INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
The Drosophila compound eye contains about 750 facets (ommatidia), each with eight photoreceptor neurons (in a trapezoidal pattern) and 12 accessory cells (Ready et al., 1976; Frankfort and Mardon, 2002). An equator divides the eye so that the ommatidial pattern below the equator is the mirror image of that above (Ready et al., 1976). The ommatidial cells are recruited in a specific sequence by inductive and inhibitive signals via the Hedgehog, Decapentaplegic (Dpp), Notch and Epidermal growth factor receptor (Egfr) pathways (Voas and Rebay, 2004).

Patterning begins in the presumptive eye epithelium with the initiation and anterior-wards progression of the morphogenetic furrow (Ready et al., 1976; Frankfort and Mardon, 2002). The furrow is characterized by apical constriction, initial cell-type specification and patterning, as well as by cell-cycle arrest in the G1 phase (Tomlinson, 1988). Progression of the furrow requires Hedgehog signaling, which induces dpp expression in the furrow where the two pathways may be partially redundant (Greenwood and Struhl, 1999; Frankfort and Mardon, 2002). Additionally, G1 cell-cycle arrest in the furrow requires Dpp signaling (Penton et al., 1997; Vrailas and Moses, 2006). For simplicity, we have divided the developing eye into three stages (Fig. 1). In phase 0 (anterior to the furrow), cells are not patterned and are randomly proliferating, which requires low-level Ras pathway activity (Xu and Rubin, 1993; Halfar et al., 2001). Ectopic, high-level Ras pathway activation in phase 0 causes all cells to differentiate as photoreceptor neurons (Dominguez et al., 1998).

In phase 1 (the furrow), differentiation begins. A column of precisely spaced ommatidial founder cells (the future R8 photoreceptors) is specified every two hours (Ready et al., 1976; Basler and Hafen, 1989; Frankfort and Mardon, 2002). Founder cell specification requires the progressive restriction of the proneural transcription factor Atonal (Fig. 1) (Jarman et al., 1994; Frankfort and Mardon, 2002). Atonal is expressed in the nuclei of all cells in the furrow and is then restricted to a small cluster of cells, the `intermediate group', and finally to the lone future R8 photoreceptor (Jarman et al., 1994; Dokucu et al., 1996; Frankfort and Mardon, 2002). The R8/founder cells (one per cluster) then inhibit the differentiation of their neighbors through Delta/Notch-mediated lateral inhibition (Frankfort and Mardon, 2002). pMAPK is expressed in the Atonal-positive intermediate groups, although the function of this Ras signaling is unclear (further discussed below).

In phase 2 (posterior to the furrow), the R8/founder cells reverse their inhibitory behavior and induce the recruitment of their neighbors through Egfr/Ras pathway signaling (Freeman, 1994; Tio et al., 1994; Freeman, 1996; Tio and Moses, 1997; Freeman, 2002). The first five cells recruited remain in G1 cell-cycle arrest, while the surrounding cells re-enter the cell cycle and go through a `second mitotic wave', which also requires Egfr/Ras signaling (Wolff and Ready, 1991; Firth and Baker, 2003). This provides the pool of cells from which the remaining cell types will be recruited (Ready et al., 1976; Tomlinson, 1988). Later, the ommatidia become asymmetric and rotate to form the equator (Ready et al., 1976; Tomlinson, 1988). Although ommatidial chirality depends on Frizzled and Delta/Notch signaling (Mlodzik, 2002), the rotation itself is regulated, in part, by Egfr/Ras signaling (Brown and Freeman, 2003; Gaengel and Mlodzik, 2003; Strutt and Strutt, 2003).

Thus, Egfr signaling is required for proliferation and cell survival in phases 0 and 2, as well as for the reiterative induction of cell types and ommatidial rotation in phase 2. It has also been suggested that Egfr may have a crucial function in phase 1: in the initial specification of the Atonal-positive intermediate groups and/or the patterning of the R8/founder cells. Evidence for this is that Egfr-driven pMAPK is strongly expressed in the Atonal-positive intermediate groups (Gabay et al., 1997; Kumar et al., 1998; Spencer et al., 1998), and that the Egfr gain-of-function mutation Ellipse (Egfr^Elp) has reduced numbers of Atonal-positive R8/founder cells (Baker and Rubin, 1989; Baker and Rubin, 1992; Zak and Shilo, 1992).

View larger version (105K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Three phases in eye development. Third instar eye-imaginal disc, stained for Atonal (green) and Elav (red) to show the positions of phases 0, 1 and 2, as indicated (see text). Anterior is to the right.

In cultured vertebrate cells, MAPK is phosphorylated by and released from MEK, it undergoes a conformational change, dimerizes and rapidly translocates to the nucleus (Cobb and Goldsmith, 2000). The dimeric form of pMAPK is thought to be too large to enter the nucleus passively, requiring Ran-mediated active transport (Cobb and Goldsmith, 2000) or a carrier-free mechanism (Whitehurst et al., 2002). However, some examples of cytoplasmic pMAPK have been reported in vertebrates (Smith et al., 2004; Ebisuya et al., 2005). In mouse embryos, cells that receive Fgf signals have high levels of cytoplasmic pMAPK (Corson et al., 2003), and vertebrate cytoplasmic anchors for pMAPK have been suggested: Pea15 and Sef (Formstecher et al., 2001; Torii et al., 2004). However, we have been unable to identify Drosophila Pea15 or Sef homologs by BLAST analysis. Another possible mediator of MAPK cytoplasmic hold in Drosophila may be the Drosophila homolog of vertebrate importin 7, Moleskin (Msk), which has been found to bind pMAPK and is involved in its nuclear transport, with reported roles in embryonic and wing development (Lorenzen et al., 2001; Baker et al., 2002; Marenda et al., 2006).

Here, we report that Msk is required for cell proliferation and survival in phase 0, as well as for correct ommatidial rotation in phase 2. However, in phase 1, Msk protein is predominantly apical, which may serve to limit pMAPK nuclear translocation and block MAPK signaling. Ectopic expression of Msk in phase 1 overcomes the effects of MAPK cytoplasmic hold, disrupting Atonal expression. Additionally, the Hedgehog and Dpp receptor genes smoothened (smo) and thickveins (tkv) are required for maintaining MAPK cytoplasmic hold and are genetically upstream of msk.

