Journ
alof
Cell
Scie
nce
A Serrate–Notch–Canoe complex mediates essentialinteractions between glia and neuroepithelial cellsduring Drosophila optic lobe development
Raquel Perez-Gomez1,*, Jana Slovakova1,`,§, Noemı Rives-Quinto1,`, Alena Krejci2 and Ana Carmena1,"
1Instituto de Neurociencias-CSIC/UMH, 03550-Sant Joan d’Alacant, Alicante, Spain2University of South Bohemia, Faculty of Science and Institute of Entomology, Biology Centre ASCR, Branisovska 31, Ceske Budejovice,Czech Republic
*Present address: University of South Bohemia, Branisovska 31, 370 05 Ceske Budejovice, Czech Republic`These authors contributed equally to this work§Present address: IST Austria, Am Campus 1, A-3400 Klosterneuburg, Austria"Author for correspondence ([email protected])
Accepted 12 August 2013Journal of Cell Science 126, 4873–4884� 2013. Published by The Company of Biologists Ltddoi: 10.1242/jcs.125617
SummaryIt is firmly established that interactions between neurons and glia are fundamental across species for the correct establishment of a functional
brain. Here, we found that the glia of the Drosophila larval brain display an essential non-autonomous role during the development of theoptic lobe. The optic lobe develops from neuroepithelial cells that proliferate by dividing symmetrically until they switch to asymmetric/differentiative divisions that generate neuroblasts. The proneural gene lethal of scute (l9sc) is transiently activated by the epidermal growth
factor receptor (EGFR)–Ras signal transduction pathway at the leading edge of a proneural wave that sweeps from medial to lateralneuroepithelium, promoting this switch. This process is tightly regulated by the tissue-autonomous function within the neuroepithelium ofmultiple signaling pathways, including EGFR–Ras and Notch. This study shows that the Notch ligand Serrate (Ser) is expressed in the glia
and it forms a complex in vivo with Notch and Canoe, which colocalize at the adherens junctions of neuroepithelial cells. This complex iscrucial for interactions between glia and neuroepithelial cells during optic lobe development. Ser is tissue-autonomously required in the gliawhere it activates Notch to regulate its proliferation, and non-autonomously in the neuroepithelium where Ser induces Notch signaling toavoid the premature activation of the EGFR–Ras pathway and hence of L9sc. Interestingly, different Notch activity reporters showed very
different expression patterns in the glia and in the neuroepithelium, suggesting the existence of tissue-specific factors that promote theexpression of particular Notch target genes or/and a reporter response dependent on different thresholds of Notch signaling.
Key words: Glia, Serrate-Notch signaling, Optic lobe, Canoe, Drosophila
IntroductionGlial cells are not a mere structural filler within the brain but they
perform multiple and vital tasks for the proper development and
functioning of the nervous system. The roles that glial cells display
during the development of the nervous system are as diverse as the
multiple glial types specified, including axon ensheathment, axon
guidance, phagocytosis and the establishment of the blood–brain
barrier (Banerjee and Bhat, 2007; Bundgaard and Abbott, 2008;
Edenfeld et al., 2005; Lemke, 2001; Nave and Trapp, 2008; Parker
and Auld, 2006). In Drosophila, three main different types of glial
cells have been very well characterized in the larval brain, namely
surface glia (subdivided into the outermost perineurial glia and the
underlying subperineurial glia), cortex glia and neuropile glia
(Hartenstein, 2011; Pereanu et al., 2005; Stork et al., 2012).
Embryonic neuroblasts (NBs), specifically neuro-glioblasts, give
rise to the precursors of the larval glia that will increase in number
throughout the larval life, mainly at late larval stages and
fundamentally from neuroglioblast division, although the mitosis
of differentiated glia also contributes (Pereanu et al., 2005). These
three types of glia perform crucial functions during the
development of the Drosophila brain. For example, surface glial
cells provide signals at early stages of the larval period to induce
embryonic quiescent NBs to resume proliferation (Ebens et al.,
1993). Cortex glial cells have important trophic functions for
neurons, and neuropile and surface glia act as key intermediate
targets during axon pathfinding in the brain (Hidalgo, 2003; Hoyle
et al., 1986; Pielage and Klambt, 2001; Poeck et al., 2001; Sepp
et al., 2001; Tayler and Garrity, 2003). Glial processes engulf NBs
and neurons in the Drosophila larval brain, which is formed by the
central brain and the optic lobes (Hartenstein et al., 2008).
The optic lobes, which are located at the lateral side of both
brain hemispheres, form part of the Drosophila visual system.
They derive from neuroectodermal placodes in the embryonic
head that invaginate, lose contact with the epidermis and attach to
the brain (Green et al., 1993). At the beginning of the larval life,
just after larval hatching, cells of the optic lobe start to proliferate
and they separate into an outer proliferation center (OPC), which
will give rise to the outer medulla and lamina neurons, and an
inner proliferation center (IPC), which generates the inner
medulla, the lobula and the lobula plate neurons (Hofbauer and
Campos-Ortega, 1990; Meinertzhagen and Hanson, 1993). The
OPC anlage is formed by neuroepithelial (NE) cells, which
Research Article 4873
Journ
alof
Cell
Scie
nce
proliferate by symmetric cell division until the OPC reaches aproper size, at third larval instar. At this point, NE cells switch to
asymmetric differentiative divisions generating medulla NBs atthe medial edge of the OPC anlage (Egger et al., 2007).Differentiation of NE cells to medulla NBs progresses from themedial to the lateral edge of the OPC in a ‘proneural wave’,
which was recently identified by the transient and localexpression at the wave front of the proneural gene lethal of
scute (l9sc) (Yasugi et al., 2008). Over the past few years multiple
signaling pathways have proved to be essential for regulating theproneural wave progression within the neuroepithelium in atissue-autonomous way, including Notch, JAK–STAT, EGFR–
Ras–PointedP1 (PntP1) and Fat–Hippo signaling pathways(Egger et al., 2010; Ngo et al., 2010; Reddy et al., 2010;Yasugi et al., 2010; Yasugi et al., 2008). However, not much isknown about non-autonomous regulatory mechanisms. Given
that glial cells proliferate and differentiate in close contact withthe OPC and IPC neuroepithelia, the glia might influence thedevelopment of the optic lobe, including the progression of the
proneural wave.
In this work, we have analyzed the relationships between NEcells of the optic lobe and the surrounding glia. We found that the
PDZ (PSD-95, Discs Large, ZO-1)-domain-containing proteinCanoe (Cno) (Miyamoto et al., 1995) is expressed in the NE cellsof the OPC and IPC. Cno and its vertebrate homologues AF-6/
Afadin are scaffolding proteins that are predominant at adherensjunctions (AJs) where they regulate the linkage of AJs to the actincytoskeleton (Lorger and Moelling, 2006; Mandai et al., 1997;Matsuo et al., 1999; Miyamoto et al., 1995; Sawyer et al., 2009).
Cno also performs AJ-independent functions regulating neuron–glia interactions and asymmetric cell division (Slovakova andCarmena, 2011; Speicher et al., 2008). In addition, Cno acts as an
integration hub of different signaling pathways, including Rasand Notch during muscle and heart progenitor specification(Carmena et al., 2006).
The Ras pathway triggered by the EGFR ultimately activatesthe ETS transcription factor Pnt that exists in two isoforms, PntP1and PntP2, the former acting in the optic lobe (Klambt, 1993;Yasugi et al., 2010). PntP1 is very locally activated at the
transition zone, where, in turn, it induces the local expression ofL9sc (Yasugi et al., 2010). The Notch receptor is activated by twodifferent ligands, Delta (Dl) and Serrate (Ser), which trigger the
proteolytic cleavage of the intracellular domain of Notch. Thisdomain translocates into the nucleus where it associates withSuppressor of Hairless [Su(H)] and activates target genes. The
best characterized Notch targets are the genes of the Enhancer ofSplit-Complex [E(spl)-C], which comprises seven genes thatencode basic-helix-loop-helix (b-HLH) transcription factors,
namely md, mc, mb, m3, m5, m7 and m8 (Bailey andPosakony, 1995; Delidakis and Artavanis-Tsakonas, 1992;Jennings et al., 1994; Knust et al., 1992; Lecourtois andSchweisguth, 1995; Rebay et al., 1991).