	MATERIALS AND METHODS

TOP SUMMARY INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
Histology and microscopy
Eye discs were prepared as described by Tomlinson and Ready (Tomlinson and Ready, 1987), with modifications as described previously (Tio and Moses, 1997). For all except Msk stains, discs were mounted in Vectashield (Vector Laboratories, H-1000) and imaged by confocal microscopy. For Msk stains, peripodial membranes were removed and the antigen visualized with DAB and Ni/Co intensification, followed by dehydration and mounting in DPX (Zeiss) and bright-field microscopy. Adult eye SEM, sections and pupal eye preparations were performed as previously described (Ready et al., 1976; Cagan and Ready, 1989; Tio and Moses, 1997).

Antisera
Primary antisera: rabbit anti-Msk (1:1,000) (Lorenzen et al., 2001), mouse anti-pMAPK (1:625, Sigma) (Gabay et al., 1997), rabbit anti-Atonal (1:1,000) (Jarman et al., 1993), mouse anti-BrdU (1:50, BD Biosciences), mouse anti-Cyclin E (1:5, gift of B. Edgar) (Richardson et al., 1995), rabbit activated Caspase-3 (1:200, BD Biosciences) (Srinivasan et al., 1998), rabbit anti-ß-galactosidase (1:1,000, Cortex Biochem), rat anti-Elav for neurons [1:500, Developmental Studies Hybridoma Bank (DSHB)] (Robinow and White, 1988; O'Neill et al., 1994), mouse anti-BarH1 for R1 and R6 (1:10, gift of K. Saigo) (Higashijima et al., 1992), rabbit anti-SalM for R3 and R4 (1:10, gift of R. Schuh) (Kuhnlein et al., 1994; Mollereau et al., 2001), mouse anti-Cut for cone cells (1:10, DSHB) (Blochinger et al., 1990; Blochlinger et al., 1993), guinea-pig anti-Senseless for R8 cells (1:1000, gift of G. Mardon) (Nolo et al., 2000; Frankfort et al., 2001), mouse anti-Pros for R7 (1:100, DSHB) (Campbell et al., 1994; Kauffmann et al., 1996), mouse anti-Cyclin A (1:10, DSHB, a gift of I. Hariharan) (Knoblich and Lehner, 1993), mouse anti-Cyclin B (1:50, DSHB, gift of I. Hariharan) (Knoblich and Lehner, 1993), mouse anti-Cyclin D (1:10, gift of K. Moberg, Emory University, Atlanta, GA) and rabbit anti-phospho-Histone H3 (1:1,000 Cell Signaling Technologies). Secondary antibodies from Jackson ImmunoReserach were: goat anti-mouse Cy5 (1:500), goat anti-rabbit TRITC (1:250), goat anti-rat Cy5 (1:200), goat anti-rabbit HRP (1:100), and goat anti-mouse HRP (1:40). Actin was detected with Rhodamine-phalloidin (1:50, Molecular Probes).

Drosophila genotypes
Wild types: Canton-S or w¹¹¹⁸.

For ectopic expression of Msk: hs:msk and w¹¹¹⁸ or UAS:msk, or UAS:GFP crossed to hs:GAL4 (gift of K. Moberg), or GMR:GAL4/CyO (gift of L. Zipursky, University of California, Los Angeles).

For msk null clones larval genotypes were: y w ey:FLP; P{w⁺mC=Ubi:GFP} P{neo FRT}80B/msk⁵ P{neo FRT}80B, or w hs:FLP; P{w⁺mC=Ubi:GFP} P{neo FRT}80B/msk⁵ P{neo FRT}80B, or y w ey:FLP; hs:MG UAS:lacZ/+; P{w⁺mC=Ubi:GFP} P{neo FRT}80B/msk⁵ P{neo FRT}80B, or y w ey:FLP/GMR:p35; P{w⁺mC=Ubi:GFP} P{neo FRT}80B/msk⁵ P{neo FRT}80B, or w y ey:FLP/P{HLHmdelta-lacZ.0.5}; P{w⁺mC=Ubi:GFP} P{neo FRT}80B/msk⁵ P{neo FRT}80B.

For smo, tkv and smo tkv clones: y w ey:FLP;P{w⁺mC=Ubi:GFP} P{neo FRT}40A/smo³ P{neo FRT}40A, or /tkv⁸ P{neo FRT}40A, or /smo³ tkv⁸ P{neo FRT}40A.

For smo tkv; msk clones: w y ey:FLP; P{w⁺mC=Ubi:GFP} P{neo FRT}40A/smo³ tkv⁸ P{neo FRT}40A; P{w⁺mC=Ubi:GFP} P{neo FRT}80B/msk⁵ P{neo FRT}80B.

Temperature-shift regimes
For Msk expression, hs:msk or hs:GAL4::UAS:msk and controls were raised at 25°C and placed at 37°C for one hour. Eye discs were dissected immediately, after one hour, or after two hours recovery at 25°C. To induce hs:Flp clones, flies were raised at 25°C, placed at 37°C for one hour at the times indicated in the text, and then returned to 25°C until dissection in the late third instar.

DNA constructs
pP(Hsp70-CaSpeR)NK was derived from pP(Hsp70-CaSpeR) (Bell et al., 1991) by replacing the SalI, XbaI, SpeI, BamHI, SmaI and PstI sites with KpnI, HpaI, EagI and NotI sites (in that order). A 3,253 bp KpnI to NotI msk-containing fragment [1049 residues of msk with a nine residue N-terminal MYC epitope tag added and two intervening residues (`AS')] was then inserted between the KpnI and NotI sites to yield pP(Hsp70-Msk/CaSpeR) or `hs:msk', which was injected into w¹¹¹⁸ embryos as described previously (Rubin and Spradling, 1982), at a 1:1 ratio (500 µg/ml each), with a helper plasmid driving the expression of the S129A enhanced P-transposase (Beall et al., 2002). Multiple independent lines were obtained and two viable independent insertions were retained on each major chromosome.

	RESULTS

TOP SUMMARY INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
Msk is normally required for cell proliferation and survival in the developing eye in phase 0
To study the requirements for msk in eye development, we used hs:Flp to induce msk null (msk⁵) clones 48, 72 and 96 hours before dissection at late third instar. When clones were induced 48 hours before dissection, we saw many, small homozygous msk null clones and homozygous wild-type twin spots (Fig. 2A), both anterior and posterior to the furrow. However, when clones were induced 72 hours before dissection there were fewer clones, and the twin spots were much larger than the msk null clones (Fig. 2B). This suggests that the msk null cells may have a growth disadvantage, or that the msk cells die, between 48 and 72 hours, indicating that Msk protein may perdure for at least 48 hours. Interestingly, at 72 hours after clone induction (Fig. 2B), msk clones survived posterior to the furrow in postmitotic territories, but there were no msk clones (only twin spots) anterior to the furrow. Additionally, clone induction 96 hours before dissection reveals even fewer but larger twin spots, and no msk clones (Fig. 2C). Thus, msk mutant cells are lost from proliferative domains. Loss of msk cells may be a result of cell competition between the msk cells and the surrounding wild-type tissue, or msk may be autonomously required for the survival of proliferating cells, much like ras, which also has a small clone phenotype (Baker and Rubin, 1992; Xu and Rubin, 1993; Halfar et al., 2001).

One possible reason that msk clones are much smaller than their wild-type counterparts might be that msk cells divide more slowly, which would suggest that msk affects the cell cycle. We, therefore, used ey:Flp to induce msk null clones, which where then examined for cell-cycle marker expression in phase 2: BrdU for S-phase (Fig. 2D-F), Cyclin E for late G1 (Fig. 2G-I), Cyclin D for G1 arrest, phospho-Histone H3 for mitosis and Cyclin A and B for G2 (data not shown). The absence of msk does not eliminate the expression of any of these markers, suggesting that there is no simple cell-cycle, stage-specific block.

Alternatively, the small clone size could be due to cell death. Larval msk clones do not stain for activated Caspase-3, a marker for apoptosis (data not shown). However, it may be that clones in phase 0 are dying by other means, such as necrosis, or that the dying cells are being cleared too rapidly to be detected. To test for this, we overexpressed p35 to inhibit apoptosis, but this failed to rescue clone size; this was also the case for Egfr loss-of-function mutants (Yu et al., 2002). msk null cells that survive into phase 2 eventually die in the pupal stage, a time when we can detect activated Caspase 3 (Fig. 2J-L), and adult eyes have small scars in the place of msk null clones (data not shown). Taken together, these experiments suggest that msk is required for cell proliferation in the larval stage, and later for the survival of postmitotic cells.

View larger version (136K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Cell proliferation and survival requires msk in the developing eye. (A-L) Third-instar (A-I) and 60-hour pupal (J-L) eye-imaginal discs containing clones of msk null cells, revealed by negative marking using GFP (D,G,J); outlined in (D-I). Anterior is to the right; A-C and D-L are the same scale as indicated in A and D, respectively. In E,H,K, antigens are indicated on the left; F,I and L are merged images showing GFP (green) and antigens (red); A-C shows a time course following the hsp70-driven induction of clones. Brightly labeled cells are homozygous wild-type `twin-spots' (white filled arrows), gray cells are heterozygous and black cells are homozygous msk nulls (black filled arrows). Note, late clones (48 hours before dissection in A) are numerous, small, equally distributed on both sides of the furrow, and are accompanied by twin spots of roughly equal size; earlier clones (72 hours before dissection in B) are rare, smaller than their twin spots, and are present only posterior to the furrow. Note also that very early clones (96 hours before dissection in C) are absent, with only rare, large twin spots remaining. Cell-cycle markers (BrdU for S-phase (D-F) and Cyclin E for G1 (G-I) are not eliminated by msk loss of function (arrows). Note, msk null cells posterior to the furrow eventually die during pupal life, as revealed by activated Caspase 3 antigen (arrows in J-L).

In addition to cell-type specification, ommatidial chirality and rotation are established in phase 2. As the five-cell preclusters form, they face the same direction and have a single axis of symmetry. The preclusters then rotate 90° away from the anteroposterior axis of the eye disc with the dorsal and ventral halves rotating in opposite directions. Disruption of the direction of rotation can then be detected by the expression of BarH1, which is normally expressed in R1 and R6 (Higashijima et al., 1992; Lim and Choi, 2004). As the ommatidia clusters rotate, they loose their symmetry so that R4 is positioned posterior to R3 (Tomlinson, 1988). This repositioning of R3 and R4 can be detected with E(Spl)M-delta-0.5:lacZ, which is expressed only in the R4 (Cooper and Bray, 1999). The R3/R4 photoreceptor pair play a crucial role in the establishment of ommatidial polarity as their loss and/or misspecification disrupts the chirality of the cluster and leads to randomization of the direction and degree of rotation (Gubb, 1993; Theisen et al., 1994; Zheng et al., 1995; Fanto et al., 1998). Although chirality and rotation are linked, they are genetically separable (Rawls et al., 2002; Yang et al., 2002), and some mutations in elements of the Ras pathway affect rotation and not chirality (e.g. specific alleles of argos, spitz, pointed, nemo and Star) (Choi and Benzer, 1994; Brown and Freeman, 2003; Gaengel and Mlodzik, 2003; Strutt and Strutt, 2003).

In msk null clones, some ommatidia no longer rotate reliably (see Fig. 3M-O). As chirality and rotation can be disrupted independently of each other, we then visualized R4 fate. If the ommatidia have rotated incorrectly but chirality has remained intact, R4 would be misplaced within the cluster. In cases of miss-rotated ommatidia, we find that the R4 cell is misplaced, although in some cases two R4s are specified (Fig. 3P-R). Thus msk, like other Ras pathway elements, is required for ommatidial rotation and not chirality.

These data show that some important Egfr/Ras pathway functions are not affected in msk null clones in phase 2 (cell cycle and cell-type specification), whereas other functions are (ommatidial rotation). This suggests that in phase 2, a second pMAPK nuclear transport factor or pathway may exist, making Msk redundant at some steps. Another possibility is that enough pMAPK can translocate into the nucleus in the absence of Msk to perform some functions, but that levels are not sufficient for others. Third, some functions of pMAPK may be via cytoplasmic targets, which do not require nuclear translocation, as is known in the developing wing (Marenda et al., 2006).