The data presented in this work strongly suggest that acomplex between Cno, Notch (present in NE cells) and Ser(present in the glia) is key for interactions of NE cells and glia
during the development of the optic lobe. We show that theNotch ligand Ser displays tissue-autonomous and non-autonomous effects in the glia and in the neuroepithelium,
activating different Notch E(spl) target genes in each tissue. Byactivating Notch in the glia, Ser regulates its proliferation and, bytriggering Notch signaling in NE cells, Ser restricts the activation
of Ras–PntP1 signaling, and hence the activation of L9sc, to the
transition zone.
ResultsCno localizes at the AJs of NE cells in the optic lobeproliferation centersCno is expressed in Drosophila embryonic neuroectoderm and inthe delaminated NBs where Cno displays an essential role inasymmetric NB division (Speicher et al., 2008). In an attempt to
characterize a potential function of Cno in the differentiation of NEcells to medulla NBs during the development of the larval opticlobe, we first analyzed Cno expression in this tissue. Cno was highlyenriched at the apical most region of NE cells in the OPC and IPC
(Fig. 1B–E9). Cno and its vertebrate orthologs are present at the AJsof different epithelial tissues (Mandai et al., 1997; Matsuo et al.,1999; Sawyer et al., 2009). Indeed, Cno colocalized at the apical
region of NE cells with Bazooka (Baz), another well-knowncomponent of the zonula adherens, where Baz colocalizes with theDE-cadherin Shotgun (Shg) (Krahn et al., 2010) (Fig. 1F–G0).
Cno is required for a correct progression of theproneural waveNext, we wanted to analyze the effect in the optic lobe of knockingdown cno. With that purpose, we overexpressed a cnoRNAi plus the
gene encoding the Dicer2 enzyme under the neuroepithelia-specificGal4 driver c855a (Manseau et al., 1997). The loss of Cno, as testedby immunofluorescence, was complete and specific (Fig. 2E–F0).
We analyzed anterior views (see Fig. 1A), in which changes in theproneural wave progression respect to well-defined landmarks, suchas the lamina furrow, are easily detected (Fig. 2A–A0). In UAS-
cnoRNAi optic lobes, the proneural wave was advanced comparedwith control optic lobes (68%; n541 brain hemispheres), evenreaching the lamina region at some points (Fig. 2A–C0). The
overexpression of cno caused the opposite phenotype (100%;n517), with a marked delay in the progression of the proneuralwave (Fig. 2D–D0) and the concomitant decrease in thedifferentiation of medulla NBs (compare Fig. 2A and D). To
further prove a specific role of cno in this process, we carried outmosaic analysis with repressible cell marker (MARCM) clones inthe neuroepithelium using armadillo (arm)-Gal4 as a driver. Clones
for the null allele cnoR2, labeled with CD8-GFP, revealed L9sc-expressing cells within the clone in an advanced position relative tothe cno+ cells outside the clone (40%; n520) (Fig. 2G,G9).
Cno colocalizes with Notch at the AJs of NE cellsNotch signaling is required to regulate the progression of theproneural wave (Egger et al., 2010; Ngo et al., 2010; Reddy et al.,2010; Wang et al., 2011; Weng et al., 2012; Yasugi et al., 2010).
Given that Cno and Notch functionally interact in other systems(Carmena et al., 2006; Miyamoto et al., 1995) and that cno
mutant phenotypes were very reminiscent of those previously
described for Notch mutants in the neuroepithelium (Yasugi et al.,2010), we decided to analyze the relative localization of Cno andNotch in the optic lobe. Confocal analysis of double
immunofluorescence for Cno and Notch showed colocalizationof these proteins at the AJs of NE cells (Fig. 3A–B0).
E(spl) Notch target genes are differentially expressed inthe optic lobe and in the surrounding gliaNext, we wondered whether Cno had some effect on the Notchactivity, which is required in NE cells to maintain their fate
Journal of Cell Science 126 (21)4874
Journ
alof
Cell
Scie
nce
(Egger et al., 2010; Wang et al., 2011; Weng et al., 2012). First,
we wanted to analyze the Notch activity in wild-type brains. For
this analysis we used different Notch activity reporters, because it
has been previously shown that different E(spl) Notch target
genes display distinct expression patterns in other tissues (Cooper
et al., 2000; de Celis et al., 1996; Wech et al., 1999). Specifically,
we looked at Gbe+Su(H)lacZ (see the Materials and Methods)
(Furriols and Bray, 2001), E(spl)mb-CD2 (mb-CD2 hereafter) (de
Celis et al., 1998), E(spl)md-lacZ (md-lacZ) (Cooper et al., 2000)
and E(spl)m7-nuclacZ (m7-nuclacZ) (Pines et al., 2010). At third
larval instar, Gbe+Su(H)lacZ was barely detected in NE cells
(Fig. 3C–F9); it started to be highly expressed at the transition
zone where the Notch ligand Dl is enriched in a characteristic
punctuated pattern (Fig. 3C–D0) (Weng et al., 2012; Yasugi et al.,
2010). L9sc is also very locally activated at the transition zone, in
progenitor I (PI) and progenitor II (PII) cells; the latter
juxtaposed to the emerging medulla NBs (Yasugi et al., 2010)
(Fig. 3F,K). Gbe+Su(H)lacZ was highly detected in PI but its
expression dropped markedly in PII (Fig. 3F,F9,K), and it was
again highly activated in NBs along with the Notch-responding
gene deadpan (dpn) (Krejcı et al., 2009) (Fig. 3E,E9,K). A
similar expression pattern was shown for the Notch activity
reporter mc–GFP (Weng et al., 2012) (Fig. 3K). A weak
expression of Gbe+Su(H)lacZ was detected in the surface glia
in close contact with NE cells (Fig. 3D,D0,K). Interestingly, the
mb-CD2 reporter was highly expressed in these surface glia, the
same location in which the md-lacZ reporter was detected,
although at much lower levels (Fig. 3G,G9,I,I9,K); none of them
was clearly present in NE cells (Fig. 3G,G9,I,I9,K), but the mb-
CD2 reporter was also detected in medulla NBs (Fig. 3H,H9,K).
The only reporter that was expressed in the neuroepithelium was
m7-nuclacZ, which also showed a uniform expression in the
transition zone and in the emerging NBs (Fig. 3J–K). Specific
effects of Notch loss and gain of function on the expression of
these reporters were observed in the optic lobe and in the
surrounding glia, confirming them as bona fide Notch target
genes in the brain (supplementary material Fig. S1).
The Notch ligand Ser is expressed in the glia
Given this pattern of Notch activity and the fact that Dl is
enriched at the transition zone with almost undetectable levels in
NE cells or in the surrounding glia (Fig. 3C,C9,D,D9) (Weng
et al., 2012; Yasugi et al., 2010), we wondered whether Ser,
another ligand of Notch that activates it in different tissues and
cell contexts (Fleming et al., 1990; Rebay et al., 1991; Thomas
et al., 1991), would be expressed in the optic lobe. A UAS-
CD8::GFP construct under a Ser-Gal4 driver revealed that,
whereas Dl was highly restricted to the transition zone, Ser was
active in what seemed to be the brain glia, with no detectable
expression in NE cells (Fig. 4A–B9). Double labeling with the
glial marker Nervana (Nrv) confirmed the expression of Ser
(Ser-Gal4..UAS-CD8::GFP) in the glia (Fig. 4C–C0). Given
that CD8-GFP is a membrane protein that reflects where Ser-
Gal4 is expressed but not the real localization of the Ser protein
within the glia, we used a specific Ser antibody to analyze Ser
distribution. Unlike CD8-GFP, Ser was not uniformly present
around all glial cell membranes but it was particularly
concentrated at the glial membranes in contact with the apical
side of NE cells, where Ser colocalized with Notch (Fig. 4D–
E0).
Fig. 1. Cno localizes at the AJs of NE cells in the optic lobe.
(A) Schematic of a larval CNS that includes two brain hemispheres
and the ventral ganglia. The optic lobe is shown in color in one hemisphere.
Medulla NBs are represented in red, NE cells in green and the lamina (L)
in blue. Two frontal views are shown, one more anterior (a; highlighted in
orange) and another one more posterior (p; highlighted in purple). At this
posterior view, medulla NBs are detected both at medial (mNBs) and
lateral position (lNBs); OPC, outer proliferation center; IPC, inner
proliferation center; D, Dorsal; V, ventral; m, medial; l, lateral; LF, lamina
furrow. (B–E9) Brain hemisphere showing the optic lobe in green (c855a-
Gal4..UAS-CD8::GFP) and Cno in red in an anterior (B–C9) and a
posterior view (D–E9). The higher magnifications (C,C9,E,E9) show in
detail the location of Cno at the apical most part of NE cells. (F–F0) Baz
(red) colocalizes with Shg (green) at the AJs of NE cells. (G–G0) Cno (red)
colocalizes with Baz (blue) at the AJs of NE cells (arrows).
Glia function in the optic lobe 4875
Journ
alof
Cell
Scie
nce
Cno forms a complex with Notch and Ser in vivo
Cno and Notch, as well as Notch and glial Ser, stronglycolocalized at the most apical side of NE cells, at the interface
with the surrounding glia. Hence, we speculated that these
proteins might be in a complex. To test this hypothesis, we
performed co-immunoprecipitations (co-IPs) from larval head
extracts and found that Cno co-immunoprecipitated with both
Notch and Ser (Fig. 4F). Hence, Ser, Notch and Cno exist in a
complex in vivo.
Knockdown of cno in NE cells affects Notch and Serlocation and Notch activity
Colocalization and co-IP experiments suggested that Cno could
contribute to stabilize Notch at the AJs of NE cells to facilitate
Notch binding to its ligand Ser in the adjacent glia. Indeed, we
observed that not only Notch but also Ser were highly reduced
after knockdown of cno (UAS-cnoRNAi) in NE cells (63%;n519), compared with controls (Fig. 5A–B0). Then, we reasoned
that the Notch activity should be also affected in this cno mutant
condition. In fact, the analysis of the Notch reporter m7-nuclacZ
showed a slight but consistent reduction of its expression in the
neuroepithelium (67%; n59) (Fig. 5C–D9).
Ser loss of function in the glia non-autonomously affectsthe proneural wave progression
To analyze in more detail the effect of glial Ser in the
development of the neuroepithelium, we expressed in the glia a
dominant-negative form of Ser (DNSer) called Bd E24 (recently
renamed Sersec), which is a strong dominant-negative form
(Fleming et al., 2013). The expression of DNSer in the glia
caused a marked advance of the proneural wave (100%; n515)
(Fig. 5E,E9,H,H9), a phenotype reminiscent of that displayed
when cno is knocked down in the neuroepithelium. The
expression of DNSer in the glia also caused ectopic expression
of L9sc within the neuroepithelium (100%; n521)
(Fig. 5F,F9,I,I9). Moreover, PntP1 was also ectopically activated
in DNSer (100%; n511), colocalizing with L9sc in several cells,
indicating that the Ras pathway was misregulated
(Fig. 5G,G9,J,J9). Hence, Ser in the glia is crucial for
determining the correct spatial activation of the Ras–PntP1
pathway in the neuroepithelium. The expression of DNSer in the
glia caused a significant depletion in the glial levels of the Notch
reporter mb–CD2 (100%; n512) (Fig. 5K,L), expression that
was rescued after the simultaneous expression of DNSer and an
activated form of Notch, Nintra (Ni), in the glia (Fig. 5M,M9).
Fig. 2. Cno is required for the normal proneural wave
progression. (A–D9) Brain hemispheres in an anterior view
stained for L9sc (red) and Dpn (green); GFP is in blue. c855a-
Gal4 drives the expression of UAS-CD8::GFP in A–C9 and of
UAS-cno::GFP in D,D9. Higher magnifications of A–D (average
projections of several confocal planes of Z-stacks) are shown in
A9–D9 (single confocal projections from Z-stacks). The
knockdown of cno (UAS-cnoRNAi) causes an advance in the
proneural wave compared with control optic lobes (A–C9); two
examples are shown, one more extreme (C) than the other (B).
Arrows indicate the lamina furrow (LF, dotted line); arrowheads
point to NBs that are reaching the lamina (L). The overexpression
of cno (UAS-cno::GFP) causes a delay in the proneural wave
progression (D,D9); compare the width of the bands
corresponding to NBs and NE cells (arrow with double
arrowheads) with the control (A,A9, D,D9). (A0–D0) Schematics
representing the progression of the proneural wave (black arrow)
in the different genetic backgrounds specified. L9sc (red) appears
at the leading edge of the proneural wave. (E–F0) In control optic
lobes, Cno is detected at the AJs of NE cells (E,E9) along with
Baz (E,E0). GFP, in green, reveals the expression of UAS-CD8
under the c855a-Gal4 driver. In UAS-cnoRNAi optic lobes, Cno
completely disappears from NE cells (F,F9), whereas Baz is still
detected (F,F0). (G–G9) cnoR2 clone is labeled with CD8-GFP.
L9sc+ (red) cells normally at the proneural wave front (labeled
with a red dotted line) appear in advanced positions (arrowheads)
within the clone (LF, lamina furrow, white dotted line); Dlg labels
NE cells (blue).
Journal of Cell Science 126 (21)4876
Journ
alof
Cell
Scie
nce
However, the expression of DNSer plus Ni in the glia did not
rescue the phenotype of ectopic L9sc+ and PntP1+ cells in the
neuroepithelium (Fig. 5N,N9). Intriguingly, the overexpression of
DNSer in the glia led to a striking reduction in the expression of the
Notch activity reporter m7-nuclacZ in NE cells (100%; n57)
(Fig. 5O-P9). To further support the role of glial Ser in the
underlying neuroepithelium, we performed mosaic analysis with
MARCM clones in the glia using the nrv2-Gal4 driver. Clear
ectopic L9sc was observed underlying glial SerRX82 mutant clones
in 69% of the brain hemispheres analyzed (n526) (Fig. 5Q). Thus,
altogether, these results strongly suggest that, in normal
conditions, Ser non-autonomously triggers Notch signaling in the
neuroepithelium and this activity avoids the premature activation
of Ras–PntP1 signaling in NE cells.
Ser–Notch signaling in the glia regulates glia proliferation
By using Repo, as a specific glial marker, and phospho-histone3
(PH3), as an indicator of mitotic cells, we found that the
expression of DNSer in the glia led to a statistically significant
decrease in the number of Repo+ and PH3+ cells, compared with
control optic lobes (Fig. 6D–D0,G,H). This phenotype was
opposite to the overexpression of the constitutive active form
Ni in the glia (Fig. 6E–E0,G,H). Interestingly, the expression of
UAS-cnoRNAi in NE cells showed a similar phenotype to the
expression of DNSer in the glia (Fig. 6B–B0,H): a significant
decrease in the number of glial PH3+ cells. In addition, the
overexpression of cno in NE cells showed, similar to the
overexpression of Ni in the glia, a significant increase in Repo+ and
PH3+ cells, compared with control optic lobes (Fig. 6C–C0,G,H).
Fig. 3. Cno colocalizes with Notch, which is
active in NE cells and in the surrounding
glia. (A–B0) Cno (in red) and Notch (in green)
colocalize at the apical AJs of NE cells in the
optic lobe. An anterior view (A–A0) and a
posterior view (B–B0) are shown. NE,
neuroepithelium; LF, lamina furrow; L,
lamina. (C–F9) The Notch activity reporter
Gbe+Su(H)lacZ (in green) is shown along with
Dl (red) in an anterior view (C–C0) or a
posterior view (D–D0), along with Dpn (red;
E,E9) or L9sc (red; F,F9). NE (Shg or
CD8::GFP expression under the control of the
c855a-Gal4 driver) is in blue; TZ, transition
zone. Green arrows indicate Gbe+Su(H)lacZ
expression in NE cells at the TZ and green
arrowheads show its expression in medulla
NBs (mNBs and lNBs in the posterior view
shown in D,D0). Red arrows indicate the
enrichment of Dl at the TZ (C,C9,D,D9), Dpn
expression in the TZ and in NBs (E) or L9sc at
the TZ (F). Asterisks (D,D0,E–F9) indicate the
PII cell at the TZ that does not express
Gbe+Su(H)lacZ and expresses L9sc (red
arrowhead in F). No expression of
Gbe+Su(H)lacZ is detected in NE cells outside
the TZ (D,D0,E–F9). (G-H9) The Notch activity
reporter mb-CD2 (in red) is expressed in the
glia along with the glial marker Nrv (in green),
but is not detected in NE cells (in blue)
(G,G9). mb-CD2 is also present in the NBs
along with Dpn (in green; H,H9). (I,I9) The
Notch activity reporter md-lacZ (in red)
localizes at low levels in the glia labeled with
Nrv (in green). (J,J9) The Notch activity
reporter m7-nuclacZ (in green) is expressed
throughout the neuroepithelium (NE, in blue),
including the TZ labeled by L9sc (in red) and
in the emerging medulla NBs, adjacent to
L9sc-expressing cells. (K) Schematic
summarizing the expression of the different
Notch activity reporters analyzed.