View larger version (91K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 3. msk is not required for cell-type specification in the developing eye but does contribute to ommatidial rotation. (A,D,G,J,M,P) Third-instar eye-imaginal discs containing clones of msk null cells, revealed by negative marking using GFP. (B,E,H,K,N,Q) Antigens visualized by the immunostain indicated at the left. (C,F,I,L,O,R) Merged images, with GFP in green and antigens in red (Elav, blue in R). Anterior is to the right; all images are at the same scale, see bar in P. (A-C) msk loss-of-function does not affect the neural marker Elav (arrows). (D-F) Senseless expression in R8 cells (arrow). (G-I) Spalt expression in R3 and R4 (arrows). (J-L) Cut expression in the cone cells (arrow). (M-R) msk loss-of-function affects ommatidial rotation (M-O), as revealed by BarH1 antigen labelling of R1 and R6 (normal orientation is indicated by an arrowhead and reversed by an arrow), but not chirality (P-R), as revealed by E(Spl)M-delta-0.5:lacZ expression in R4 cells (reversed ommatidia have reversed a R3/4 position, arrow). Note, occasionally two cells are specified as R4 in msk clones (arrowhead in P-R).

Gal4 activity is cold sensitive, and we used this to control the levels of Msk expression. Flies carrying GMR:Gal4 alone or GMR:Gal4::UAS:GFP, cultured at 18°C, have full-sized and fully pigmented eyes (Fig. 4A,D; data not shown), whereas adding UAS:msk causes a roughening of the eye and a loss of some red pigment (Fig. 4B,E); this is accentuated at 25°C (Fig. 4C,F), over the effect of GMR:Gal4 alone (data not shown) (see also Kramer and Staveley, 2003). Sections of these eyes show that GMR:Gal4 control flies cultured at 18°C have the normal complement of photoreceptor and pigment cells, as seen in the adult (Fig. 4G) and in 60-hour pupae (Fig. 4J). By contrast, the addition of UAS:msk at 18°C causes some disruption, and reduced numbers of both photoreceptors and pigment cells (Fig. 4H), and this effect occurs before the 60-hour pupal stage (Fig. 4K). Elevating the temperature to 25°C kills almost all retinal cells before the adult stage (Fig. 4I), but the cells are not yet lost in the 60-hour pupa (Fig. 4L).

View larger version (128K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Ectopic Msk affects late eye development. All panels show anterior right, dorsal up; genotypes and temperatures are indicated above panels. (A,D,G,J) GMR:Gal4, raised at 18°C; (B,E,H,K) GMR:Gal4 UAS:Msk, raised at 18°C; (C,F,I,L) GMR:Gal4 UAS:Msk, raised at 25°C. (A-C) Adult compound eyes viewed by light microscopy. Note the reduced red pigment upon the addition of ectopic Msk (compare B and C with A). (D-F) Adult compound eyes viewed by scanning electron microscopy. Note the disrupted facet pattern upon the addition of ectopic Msk (compare E and F with D). (G-I) Adult compound eye sections. Note the reduced numbers of photoreceptor and pigment cells upon the addition of ectopic Msk (compare the area indicated by the arrow in H with G). (J-L) 60-hour pupal eyes, stained for F-actin. Note the disrupted pattern upon the addition of ectopic Msk (compare K and L with J). Note, all phenotypes are accentuated by elevated Msk expression (through increased Gal4 activity) at 25°C (C,F,I,L).

This pattern of apical Msk is very similar to the apical cell constrictions seen with cobalt or lead sulphide staining in the G1 cell cycle-arrested cells in phase 1 (Tomlinson and Ready, 1987; Wolff and Ready, 1991). We suggest that Msk is unrestricted in phases 0 and 2, facilitating pMAPK translocation into the nucleus. However, in phase 1 (in G1 arrested cells), Msk becomes sequestered apically, preventing pMAPK nuclear translocation. In late phase 1, Msk is released in cells not allocated to the ommatidial clusters (Fig. 5A).

Ectopic Msk expressed in the furrow disrupts normal Atonal and pMAPK expression
We have proposed that the elevated levels of pMAPK antigen in the furrow may be due, in part, to cytoplasmic hold, which prevents nuclear translocation and subsequent exposure to some nuclear phosphatase or protease (Kumar et al., 2003). Additionally, nuclear-directed MAPK expressed in the furrow or overexpression of ras^v12 disrupts Atonal expression (Hayashi and Saigo, 2001; Kumar et al., 2003). Thus, if we were to break cytoplasmic hold, we might expect to reduce pMAPK antigen and Atonal expression in the furrow. If apical Msk sequestration is the normal mechanism that mediates MAPK cytoplasmic hold, then high-level ectopic expression of Msk in the furrow might titrate the Msk anchoring factor(s) and allow pMAPK to enter cell nuclei, reducing pMAPK and Atonal expression.

To explore this, we used hs:GAL4 UAS:msk flies and derived hs:msk transgenic flies to express Msk by heat induction. We observe two consequences: first, pMAPK antigen is lost from the Atonal intermediate groups (Fig. 5C-F). This effect is rapid, complete (after one hour at 37°C, Fig. 4F) and reversible (pMAPK expression recovers after an hour at 25°C, data not shown). The second effect is that Atonal antigen is dramatically reduced in early phase 1 (Fig. 5G-I, compare with 5J). As with pMAPK antigen, Atonal expression recovers after an hour at 25°C (data not shown); however, unlike the pMAPK antigen, some Atonal antigen is retained, particularly in the late, single founder cells. It could be that this is due to a failure to express sufficient ectopic Msk, or that one hour of heat induction, even at 37°C, is insufficient. A higher induction temperature and longer times at 37°C are lethal. Therefore, to increase the levels of Msk, we combined six independent insertions together to give 12 genomic copies of hs:msk. However, the expression of multiple copies of Msk had the same affect on Atonal expression as a single copy (data not shown). As we have probably reached saturation for ectopic Msk, and this phenocopies the expression of nuclear-directed MAPK and ectopic ras^v12, the retention of Atonal in founder cells may be refractory to ectopic Msk and perhaps to pMAPK nuclear translocation.

View larger version (147K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Msk protein is apically sequestered in the morphogenetic furrow and ectopically expressed Msk at the furrow reduces both pMAPK and Atonal. Third instar eye-imaginal discs, anterior right. A,B and C-J are at the same scale, as indicated. (A,B) Apical (A) and basal (B) view of Msk staining (Dim7 antigen, black) at the morphogenetic furrow (arrowheads) Note the apical Msk expression (arrows, A), and that this is lost from cells surrounding the preclusters (black asterisk, B). Note also the higher level of Msk antigen anterior to the furrow (white asterisks). (C-J) pMAPK (black, C-F) and Atonal (white, G-J) expression at the morphogenetic furrow (arrowheads). pMAPK antigen stained with Ni/Co intensified DAB; Atonal by immunofluorescence. Genotypes and heat-induction times are indicated above the panels. pMAPK antigen is lost from the furrow after one hour of hsp70 promoter-driven Msk expression (compare F with arrows in C-E. Atonal expression is greatly reduced by the same treatment, on the anterior side of the furrow (arrows, J).

View larger version (100K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 6. msk loss-of-function does not affect Atonal or pMAPK in the furrow. (A-F) Third instar eye-imaginal discs with msk null clones (outlined), stained for (A,D) GFP, which negatively marks the clones, (B) pMAPK, (C) pMAPK (red) and GFP (green), (E) Atonal, and (F) Atonal (red) and GFP (green). Anterior is to the right, scale as indicated in A. Atonal and pMAPK expression is normal in clones (arrows).

These ectopic Msk expression data in the furrow suggest that Msk is sufficient to support pMAPK nuclear translocation. Thus, we propose that Msk may be inactivated through sequestration and is normally limiting in cells in which MAPK cytoplasmic hold is required.

MAPK cytoplasmic hold is genetically dependent on the Hedgehog and Dpp receptors Smo and Tkv
As MAPK cytoplasmic hold is a local and transient phenomenon limited in the developing eye to the morphogenetic furrow, we reasoned that Msk sequestration might be developmentally regulated and mediated by some signaling receptor. We initially suspected that Notch signaling might be upstream of the MAPK cytoplasmic hold in phase 1. However, it has been shown that Notch loss-of-function results in increased and persistent Atonal expression, the opposite of the result expected if MAPK cytoplasmic hold is lost (Baker et al., 1996). We repeated this experiment and obtained the same result (data not shown). Additionally, pMAPK expression is unaffected (data not shown), thus eliminating the Notch pathway as an upstream signal for MAPK cytoplasmic hold.

Next, we examined the Hedgehog and Dpp receptors Smoothened (Smo) and Thickveins (Tkv). It has been suggested that Hedgehog and Dpp signaling act together (redundantly) in the furrow, and it is observed that, in cells lacking both Smo and Tkv, Atonal expression is lost (Greenwood and Struhl, 1999). This suggests that Hedgehog and/or Dpp signaling could be required for the MAPK cytoplasmic hold.

View larger version (107K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 7. smo and tkv signaling affect pMAPK and Atonal expression. Third instar eye-imaginal discs with mutant null clones (outlined); anterior to the right; all to the same scale as indicated in L. Genes homozygous in the clones are indicated on the left, antigens/stains above; arrowheads indicate the furrow. (A-D) smo null clones showing reduced Atonal and pMAPK expression (asterisk). Note, residual Atonal is strongest in the lone R8 cells (arrow in B,D). (E-H) tkv null clones showing of Atonal and pMAPK (arrows). (I-L) smo tkv double-mutant clone in which Atonal and pMAPK expression is lost (asterisk).

These data suggest that Msk function may be genetically dependent on smo and tkv, and that one or the other of these receptors may form part of a regulated complex that sequesters Msk in the furrow. The apparent loss of MAPK cytoplasmic hold in the smo tkv clones (as seen by the loss of Atonal and pMAPK) could then be explained as a failure to anchor Msk, as loss of smo or smo and tkv results in disruption of the apical constriction of the actin cytoskeleton in the furrow (Vrailas and Moses, 2006). If this is so, msk loss-of-function should be genetically epistatic to smo and tkv for this phenotype in the furrow.

To test this, we derived triply mutant clones lacking smo, tkv and msk. Indeed, we observe a complete genetic suppression by msk of the smo tkv phenotypes: a complete restoration of pMAPK and Atonal expression and patterning (Fig. 8). In some cases we see a synthetic gain-of-function effect anterior to the furrow (phase 0): ectopic pMAPK, but not Atonal (Fig. 8G,H). Thus, msk is genetically downstream of the Hedgehog and Dpp receptors in the furrow. We propose that the Hedgehog and Dpp pathways may act together to inhibit Msk function and hence restrict pMAPK nuclear import.

View larger version (95K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 8. msk is epistatic to smo and tkv in the furrow. (A-H) Third instar eye-imaginal discs with triply mutant smo, tkv and msk null clones (outlined), stained for (A,E) GFP, which negatively marks the clones, (B,F) Atonal and (C,G) pMAPK. D and H show merged images, colors as indicated. Anterior right, scale as indicated in A. Atonal and pMAPK expression is normal in the clones in the furrow (black arrow, compare with Fig. 7I-L). Note the ectopic pMAPK expression anterior to the furrow (white arrows in G,H).

	DISCUSSION

TOP SUMMARY INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

We suggest that in wild-type eye discs, the level of pMAPK antigen is a very misleading reporter of Egfr/Ras pathway activity, because cytoplasmic hold in phase 1 allows even a relatively low level of pathway activity to build up high levels of pMAPK antigen. We previously developed a system to reveal MAPK nuclear translocation without the use of an antibody (MG-driven reporter gene expression) (Kumar et al., 2003). However, we have since found that under all conditions tested, MG-driven reporter expression does not reveal nuclear MAPK in phase 0, where Ras pathway activation is required. We reliably see MG-driven reporter expression in phase 2, where there is thought to be high (or sustained) levels of Ras pathway activity. In phase 1, the level of pathway signaling may be insufficient for expression, and thus MG-driven reporter expression may reveal only high (or sustained) levels of nuclear MAPK. Alternatively, this could be caused by a technical limitation: the hsp70 promoter drives the expression of only low levels of MG protein (see Kumar et al., 2003). Therefore, we have turned to two less direct assays, which together, we interpret as revealing the loss of MAPK cytoplasmic hold in the furrow: (1) loss of Atonal expression (as previously demonstrated by fusing an SV40 NLS to MAPK and by the ectopic expression of Ras^v12) (Hayashi and Saigo, 2001; Kumar et al., 2003); and (2) loss of pMAPK antigen, which may be due to exposure to a nuclear phosphatase/protease.