Glia function in the optic lobe 4877
Journ
alof
Cell
Scie
nce
Indeed, in UAS-cnoRNAi, the Notch reporter mb-CD2 was
downregulated in the surface glia, specifically in the subperineurial
glia, in close contact with the neuroepithelium (53%; n519)
(Fig. 6K–L9) and the overexpression of cno in the neuroepithelium
led to an upregulation of the Notch activity reporter Gbe+
Su(H)lacZ in the glia (100%; n512), whereas, in normal
conditions, it is barely detected (Fig. 6I–J9; see also Discussion).
The simultaneous expression of DNSer and Ni in the glia rescued the
DNSer phenotype in the glia, but not in the neuroepithelium
(Fig. 6F–H). Indeed, the expression of mb-CD2, which was
downregulated in the glia after expressing DNSer in this tissue, was
also rescued when DNSer and Ni were simultaneously expressed in
the glia (Fig. 5M,M9). Hence, Ser is required autonomously in the
glia to regulate their proliferation.
Working model
Taking all our data together, we propose a working model in
which the brain glia would display an important role during the
progression of the proneural wave in the optic lobe (Fig. 7H).
Ser, present in the glia in close contact with the neuroepithelium,
can activate Notch in the glia, as detected by the Notch
activity reporters mb-CD2, md-lacZ and, to a lesser degree,
Gbe+Su(H)lacZ contributing to regulate glia proliferation. Ser
can also activate Notch in the neuroepithelium, as revealed by the
Fig. 4. Ser is expressed in the glia and forms a complex
with Notch and Cno in vivo. (A–B9) In Ser-
Gal4..UAS-CD8::GFP optic lobes, CD8::GFP is
detected in glial membranes (green) with no presence in
NE cells (labeled with Shg, in blue), whereas Dl (in red) is
highly restricted to the transition zone (red arrows) in the
neuroepithelium (NE). An anterior view (A,A9) and a
posterior view (B,B9) are shown. White arrows indicate
the lamina furrow (LF, dotted line in A9). (C–C0) Detail of
a Ser-Gal4..UAS-CD8::GFP optic lobe, in a posterior
view. CD8::GFP colocalizes with the glial marker Nrv (in
red); Shg, labeling the NE, is in blue. (D–E0) The Ser
protein (in red) accumulates strongly in the glia at the
interface between glial membranes and NE cells (arrows)
(D–D0), where it colocalizes with Notch (green in E–E0).
(F) c855a-Gal4..UAS-Notch::GFP larval lysates were
subject to immunoprecipitation (IP) with an anti-GFP
antibody and probed on immunoblots (IB) with anti-Cno,
with anti-GFP (as an IP control) and with anti-Ser (as a
positive control). c855a-Gal4..UAS-Cno::GFP larval
lysates were subject to IP with anti-GFP and probed on IB
with anti-Ser and with anti-GFP (as an IP control). c855a-
Gal4..UAS-GFP larval lysates were used as a negative
control in all cases.
Journal of Cell Science 126 (21)4878
Journ
alof
Cell
Scie
nce
Fig. 5. Ser loss of function in the glia non-autonomously affects the proneural wave progression. (A–D9) cno loss of function in NE cells affects Notch and Ser
location and Notch activity. A detail of an optic lobe neuroepithelium in a posterior view is shown in all panels. In control optic lobes, Ser (in red) and Notch (in green)
highly colocalize at the interface between glia and NE cells (in blue) (A–A0). In UAS-cnoRNAi optic lobes, the amount of Ser and Notch drops significantly at the
glia–NE cell interface (arrows in B–B0; compare with A–A0). Compared with control optic lobes, in UAS-cnoRNAi optic lobes the Notch activity decreases in NE
cells, as revealed with the reporter m7-nuclacZ (C–D9; L9sc is in red). (E–J9) Brain hemispheres in an anterior view (E,E9,H,H9) and a posterior view
(F–G9, I–J9) where E9,H9,F9 and I9 are details at higher magnification of the images shown in E,H,F and I, respectively; NE cells (c855a-Gal4..UAS-CD8::GFP or
Dlg) and the glia (repo-Gal4..UAS-CD8::GFP) appear in blue in E–G9 and H–J9. With Ser loss of function in the glia (repo-Gal4..UAS-DNSer), there is a
strong advance of the proneural wave (arrowheads in H,H9; compare with control E,E9). In a posterior view, ectopic L9sc-expressing cells are detected in the middle of
the neuroepithelium (NE; arrowhead in I,I9; compare with F,F9). The white arrows indicate the normal position of L9sc at the medial (m) and lateral (l) position (note
that in I the proneural wave is so advanced in the most ventral part that no NE cells are detected). Most of these L9sc+ cells also ectopically express PntP1
(J,J9; compare with G;G9). (K,L) With Ser loss of function in the glia, the Notch reporter mb-CD2 significantly drops in the glia compared with the control (arrows).
The expression of mb-CD2 in the NBs is less affected because the expression of nrv2-Gal4 is weaker in NBs (arrowheads; see blue channel). (M,N9) The simultaneous
expression of DNSer and Ni in the glia (repo-Gal4..UAS-SerDN+UAS-Ni) rescues the expression of mb-CD2 in the glia (M,M9) but does not rescue the
ectopic L9sc+/PntP1+ cells present in the neuroepithelium (N,N9). (O–P9) With Ser loss of function in the glia (repo-Gal4..UAS-DNSer) there is, along with the
ectopic expression of L9sc (P), a high decrease in the expression of the Notch activity reporter m7-nuclacZ in NE cells (P,P9; compare with control O,O9). (Q) In
SerRX82 glial mutant clones, labeled with GFP, ectopic L9sc is detected in the underlying NE cells.
Glia function in the optic lobe 4879
Journ
alof
Cell
Scie
nce
Notch activity reporter m7-nuclacZ, activity that restricts the
EGFR–Ras–PntP1 signaling and hence L9sc expression to the
transition zone. Cno in a complex with Notch at the AJs of NE cells
somehow stabilizes Notch at the membrane, favoring the binding of
its ligand Ser present in the adjacent glia. Dl, which is enriched at
the NE cells of the transition zone (Fig. 7A,A9), could preferentially
activate the Notch target gene Gbe+Su(H)lacZ at this location (and
in the emerging NBs). Indeed, the ectopic activation of Dl in all NE
cells (Fig. 7B,B9) led to a concomitant ectopic activation of the
Gbe+Su(H)lacZ reporter along with Dpn (100%; n512)
(Fig. 7D,E), as well as to a repression of the m7-nuclaz reporter
in NE cells (100%; n57) (Fig. 7F,G). Intriguingly, when Dl was
ectopically activated in the whole surface glia, it was exclusively
detected in the perineurial glia (Fig. 7C–C90), being completely
absent in the subperineurial glia where Ser accumulates strongly in
contact with neuroepithelial Notch (Fig. 7A; see the Discussion).
DiscussionGlial cells are key players during the development of the nervous
system, and their number is indicative of nervous system
complexity (Nave and Trapp, 2008). In Drosophila, larval glia
are essential during the development of the brain, where they
display multiple functions (Hartenstein, 2011). In this work, we
provide evidence that glia play a key role during optic lobe
development and proneural wave progression.