We find that the MAPK nuclear transport factor Drosophila Importin 7/Msk is apically sequestered in phase 1, the time when pMAPK nuclear access is blocked. Furthermore, we find that ectopic Msk is sufficient to break the cytoplasmic hold in the furrow, as seen by loss of pMAPK antigen and suppression of the early stages of Atonal expression. However, this transient expression of Msk is unable to promote the precocious neural differentiation or the increase in rough expression, as has been seen with hs:ras^v12 or nuclear-directed MAPK. Because ectopic ras^v12 produces an increase in pMAPK, and the phosphorylation state of nuclear-directed MAPK is not required for nuclear translocation, it may be that the available pool of pMAPK that can be imported into the nucleus by Msk is enough to affect Atonal expression, but not to affect Elav or Rough expression. We also show genetic evidence that the MAPK cytoplasmic hold depends on the Hedgehog receptor Smo and is enhanced by the loss of the Dpp receptor Tkv. smo loss-of-function clones reduce Atonal and pMAPK expression, whereas tkv clones have much weaker effects. However, the loss of smo and tkv together completely abolishes both pMAPK and Atonal expression in the furrow. This is consistent with a previous report of the loss of Atonal expression in smo tkv clones (Greenwood and Struhl, 1999). Additionally, MAPK cytoplasmic hold in smo tkv clones is rescued by the additional loss of msk. Thus, we have shown that msk genetically antagonizes pMAPK levels in the morphogenetic furrow: msk gain-of-function reduces pMAPK and msk loss-of-function (in smo tkv clones) increases it.

Hedgehog signaling has also been reported as a positive regulator of Atonal on the anterior side of the furrow and as a negative regulator (perhaps through Rough or Bar) on the posterior side (Baker and Yu, 1997; Dominguez, 1999; Frankfort and Mardon, 2002; Lim and Choi, 2004). However, the inductive effect of Hedgehog on Atonal appears to be independent of the Hedgehog pathway transcription factor Ci (Suzuki and Saigo, 2000; Fu and Baker, 2003), which is consistent with an indirect effect through the MAPK cytoplasmic hold. We used smo tkv msk triple mutant clones to show that msk is genetically epistatic to smo and tkv in the furrow, and suggest that Msk sequestration in the furrow is required for MAPK cytoplasmic hold, and that smo and tkv are genetically upstream of this sequestration of Msk. Indeed, loss of smo and tkv results in a disruption of the actin cytoskeleton in the furrow, as well as of expression of Egfr and other signaling molecules (Baonza and Freeman, 2005; Firth and Baker, 2005; Vrailas and Moses, 2006). The loss of apical constriction may therefore disrupt Msk apical sequestration in such a way as to allow precocious Msk-mediated pMAPK nuclear import.

What is more surprising is that differentiation and ommatidial assembly, which are known to require Ras signaling (Freeman, 1997) and MAPK nuclear translocation (Kumar et al., 2003), occur normally in the absence of Msk in phase 2. It may be that cytoplasmic MAPK targets are important for ommatidial assembly or that pMAPK can translocate into the nucleus by some Ran-independent mechanism [such as that reported by Whitehurst et al. (Whitehurst et al., 2002)]. However, we favor the possibility that, in phase 2, other (possibly redundant) transport factors are expressed.

Like the Ras pathway, msk plays a role in ommatidial rotation but not chirality. It may be that in the absence of Msk, enough pMAPK can translocate into the nucleus for ommatidial assembly, but not enough for proper rotation. Additionally, in phase 0, we find that Msk is required for proliferation, which also requires Ras signaling. Therefore, Msk is required for some pMAPK nuclear translocation in phase 0 and phase 2, but is not necessary in phase 1, in order to allow for the initial specification of the Atonal-positive R8.

To conclude, we have identified the apical sequestration of Drosophila Importin 7/Msk in the morphogenetic furrow and we suggest that this may be required for the MAPK cytoplasmic hold in the developing eye. Cytoplasmic hold is required to allow initial patterning through lateral inhibition and the focusing of the proneural factor Atonal. We further suggest that this is mediated by the combined action of Hedgehog and Dpp.

	ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

 
We thank K. Arora, S. Bray, K. Moberg, I. Hariharan and G. Struhl for gifts of reagents, and K. Moberg for his critical reading of our manuscript. Work in the Perkins lab was supported by NIH RO1 GM61707 and PO1 HD39942 project 2, and in the Moses and Powers labs by NIH R01 EY12537. D.R.M. is supported by an NIH fellowship: 1 F32 GM073608.

	Footnotes

 
^* Present address: Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Janelia Farm Research Campus, Ashburn, VA 20147, USA

	REFERENCES

TOP SUMMARY INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 

Baker, N. E. and Rubin, G. M. (1989). Effect on eye development of dominant mutations in Drosophila homologue of the EGF receptor. Nature 340,150 -153.[CrossRef][Medline]

Baker, N. E. and Rubin, G. M. (1992). Ellipse mutations in the Drosophila homologue of the EGF receptor affect pattern formation, cell division, and cell death in eye imaginal discs. Dev. Biol. 150,381 -396.[CrossRef][Medline]

Baker, N. E. and Yu, S. (1997). Proneural function of neurogenic genes in the developing Drosophila eye. Curr. Biol. 7,122 -132.[CrossRef][Medline]

Baker, N. E., Yu, S. and Han, D. (1996). Evolution of proneural atonal expression during distinct regulatory phases in the developing Drosophila eye. Curr. Biol. 6,1290 -1301.[CrossRef][Medline]

Baker, S. E., Lorenzen, J. A., Miller, S. W., Bunch, T. A., Jannuzi, A. L., Ginsberg, M. H., Perkins, L. A. and Brower, D. L. (2002). Genetic interaction between Integrins and moleskin, a gene encoding a Drosophila homolog of Importin-7. Genetics 162,285 -296.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Baonza, A. and Freeman, M. (2005). Control of cell proliferation in the Drosophila eye by Notch signaling. Dev. Cell 8,529 -539.[CrossRef][Medline]

Basler, K. and Hafen, E. (1989). Dynamics of Drosophila eye development and temporal requirements of sevenless expression. Development 107,723 -731.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Beall, E. L., Mahoney, M. B. and Rio, D. C. (2002). Identification and analysis of a hyperactive mutant form of Drosophila P-element transposase. Genetics 162,217 -227.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Bell, L. R., Horabin, J. I., Schedl, P. and Cline, T. W. (1991). Positive autoregulation of Sex-lethal by alternative splicing maintains the female determined state in Drosophila.Cell 65,229 -239.[CrossRef][Medline]

Blochinger, K., Bodmer, R., Jan, L. Y. and Jan, Y. N. (1990). Patterns of expression of Cut, a protein required for external sensory organ development in wild-type and cut mutant Drosophila embryos. Genes Dev. 4,1322 -1331.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Blochlinger, K., Jan, L. Y. and Jan, Y. N. (1993). Postembryonic patterns of expression of cut, a locus regulating sensory organ identity in Drosophila.Development 117,441 -450.[Abstract]

Brown, K. E. and Freeman, M. (2003). Egfr signalling defines a protective function for ommatidial orientation in the Drosophila eye. Development 130,5401 -5412.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Cagan, R. L. and Ready, D. F. (1989). The emergence of order in the Drosophila pupal retina. Dev. Biol. 136,346 -362.[CrossRef][Medline]

Campbell, G., Göring, H., Lin, T., Spana, E., Andersson, S., Doe, C. Q. and Tomlinson, A. (1994). RK2, a glial-specific homeodomain protein required for embryonic nerve cord condensation and viability in Drosophila. Development 120,2957 -2966.[Abstract]

Choi, K.-W. and Benzer, S. (1994). Rotation of photoreceptor clusters in the developing Drosophila eye requires the nemo gene. Cell 78,125 -136.[CrossRef][Medline]

Cobb, M. H. and Goldsmith, E. J. (2000). Dimerization in MAP-kinase signaling. Trends Biochem. Sci. 25,7 -9.[CrossRef][Medline]

Cooper, M. T. and Bray, S. J. (1999). Frizzled regulation of Notch signaling polarizes cell fate in the Drosophila eye. Nature 397,526 -530.[CrossRef][Medline]

Corson, L. B., Yamanaka, Y., Lai, K. M. and Rossant, J. (2003). Spatial and temporal patterns of ERK signaling during mouse embryogenesis. Development 130,4527 -4537.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Dokucu, M. E., Zipursky, L. S. and Cagan, R. L. (1996). Atonal, Rough and the resolution of proneural clusters in the developing Drosophila retina. Development 122,4139 -4147.[Abstract]

Dominguez, M. (1999). Dual role for Hedgehog in the regulation of the proneural gene atonal during ommatidia development. Development 126,2345 -2553.[Abstract]

Dominguez, M., Wasserman, J. D. and Freeman, M. (1998). Multiple functions for the EGF receptor in Drosophila eye development. Curr. Biol. 8,1039 -1048.[CrossRef][Medline]

Ebisuya, M., Kondoh, K. and Nishida, E. (2005). The duration, magnitude and compartmentalization of ERK MAP kinase activity: mechanisms for providing signaling specificity. J. Cell Sci. 118,2997 -3002.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Fanto, M., Mayes, C. A. and Mlodzik, M. (1998). Linking cell-fate specification to planar polarity: determination of the R3/R4 photoreceptors is a prerequisite for the interpretation of the Frizzled mediated polarity signal. Mech. Dev. 74, 51-58.[CrossRef][Medline]

Firth, L. C. and Baker, N. E. (2003). EGF receptor signaling: a prickly proposition. Curr. Biol. 13,R773 -R774.[CrossRef][Medline]

Firth, L. C. and Baker, N. E. (2005). Extracellular signals responsible for spatially regulated proliferation in the differentiating Drosophila eye. Dev. Cell 8, 541-551.[CrossRef][Medline]

Formstecher, E., Ramos, J. W., Fauquet, M., Calderwood, D. A., Hsieh, J. C., Canton, B., Nguyen, X. T., Barnier, J. V., Camonis, J., Ginsberg, M. H. et al. (2001). PEA-15 mediates cytoplasmic sequestration of ERK MAP kinase. Dev. Cell 1, 239-250.[CrossRef][Medline]

Frankfort, B. J. and Mardon, G. (2002). R8 development in the Drosophila eye: a paradigm for neural selection and differentiation. Development 129,1295 -1306.[Medline]

Frankfort, B. J., Nolo, R., Zhang, Z., Bellen, H. and Mardon, G. (2001). senseless Repression of rough Is Required for R8 Photoreceptor Differentiation in the Developing Drosophila Eye. Neuron 32,403 -414.[CrossRef][Medline]

Freeman, M. (1994). The spitz gene is required for photoreceptor determination in the Drosophila eye where it interacts with the EGF receptor. Mech. Dev. 48, 25-33.[CrossRef][Medline]

Freeman, M. (1996). Reiterative use of the EGF receptor triggers differentiation of all cell types in the Drosophila eye. Cell 87,651 -660.[CrossRef][Medline]

Freeman, M. (1997). Cell determination strategies in the Drosophila eye. Development 124,261 -270.[Abstract]

Freeman, M. (2002). A fly's eye view of EGF receptor signalling. EMBO J. 21,6635 -6642.[CrossRef][Medline]

Fu, W. and Baker, N. E. (2003). Deciphering synergistic and redundant roles of Hedgehog, Decapentaplegic and Delta that drive the wave of differentiation in Drosophila eye development. Development 130,5229 -5239.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Gabay, L., Seger, R. and Shilo, B.-Z. (1997). In situ activation pattern of Drosophila EGF receptor pathway during development. Science 277,1103 -1106.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Gaengel, K. and Mlodzik, M. (2003). Egfr signaling regulates ommatidial rotation and cell motility in the Drosophila eye via MAPK/Pnt signaling and the Ras effector Canoe/AF6. Development 130,5413 -5423.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Greenwood, S. and Struhl, G. (1999). Progression of the morphogenetic furrow in the Drosophila eye: the roles of Hedgehog, Decapentaplegic and the Raf pathway. Development 126,5795 -5808.[Abstract]

Gubb, D. (1993). Genes controlling cellular polarity in Drosophila. Dev. Suppl.269 -277.