A Ser–Notch–Cno complex at the interface between theglia and NE cells
Cno and its vertebrate homologues AF-6/Afadin localize at
epithelial AJs where they regulate the linkage of AJs to the actin
cytoskeleton by binding both actin and nectin family proteins
(Lorger and Moelling, 2006; Mandai et al., 1997; Matsuo et al.,
1999; Sawyer et al., 2009; Takahashi et al., 1998). Here, we have
Fig. 6. Notch activity in the glia promoted by Ser
regulates glia proliferation. (A–F0) Detail of an optic
lobe and the surrounding glia with Repo in red and
PH3 in green. Ser loss of function in the glia (repo-
Gal4 . .UAS-DNSer) causes a statistically
significant decrease of Repo and PH3-positive cells in
the glia (D–D0,G,H). The overexpression of Ni in the
glia (repo-Gal4..UAS-Ni) causes the opposite
phenotype: a significant increase in the number of
Repo+ cells, as well as in the number of PH3+ cells in
the glia compared with the control
(A–A0,E–E0,G,H). The simultaneous overexpression in
the glia of SerDN and Ni rescues the phenotype of
SerDN in the glia (F–H). cno knockdown (c855a-
Gal4..UAS-cnoRNAi) and overexpression (c855a-
Gal4..UAS-cno::GFP) in NE cells display similar
phenotypes to those seen with the loss and gain of
Notch signaling (B–C0,G,H). (G,H) Quantification of
the phenotypes analyzed; average Repo+ cell number
(G) and percentage (mean 6 s.e.m.) of glial PH3+ cells
(H) per optical section analyzed in the genotypes
specified. n5number of total optical sections analyzed
from different optic lobes. *P,0.05; **P,0.01;
***P,0.001. Repo+ cells with knockdown of cno
(UAS-cnoRNAi) were not analyzed because of the
disorganization of glial cells intermingled with the
neuroepithelium. (I–J9) Overexpression of cno in the
neuroepithelium leads to an increase of Notch activity
in the glia, as revealed with the Notch reporter
Gbe+Su(H)lacZ (arrows in J,J9), which is barely
detected in the glia in control embryos (arrows in I,I9).
There is also an expansion of the Gbe+Su(H)lacZ
expression domain in the transition zone (TZ) where
more Dpn-positive cells (‘PI cells’) are detected.
(K–L9) The knockdown of cno in NE cells (c855a-
Gal4..UAS-cnoRNAi) leads to a decrease in the
levels of the Notch activity reporter mb–CD2 in the
subperineurial glia, in contact with the
neuroepithelium (arrows in L9, compare with K9).
Journal of Cell Science 126 (21)4880
Journ
alof
Cell
Scie
nce
found that Cno colocalizes with Notch at the AJs of NE cells in
the optic lobe proliferation centers. Notch also colocalized with
its ligand Ser; they accumulated strongly at the interface between
NE cells and the surrounding glia. Our co-immunoprecipitation
experiments indicate the formation of a Ser–Notch–Cno complex
in vivo, and the mutant analysis shows the functional relevance of
such a complex at the glia–neuroepithelium interface. The data
presented in this study support the hypothesis that Cno stabilizes
Notch at the AJs of NE cells, favoring the binding of Ser present
in the adjacent glial cells. Indeed, in cno loss-of-function
mutants, both Notch and Ser distribution is affected; this
alteration is accompanied by an abnormally advanced proneural
wave, a phenotype reminiscent of that shown by optic lobes with
Notch loss of function (Yasugi et al., 2010), and also with Ser
loss of function, as we show here. Activation of the Notch
pathway is essential to maintain the integrity of the
neuroepithelium and to allow the correct progression of the
proneural wave (Egger et al., 2010; Wang et al., 2011; Weng
et al., 2012). Our results show that glial Ser is responsible for
such activation, promoting the expression of the m7-nuclacZ
reporter in NE cells. In fact, the reduction of glial Ser either by
knocking down epithelial cno or by expressing DNSer in the glia
led to a decrease in the expression of the m7-nuclacZ reporter in
NE cells and to an ectopic activation of the Ras–PntP1 pathway
and of L9sc. We propose that this is ultimately the cause of the
proneural wave advance observed in those genotypes. Thus, the
activation of Notch in the neuroepithelium by glial Ser, in normal
conditions, would be essential to avoid a premature activation of
the EGFR–Ras–PntP1 pathway and hence of L9sc. Indeed, Notch
has been shown to downregulate different EGFR–Ras signaling
pathway components such as Rhomboid (Rho), required for the
processing of the EGFR ligand Spitz, in other developmental
contexts where both pathways are actively cross-talking (Carmena
et al., 2002). Therefore, Notch activity in NE cells could be
contributing to inhibit Rho, restricting its presence to the transition
zone where Rho is very locally expressed (Yasugi et al., 2010).
We observed that, in wild-type conditions, Ser is present in all
surface glia (perineurial and subperineurial), as shown by the
expression of CD8::GFP (SerGal4..UAS-CD8::GFP). Notch,
as tested by different reporters, is active in this tissue and highly
reduced with Ser loss of function in the glia. This suggests the
existence of Ser–Notch-mediated intercellular communication
between the glial cells that comprise both the perineurial
and subperineurial glia. Intriguingly, the knockdown and
overexpression of cno in NE cells also had a clear effect on
Notch activity in the glia: a reduction and an increase, respectively.
This is more challenging to explain. Because the cno loss of
function in the NE led to a high reduction of both neuroepithelial
Fig. 7. Dl and Ser locate at different domains and
activate different Notch target genes during optic lobe
development. (A–B9, D–G) The overexpression of Dl
within the neuroepithelium extends the Dl domain
(B,B9), normally restricted to the transition zone
(A,A9), causing ectopic activation of the Notch activity
reporter Gbe+Su(H)lacZ along with Dpn (E, compare with
the control D) and a repression of the reporter m7-nuclacZ
(G, compare with the control F). (C–C90) Overexpression of
Dl in the glia leads to an accumulation of Dl in the
perineurial glia but it is not detected in the subperineurial
glia in tight contact with the neuroepithelium (arrowheads),
where Ser is normally accumulated (A). (H) Working
model. Glial Ser autonomously triggers Notch activity in the
glia, as detected with the Notch reporters mb-CD2, md-lacZ
(both in red) and Gbe+Su(H)lacZ (in green), and non-
autonomously in the neuroepithelium, as visualized with the
Notch reporter m7-nuclacZ (purple). Cno binds Notch at the
AJs of NE cells and Notch binds glial Ser. This complex is
essential for the activation of m7-nuclacZ in the
neuroepithelium by Ser. This allows the local activation of
the Ras–PntP1 pathway only at the TZ where Ras–PntP1
signaling, in turn, locally activates L9sc. Dl activates the
Notch activity reporter Gbe+Su(H)lacZ at the TZ. The
emerging medulla NBs express three of the four Notch
activity reporters analyzed: Gbe+Su(H)lacZ, mb-CD2
and m7-nuclacZ.
Glia function in the optic lobe 4881
Journ
alof
Cell
Scie
nce
Notch and glial Ser, the easiest explanation is that an ‘excess’ of
unbound glial Ser is degraded and this impinges on the generalthresholds of glial Ser, therefore causing a general reduction in theNotch activity in this tissue. This will be an interesting area to
explore in detail and we leave the question open for futureinvestigation.
Notch target genes are differentially expressed throughoutoptic lobe and glia development
The activity of Notch in the neuroepithelium and in medulla NBsseems controversial. For example, Notch has been shown to beactive in the neuroepithelium at low or null levels (Wang et al.,
2011; Weng et al., 2012; Yasugi et al., 2010) or in a ‘salt andpepper’ pattern (Egger et al., 2011). Weak or no activity of Notchin NBs has also been reported (Egger et al., 2010; Yasugi et al.,
2010), as well as a high activation (Ngo et al., 2010; Weng et al.,2012). One possibility to conciliate all these results and apparentlycontradictory data is that different Notch target genes used as
Notch activity reporters are, in fact, differentially activated inparticular regions or tissues. Our results support this proposal.Here, we have used four different Notch reporters,Gbe+Su(H)lacZ, E(spl)mb-CD2, E(spl)md-lacZ and E(spl)m7-
nuclacZ. Whereas m7-nuclacZ was expressed throughout theneuroepithelium, Gbe+Su(H)lacZ was restricted to the transitionzone, although both were expressed in medulla NBs along with
mb-CD2. In addition, mb-CD2 was strongly activated in the glia,whereas the Gbe+Su(H)lacZ and the md-lacZ reporters wereexpressed at much lower levels at this location. Differential
activation of Notch target genes has been previously reported andtissue-specific factors could contribute to this differentialexpression (Cooper et al., 2000; de Celis et al., 1996; Wech
et al., 1999). This is an intriguing scenario to analyze in the future.The in-depth analysis of other Notch reporter genes in thedeveloping optic lobe would contribute to clarify this issue.