Halfar, K., Rommel, C., Stocker, H. and Hafen, E. (2001). Ras controls growth, survival and differentiation in the Drosophila eye by different thresholds of MAP kinase activity. Development 128,1687 -1696.[Abstract]

Hay, B. A., Maile, R. and Rubin, G. M. (1997). P element insertion-dependent gene activation in the Drosophila eye. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94,5195 -5200.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Hayashi, T. and Saigo, K. (2001). Diversification of cell types in the Drosophila eye by differential expression of prepattern genes. Mech. Dev. 108, 13-27.[CrossRef][Medline]

Higashijima, S.-I., Kojima, T., Michiue, T., Ishimaru, S., Emori, Y. and Saigo, K. (1992). Dual Bar homeo box genes of Drosophila required in two photoreceptor cells, R1 and R6, and primary pigment cells for normal eye development. Genes Dev. 6,50 -60.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Jarman, A. P., Grau, Y., Jan, L. Y. and Jan, Y. N. (1993). atonal is a proneural gene that directs chordotonal organ formation in the Drosophila peripheral nervous system. Cell 73,1307 -1321.[CrossRef][Medline]

Jarman, A. P., Grell, E. H., Ackerman, L., Jan, L. Y. and Jan, Y. N. (1994). atonal is the proneural gene for Drosophila photoreceptors. Nature 369,398 -400.[CrossRef][Medline]

Kauffmann, R. C., Li, S., Gallagher, P. A., Zhang, J. and Carthew, R. W. (1996). Ras1 signaling and transcriptional competence in the R7 cell of Drosophila. Genes Dev. 10,2167 -2178.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Knoblich, J. A. and Lehner, C. F. (1993). Synergistic action of Drosophila cyclins A and B during the G2-M transition. EMBO J. 12,65 -74.[Medline]

Kramer, J. M. and Staveley, B. E. (2003). GAL4 causes developmental defects and apoptosis when expressed in the developing eye of Drosophila melanogaster. Genet. Mol. Res. 2, 43-47.[Medline]

Kuhnlein, R. P., Frommer, G., Friedrich, M., Gonzalez-Gaitan, M., Weber, A., Wagner-Bernholz, J. F., Gehring, W. J., Jackle, H. and Schuh, R. (1994). spalt encodes an evolutionarily conserved zinc finger protein of novel structure which provides homeotic gene function in the head and tail region of the Drosophila embryo. EMBO J. 13,168 -179.[Medline]

Kumar, J. P., Tio, M., Hsiung, F., Akopyan, S., Gabay, L., Seger, R., Shilo, B.-Z. and Moses, K. (1998). Dissecting the roles of the Drosophila EGF receptor in eye development and MAP kinase activation. Development 125,3875 -3885.[Abstract]

Kumar, J. P., Hsiung, F., Powers, M. and Moses, K. (2003). Nuclear Translocation of Activated MAP Kinase is Developmentally Regulated in the developing Drosophila Eye. Development 130,3703 -3714.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Lim, J. and Choi, K. W. (2004). Induction and autoregulation of the anti-proneural gene Bar during retinal neurogenesis in Drosophila. Development 131,5573 -5580.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Lorenzen, J. A., Baker, S. E., Denhez, F., Melnick, M. B., Brower, D. L. and Perkins, L. A. (2001). Nuclear import of activated D-ERK by DIM-7, an importin family member encoded by the gene moleskin. Development 128,1403 -1414.[Abstract]

Marenda, D. R., Vrailas, A. D., Rodrigues, A. B., Cook, S. E., Powers, M. A., Lorenzen, J. A., Perkins, L. A. and Moses, K. (2006). MAP kinase subcellular localization controls both pattern and proliferation in the developing Drosophila wing. Development 133,43 -51.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Mlodzik, M. (2002). Planar cell polarization: do the same mechanisms regulate Drosophila tissue polarity and vertebrate gastrulation? Trends Genet. 18,564 -571.[CrossRef][Medline]

Mollereau, B., Dominguez, M., Webel, R., Colley, N. J., Keung, B., de Celis, J. F. and Desplan, C. (2001). Two-step process for photoreceptor formation in Drosophila. Nature 412,911 -913.[CrossRef][Medline]

Moses, K. and Rubin, G. M. (1991). glass encodes a site-specific DNA-binding protein that is regulated in response to positional signals in the developing Drosophila eye. Genes Dev. 5,583 -593.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Nolo, R., Abbott, L. A. and Bellen, H. J. (2000). Senseless, a Zn finger transcription factor, is necessary and sufficient for sensory organ development in Drosophila.Cell 102,349 -362.[CrossRef][Medline]

O'Neill, E. M., Rebay, I., Tjian, R. and Rubin, G. M. (1994). The activities of two Ets-related transcription factors required for Drosophila eye development are modulated by the Ras/MAPK pathway. Cell 78,137 -147.[CrossRef][Medline]

Penton, A., Selleck, S. B. and Hoffmann, F. M. (1997). Regulation of cell cycle synchronization by decapentaplegic during Drosophila eye development. Science 275,203 -206.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Rawls, A. S., Guinto, J. B. and Wolff, T. (2002). The cadherins fat and dachsous regulate dorsal/ventral signaling in the Drosophila eye. Curr. Biol. 12,1021 -1026.[CrossRef][Medline]

Ready, D. F., Hanson, T. E. and Benzer, S. (1976). Development of the Drosophila retina, a neurocrystalline lattice. Dev. Biol. 53,217 -240.