Dl and Ser: two ligands for Notch during optic lobe andglia development
At third larval instar during optic lobe development, Dl ishighly restricted to two to three cells at the transition zone in the
neuroepithelium, where Dl activates Notch (Ngo et al., 2010;Weng et al., 2012; Yasugi et al., 2010). In this work, we havefound that the other ligand of Notch, Ser, is expressed in the
surrounding glia at this larval stage and it is strongly accumulatedat the interface with NE cells. Ser activates Notch in theneuroepithelium and this, in turn, would contribute to restrict the
activation of the Ras–PntP1 pathway and L9sc to the transitionzone. Intriguingly, we have observed that Ser preferentiallyactivates the Notch target gene m7-nuclacZ in theneuroepithelium, whereas Dl activates other Notch target genes,
including Gbe+Su(H)lacZ, in the transition zone. For example,the overexpression of Dl in NE cells caused an ectopic activationof Gbe+Su(H)lacZ throughout the neuroepithelium, along with
dpn, which also behaves as a Notch target in other systems(Krejcı et al., 2009), and a repression of m7-nuclacZ (Fig. 7D–G). In addition, the loss of function of Ser in the glia caused a
striking decrease in the expression of m7-nuclacZ in theneuroepithelium (Fig. 5O–P9). One possibility to explain theseobservations is that the pool of Notch associated with the AJs and
activated by glial Ser is subject to particular post-translationalmodifications or/and is associated with other AJ proteins(including Cno) that somehow make Notch more receptive to
Ser and able to activate specific target genes (i.e. m7). In this
regard, it is interesting to note that Dl ectopically expressed in theglia (i.e. repoGal4..UAS-Dl) was not detected at the interfacewith NE cells, where glial Ser is strongly localized in contact with
Notch (Fig. 4E–E0), but Dl was restricted to the outermost surfaceglia (perineurial glia) (Fig. 7C–C90). This result strongly indicatesthat Dl cannot bind or has very low affinity for this pool of Notch atthe AJs, hence it is actively degraded in the subperineurial glia.
The low affinity of Dl for Notch at this location further suggeststhat this pool of Notch at the AJs must be endowed with particularcharacteristics, as mentioned above, that ultimately could alter the
activity properties of Su(H), explaining in turn the distinctexpression pattern of Notch target genes. Another possibility,which is not necessarily exclusive, to explain the differential
activation of the Notch reporters is that they respond to differentNotch thresholds. For example, m7-nuclacZ could require very lowlevels of Notch activation, whereas Gbe+Su(H)lacZ might require
high amounts of Notch signaling in NE cells. All these questionsremain open for further investigation.
Materials and MethodsDrosophila strains and geneticsAll stocks used in this study are from the Bloomington Stock Center and theVienna Drosophila RNAi Center, unless otherwise noted: Gbe+Su(H)lacZ [41 bpof the E(spl)m8 promoter that contains Grainyhead binding sites plus Su(H)binding sites] (Furriols and Bray, 2001), E(spl)mb-CD2 (de Celis et al., 1998),E(spl)md-lacZ (Cooper et al., 2000), E(spl)m7-nuclacZ (a gift from S. Bray) (Pineset al., 2010), FRT82B cnoR2 (Sawyer et al., 2009), hsFLP, FRT82B-tubGal80, arm-Gal4, c855a-Gal4 (Manseau et al., 1997), FRT82B SerRX82 (Thomas et al., 1991),repo-Gal4, nrv2-Gal4, Ser-Gal4, UAS-mCD8::GFP, UAS-cnoRNAi, UAS-cno::GFP (Slovakova and Carmena, 2011), UAS-Dicer2, UAS-BdE24 or Sersec
(DNSer, strong expressor that produces the first 1020 amino acids, up to the firstBamHI site in Serrate; a gift from Robert Fleming) (Fleming et al., 2013). UAS-Ni,UAS-NDN (Rebay et al., 1993), UAS-Notch::GFP (Kawahashi and Hayashi, 2010),UAS-Dl, UAS-GFP. The crosses Gal4xUAS were carried out at 29 C with thefollowing exception: the cross Gal4xUAS-DNSer was also carried out at less-stringent conditions, specifically at 25 C followed by an incubation overnight at29 C, for analyzing the expression of L9sc and PntP1 in the neuroepithelium.
MARCM clonesTo generate clones of cells homozygote for the null allele cnoR2, hsFLP; UAS-
CD8::GFP; FRT82B tubGal80 flies were crossed with armGal4; FRT82B cnoR2,identifying the clones by the presence of CD8::GFP. hsFLP was activated for 2hours at 37 C in first- and second-instar larvae. Clones of the null allele SerRX82
were performed in a similar way using in this case the nrv2Gal4 driver to identifyglial mutant clones.
Histology, immunofluorescence and microscopyBrains were dissected from third-instar larvae and fixed and stained withantibodies using standard protocols unless specified below. The following primaryantibodies were used: rabbit anti-Cno 1:400 (Speicher et al., 2008); rat anti-L9sc1:100 (Martın-Bermudo et al., 1991); guinea pig anti-Dpn 1:1000 (a gift from J.Skeath); rat anti-Baz 1:500 (Wodarz et al., 1999); mouse anti-Notch intracellulardomain (C17.9C6) 1:50–1:100 [Developmental Studies Hybridoma Bank(DSHB)]; mouse anti-Notch extracellular domain (C458.2H) 1:50–1:100(DSHB); mouse anti-Dl 1:40 (DSHB); rat anti-Shg 1:100 (DSHB); goat anti-Ser1:20–1:100 (Santa Cruz); mouse anti-Dlg 1:100 (DSHB); mouse anti-Repo 1:100(DSHB); mouse anti-Nrv5F7 1:600 (DSHB); rabbit anti-PH3 1:400 (Upstate);rabbit anti-PntP1 1:300 (a gift from J. Skeath); rabbit anti-bgal 1:3000 (Cappel);mouse anti-bgal 1:800 (Promega); mouse anti-CD2 1:600 (AbD Serotec).Secondary antibodies coupled to biotin (Vector Labs), Alexa Fluor 488, 546 or633 (Molecular Probes) were used. For immunostaining with the anti-Cnoantibody, brains were fixed using the heat and methanol method (Tepass, 1996).Fluorescent images were recorded using a Leica upright DM-SL microscope andassembled using Adobe Photoshop. Most of the micrographs shown in figuresrepresent single sections from confocal Z-stacks, with the exception of someaverage projections in the following figures: Fig. 2A-D,D9 and Fig. 5E,E9,H,H9.
Co-immunoprecipitationsFor in vivo Co-IPs, lysates were prepared from third-instar larval headsobtained from the following crosses: c855a-Gal4..UAS-Notch::GFP, c855a-Gal4..UAS-cno::GFP and c855a-Gal4..UAS::GFP as a negative control.
Journal of Cell Science 126 (21)4882
Journ
alof
Cell
Scie
nce
Sectioned heads were homogenized in lysis buffer [50 mM Tris-HCl, pH 8,150 mM NaCl, 0.1% SDS, 1 mM EDTA, 1% Triton X-100, 1 mM NaF, 100 mMNa3VO4, 2 mM PMSF and complete protease inhibitors (Roche)]. Extracts werecentrifuged for 2 minutes at 14,000 rpm (18,700 g) at 4 C. The supernatant wasincubated with Rb polyclonal antibody to GFP Sepharose beads (Abcam) for2 hours at 4 C. The beads then were washed three times with lysis buffer withoutinhibitors, resuspended in protein-set buffer (Fluka) and heated at 95 C for3 minutes. Precipitates were resolved by SDS-PAGE and immunoblotted withmouse anti-GFP (Clontech), rabbit anti-Cno (affinity purified) or goat anti-Serrate(Santa Cruz). Each experiment was performed at least twice.
Statistics
Measurement of Repo+ and PH3+ cells was made by imaging brain frontal sectionsevery 3 mm to ensure that the same cell was not counted twice. The area analyzedwas defined according to anatomical references, starting when the lobula plateneuropile appears (Ngo et al., 2010) and following in an antero-posterior directionuntil the disappearance of the outer neuroepithelium. 8–12 sections were sampledfor each brain and only surface glia were counted for statistics. Parametric andnon-parametric analyses were carried out with similar results to test differences inthe proliferation of glial cells with respect to control brains; slight differences instatistical significance were found in the genotype UAS-Ser+UAS-Ni between theparametric (**) and the non-parametric (*) tests for the percentage of PH3+ cellnumber (Fig. 6H); GLM and N-PAR1WAY procedures were performed tocompare variances between treatments and Duncan test was used for comparisonof averages using SAS v9.2.
AcknowledgementsWe thank Sarah Bray, Jim Skeath, Bob Fleming, Ben Ohlstein, IboGalindo, Mark Peifer, Andreas Wodarz, Yuh N. Jan, Utpal Banerjee,the Bloomington Drosophila Stock Center at the University ofIndiana, the Vienna Drosophila RNAi Center and the DevelopmentalStudies Hybridoma Bank at the University of Iowa for kindlyproviding fly strains and antibodies.
Author contributionsR.P.G. performed most of the experimental work and analyzed thedata; J.S. did the Co-IP experiments; N.R.Q. performed the MARCMclones; A.K. provided support and lab space to finish the work; A.C.designed and supervised the work, analyzed the data and wrote themanuscript.
FundingThis work was supported by the Spanish Government [grant numbersBFU2009-08833, BFU2012-33020 and CONSOLIDER-INGENIO2010 CSD2007-00023 to A.C.].
Supplementary material available online at
http://jcs.biologists.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1242/jcs.125617/-/DC1
ReferencesBailey, A. M. and Posakony, J. W. (1995). Suppressor of hairless directly activates
transcription of enhancer of split complex genes in response to Notch receptor
activity. Genes Dev. 9, 2609-2622.
Banerjee, S. and Bhat, M. A. (2007). Neuron-glial interactions in blood-brain barrier
formation. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 30, 235-258.
Bundgaard, M. and Abbott, N. J. (2008). All vertebrates started out with a glial blood-
brain barrier 4-500 million years ago. Glia 56, 699-708.
Carmena, A., Buff, E., Halfon, M. S., Gisselbrecht, S., Jimenez, F., Baylies, M. K.
and Michelson, A. M. (2002). Reciprocal regulatory interactions between the Notch
and Ras signaling pathways in the Drosophila embryonic mesoderm. Dev. Biol. 244,
226-242.
Carmena, A., Speicher, S. and Baylies, M. (2006). The PDZ protein Canoe/AF-6 links
Ras-MAPK, Notch and Wingless/Wnt signaling pathways by directly interacting with
Ras, Notch and Dishevelled. PLoS ONE 1, e66.
Cooper, M. T., Tyler, D. M., Furriols, M., Chalkiadaki, A., Delidakis, C. and Bray,
S. (2000). Spatially restricted factors cooperate with notch in the regulation of
Enhancer of split genes. Dev. Biol. 221, 390-403.
de Celis, J. F., de Celis, J., Ligoxygakis, P., Preiss, A., Delidakis, C. and Bray,
S. (1996). Functional relationships between Notch, Su(H) and the bHLH genes of the
E(spl) complex: the E(spl) genes mediate only a subset of Notch activities during
imaginal development. Development 122, 2719-2728.
de Celis, J. F., Tyler, D. M., de Celis, J. and Bray, S. J. (1998). Notch signalling
mediates segmentation of the Drosophila leg. Development 125, 4617-4626.
Delidakis, C. and Artavanis-Tsakonas, S. (1992). The Enhancer of split [E(spl)] locusof Drosophila encodes seven independent helix-loop-helix proteins. Proc. Natl. Acad.
Sci. USA 89, 8731-8735.
Ebens, A. J., Garren, H., Cheyette, B. N. and Zipursky, S. L. (1993). The Drosophilaanachronism locus: a glycoprotein secreted by glia inhibits neuroblast proliferation.
Cell 74, 15-27.
Edenfeld, G., Stork, T. and Klambt, C. (2005). Neuron-glia interaction in the insectnervous system. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 15, 34-39.
Egger, B., Boone, J. Q., Stevens, N. R., Brand, A. H. and Doe, C. Q. (2007).Regulation of spindle orientation and neural stem cell fate in the Drosophila optic
lobe. Neural Dev. 2, 1.
Egger, B., Gold, K. S. and Brand, A. H. (2010). Notch regulates the switch fromsymmetric to asymmetric neural stem cell division in the Drosophila optic lobe.
Development 137, 2981-2987.
Egger, B., Gold, K. S. and Brand, A. H. (2011). Regulating the balance betweensymmetric and asymmetric stem cell division in the developing brain. Fly (Austin) 5,
237-241.
Fleming, R. J., Scottgale, T. N., Diederich, R. J. and Artavanis-Tsakonas, S. (1990).The gene Serrate encodes a putative EGF-like transmembrane protein essential for
proper ectodermal development in Drosophila melanogaster. Genes Dev. 4 12A,2188-2201.
Fleming, R. J., Hori, K., Sen, A., Filloramo, G. V., Langer, J. M., Obar, R. A.,
Artavanis-Tsakonas, S. and Maharaj-Best, A. C. (2013). An extracellular region ofSerrate is essential for ligand-induced cis-inhibition of Notch signaling. Development
140, 2039-2049.
Furriols, M. and Bray, S. (2001). A model Notch response element detects Suppressorof Hairless-dependent molecular switch. Curr. Biol. 11, 60-64.
Green, P., Hartenstein, A. Y. and Hartenstein, V. (1993). The embryonicdevelopment of the Drosophila visual system. Cell Tissue Res. 273, 583-598.
Hartenstein, V. (2011). Morphological diversity and development of glia in Drosophila.
Glia 59, 1237-1252.
Hartenstein, V., Spindler, S., Pereanu, W. and Fung, S. (2008). The development ofthe drosophila larval brain. In Brain Development in Drosophila Melanogaster,
Vol. 628 (ed. G. M. Technau), pp. 1-31. Austin, TX; New York, NY: LandesBioscience and Springer.
Hidalgo, A. (2003). Neuron-glia interactions during axon guidance in Drosophila.
Biochem. Soc. Trans. 31, 50-55.
Hofbauer, A. and Campos-Ortega, J. A. (1990). Proliferation pattern and earlydifferentiation of the optic lobes in Drosophila melanogaster. Roux’s Arch. Dev. Biol.
198, 264-274.
Hoyle, G., Williams, M. and Phillips, C. (1986). Functional morphology of insectneuronal cell-surface/glial contacts: the trophospongium. J. Comp. Neurol. 246, 113-
128.
Jennings, B., Preiss, A., Delidakis, C. and Bray, S. (1994). The Notch signalling
pathway is required for Enhancer of split bHLH protein expression duringneurogenesis in the Drosophila embryo. Development 120, 3537-3548.
Kawahashi, K. and Hayashi, S. (2010). Dynamic intracellular distribution of Notch
during activation and asymmetric cell division revealed by functional fluorescentfusion proteins. Genes Cells 15, 749-759.
Klambt, C. (1993). The Drosophila gene pointed encodes two ETS-like proteins which
are involved in the development of the midline glial cells. Development 117, 163-176.
Knust, E., Schrons, H., Grawe, F. and Campos-Ortega, J. A. (1992). Seven genes ofthe Enhancer of split complex of Drosophila melanogaster encode helix-loop-helix
proteins. Genetics 132, 505-518.
Krahn, M. P., Klopfenstein, D. R., Fischer, N. and Wodarz, A. (2010). Membranetargeting of Bazooka/PAR-3 is mediated by direct binding to phosphoinositide lipids.
Curr. Biol. 20, 636-642.
Krejcı, A., Bernard, F., Housden, B. E., Collins, S. and Bray, S. J. (2009). Directresponse to Notch activation: signaling crosstalk and incoherent logic. Sci. Signal. 2,
ra1.
Lecourtois, M. and Schweisguth, F. (1995). The neurogenic suppressor of hairless
DNA-binding protein mediates the transcriptional activation of the enhancer of splitcomplex genes triggered by Notch signaling. Genes Dev. 9, 2598-2608.
Lemke, G. (2001). Glial control of neuronal development. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 24, 87-
105.
Lorger, M. and Moelling, K. (2006). Regulation of epithelial wound closure andintercellular adhesion by interaction of AF6 with actin cytoskeleton. J. Cell Sci. 119,
3385-3398.
Mandai, K., Nakanishi, H., Satoh, A., Obaishi, H., Wada, M., Nishioka, H., Itoh, M.,
Mizoguchi, A., Aoki, T., Fujimoto, T. et al. (1997). Afadin: A novel actin filament-
binding protein with one PDZ domain localized at cadherin-based cell-to-celladherens junction. J. Cell Biol. 139, 517-528.
Manseau, L., Baradaran, A., Brower, D., Budhu, A., Elefant, F., Phan, H., Philp,
A. V., Yang, M., Glover, D., Kaiser, K. et al. (1997). GAL4 enhancer trapsexpressed in the embryo, larval brain, imaginal discs, and ovary of Drosophila. Dev.
Dyn. 209, 310-322.
Martın-Bermudo, M. D., Martınez, C., Rodrıguez, A. and Jimenez, F. (1991).Distribution and function of the lethal of scute gene product during early neurogenesisin Drosophila. Development 113, 445-454.
Matsuo, T., Takahashi, K., Suzuki, E. and Yamamoto, D. (1999). The Canoe proteinis necessary in adherens junctions for development of ommatidial architecture in theDrosophila compound eye. Cell Tissue Res. 298, 397-404.
Glia function in the optic lobe 4883
Journ
alof
Cell
Scie
nce
Meinertzhagen, I. A. and Hanson, T. E. (1993). The development of the optic lobe. InThe Development of Drosophila Melanogaster (ed. M. Bate and A. Martınez-Arias),pp. 1363-1491. Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Press.
Miyamoto, H., Nihonmatsu, I., Kondo, S., Ueda, R., Togashi, S., Hirata, K.,
Ikegami, Y. and Yamamoto, D. (1995). canoe encodes a novel protein containing aGLGF/DHR motif and functions with Notch and scabrous in common developmentalpathways in Drosophila. Genes Dev. 9, 612-625.
Nave, K. A. and Trapp, B. D. (2008). Axon-glial signaling and the glial support of axonfunction. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 31, 535-561.
Ngo, K. T., Wang, J., Junker, M., Kriz, S., Vo, G., Asem, B., Olson, J. M., Banerjee,
U. and Hartenstein, V. (2010). Concomitant requirement for Notch and Jak/Statsignaling during neuro-epithelial differentiation in the Drosophila optic lobe. Dev.
Biol. 346, 284-295.Parker, R. J. and Auld, V. J. (2006). Roles of glia in the Drosophila nervous system.
Semin. Cell Dev. Biol. 17, 66-77.Pereanu, W., Shy, D. and Hartenstein, V. (2005). Morphogenesis and proliferation of
the larval brain glia in Drosophila. Dev. Biol. 283, 191-203.Pielage, J. and Klambt, C. (2001). Glial cells aid axonal target selection. Trends
Neurosci. 24, 432-433.Pines, M. K., Housden, B. E., Bernard, F., Bray, S. J. and Roper, K. (2010). The
cytolinker Pigs is a direct target and a negative regulator of Notch signalling.Development 137, 913-922.
Poeck, B., Fischer, S., Gunning, D., Zipursky, S. L. and Salecker, I. (2001). Glialcells mediate target layer selection of retinal axons in the developing visual system ofDrosophila. Neuron 29, 99-113.
Rebay, I., Fleming, R. J., Fehon, R. G., Cherbas, L., Cherbas, P. and Artavanis-
Tsakonas, S. (1991). Specific EGF repeats of Notch mediate interactions with Deltaand Serrate: implications for Notch as a multifunctional receptor. Cell 67, 687-699.
Rebay, I., Fehon, R. G. and Artavanis-Tsakonas, S. (1993). Specific truncations ofDrosophila Notch define dominant activated and dominant negative forms of thereceptor. Cell 74, 319-329.
Reddy, B. V., Rauskolb, C. and Irvine, K. D. (2010). Influence of fat-hippo and notchsignaling on the proliferation and differentiation of Drosophila optic neuroepithelia.Development 137, 2397-2408.
Sawyer, J. K., Harris, N. J., Slep, K. C., Gaul, U. and Peifer, M. (2009). TheDrosophila afadin homologue Canoe regulates linkage of the actin cytoskeleton toadherens junctions during apical constriction. J. Cell Biol. 186, 57-73.
Sepp, K. J., Schulte, J. and Auld, V. J. (2001). Peripheral glia direct axon guidanceacross the CNS/PNS transition zone. Dev. Biol. 238, 47-63.
Slovakova, J. and Carmena, A. (2011). Canoe functions at the CNS midline glia in a
complex with Shotgun and Wrapper-Nrx-IV during neuron-glia interactions.
Development 138, 1563-1571.
Speicher, S., Fischer, A., Knoblich, J. and Carmena, A. (2008). The PDZ protein
Canoe regulates the asymmetric division of Drosophila neuroblasts and muscle
progenitors. Curr. Biol. 18, 831-837.
Stork, T., Bernardos, R. and Freeman, M. R. (2012). Analysis of glial cell
development and function in Drosophila. Cold Spring Harb. Protoc. 2012,
pdb.top067587.
Takahashi, K., Matsuo, T., Katsube, T., Ueda, R. and Yamamoto, D. (1998). Direct
binding between two PDZ domain proteins Canoe and ZO-1 and their roles in
regulation of the jun N-terminal kinase pathway in Drosophila morphogenesis. Mech.
Dev. 78, 97-111.
Tayler, T. D. and Garrity, P. A. (2003). Axon targeting in the Drosophila visual
system. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 13, 90-95.
Tepass, U. (1996). Crumbs, a component of the apical membrane, is required for zonula
adherens formation in primary epithelia of Drosophila. Dev. Biol. 177, 217-225.
Thomas, U., Speicher, S. A. and Knust, E. (1991). The Drosophila gene Serrate
encodes an EGF-like transmembrane protein with a complex expression pattern in
embryos and wing discs. Development 111, 749-761.
Wang, W., Liu, W., Wang, Y., Zhou, L., Tang, X. and Luo, H. (2011). Notch
signaling regulates neuroepithelial stem cell maintenance and neuroblast formation in
Drosophila optic lobe development. Dev. Biol. 350, 414-428.
Wech, I., Bray, S., Delidakis, C. and Preiss, A. (1999). Distinct expression patterns of
different enhancer of split bHLH genes during embryogenesis of Drosophila
melanogaster. Dev. Genes Evol. 209, 370-375.
Weng, M., Haenfler, J. M. and Lee, C. Y. (2012). Changes in Notch signaling
coordinates maintenance and differentiation of the Drosophila larval optic lobe
neuroepithelia. Dev. Neurobiol. 72, 1376-1390.
Wodarz, A., Ramrath, A., Kuchinke, U. and Knust, E. (1999). Bazooka provides an
apical cue for Inscuteable localization in Drosophila neuroblasts. Nature 402, 544-
547.
Yasugi, T., Umetsu, D., Murakami, S., Sato, M. and Tabata, T. (2008). Drosophila
optic lobe neuroblasts triggered by a wave of proneural gene expression that is
negatively regulated by JAK/STAT. Development 135, 1471-1480.
Yasugi, T., Sugie, A., Umetsu, D. and Tabata, T. (2010). Coordinated sequential
action of EGFR and Notch signaling pathways regulates proneural wave progression
in the Drosophila optic lobe. Development 137, 3193-3203.
Journal of Cell Science 126 (21)4884