 |
Previous Article | Next Article 
Volume 17, Number 24,
Issue of December 15, 1997
The Origin, Location, and Projections of the Embryonic Abdominal
Motorneurons of Drosophila
Matthias Landgraf1,
Torsten Bossing2,
Gerd M. Technau3, and
Michael Bate1
1 Department of Zoology, Cambridge University,
Cambridge CB2 3EJ, United Kingdom, 2 Wellcome/CRC
Institute, Cambridge CB2 1QR, United Kingdom, and
3 Institut für Genetik, Universität Mainz,
55122 Mainz, Germany
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
FOOTNOTES
REFERENCES
ABSTRACT
We have used a retrograde labeling technique to identify
motorneurons for each of the 30 body wall muscles of an abdominal hemisegment in the late stage 16 Drosophila embryo. Each
motorneuron has a characteristic cell body position, dendritic
arborization, and axonal projection. In addition, we have determined
the neuroblasts of origin for most of the motorneurons we describe.
Some organizational principles for the neuromuscular system have become
apparent: (1) There is no obvious topographic relationship between the
cell body positions of motorneurons and the position or orientation of
the muscles they innervate; (2) motorneurons that innervate muscles of
similar position and orientation are often clustered and have
overlapping dendritic trees; (3) morphologically similar motorneurons
are generally derived from a common neuroblast and innervate
operationally related muscles; and (4) neuroblasts can give rise to
more than one morphological type of motorneuron.
Key words:
Drosophila;
motorneuron;
development;
lineage;
structure;
connectivity;
arborization;
neuroblast
INTRODUCTION
The embryonic nervous system of
Drosophila is a powerful system in which to analyze the
mechanisms that underlie neural development. Its strength lies in its
amenability to genetic, molecular, anatomical, and electrophysiological
techniques, whereas its relative simplicity allows manipulations and
analyses to be performed at the level of single, identified cells (for
review, see Goodman and Doe, 1993 ; Keshishian et al., 1996 ).
During early stages of CNS formation, neuroblasts delaminate from the
neuroectoderm and give rise to the full complement of neurons and glia.
The spatiotemporal sequence of neuroblast delamination and their
distinct patterns of gene expression make each of the neuroblasts a
uniquely identifiable cell (Hartenstein and Campos-Ortega, 1984 ; Doe,
1992 ; Broadus et al., 1995 ; for review, see Doe and Technau, 1993 ). In
addition, the neuronal and glial lineages generated by neuroblasts
derived from the ventral half of the neuroectoderm have recently been
described in detail (Bossing et al., 1996 ). As far as the motor system
is concerned, the aCC and the RP1-5 neurons have served as examples of
motor neuron development and the formation of neuromuscular connections
in the periphery (Halpern et al., 1991 ; Sink and Whitington, 1991a ;
Broadie et al., 1993 ; Chiba et al., 1995 ; for review, see Goodman and
Doe, 1993 ). However, very little is known about the other motorneurons
or the central dendritic arborizations that are fundamental to their
function.
Here we report the use of a retrograde DiI labeling technique that has
enabled us to identify and characterize the motorneurons that innervate
each of the 30 body wall muscles in an abdominal hemisegment in late
stage 16 Drosophila embryos. Sink and Whitington (1991a)
described the location of all embryonic motorneurons in the CNS but
were unable to resolve individual central and peripheral projections.
We have succeeded in separately cataloging each of the motorneurons and
their projections in the periphery, together with their dendritic
arbors within the CNS. Each motorneuron is identifiable by its
characteristic position in the neuromere. In addition, the motorneurons
make an invariant set of connections with target muscles, and for most
motorneurons we can show that they have characteristic dendritic trees.
Interestingly, neurons that innervate muscles that are putatively
related in their operation are often clustered and their dendritic
trees overlap, thus defining particular areas of the neuropile as
potential sites of integration for functionally related motorneurons.
By using DiI as a lineage tracer we have also been able to determine
the neuroblast of origin for most of the embryonic motorneurons we
describe. We find that morphologically similar motorneurons are
generally derived from the same neuroblast, but that a neuroblast can
give rise to more than one morphological type of motorneuron. This
combination of morphological analysis with cell lineage studies enables
us to begin an investigation of the relationship between the functional architecture of the nervous system and the origins and differentiation of its constituent cells.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Embryo preparation. Oregon R flies were maintained on
apple juice agar plates at 25°C. Embryos were staged according to
Campos-Ortega and Hartenstein (1985) . Late stage 16 (14.0-14.5 hr
after egg laying at 25°C) embryos were collected, dechorionated in
bleach, and rinsed thoroughly with water. Under saline (0.075 M phosphate buffer, pH 7.2) the embryos were transferred to
polylysine-coated coverslips, lifted out of the vitelline membrane with
a glass needle, cut open laterally, and then attached to the coverslip. Gut and fat body were removed by gentle suction and the embryos were
flattened by blowing a stream of saline over them. Embryos were treated
with 0.2 mg/ml collagenase (Boehringer Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany) in
saline for 1.5 min, rinsed again with saline, fixed with 3.7%
formaldehyde in saline for 2.5 min, and then rinsed with saline.
Neuronal staining. Lipid-soluble carbocyanine dye
1,1 -dioctadecyl-3,3,3 ,3 -tetramethyl indocarbocyanine perchlorate
(DiI) (Molecular Probes, Eugene, OR) was dissolved in vegetable oil as
described by Bossing and Technau (1994) and backfilled into sharpened
glass capillaries, which were then bevelled. With use of a 40×
water-immersion lens on a Zeiss fixed-stage microscope and a hydraulic
micromanipulator (Narishige, Tokyo, Japan), a small droplet of DiI was
deposited on a particular neuromuscular junction (NMJ). Then the dye
was left to diffuse overnight at 4°C. The positions of individual
NMJs are largely invariant and were established by examining a
collection of anti-Fasciclin II-stained embryos at late stage 16 (see
Fig. 1). To access NMJs of external muscles, internal muscle layers
were first surgically removed using a glass needle. Labeling of
neuroblasts and all photoconversions were performed as described by
Bossing and Technau (1994) and Bossing et al. (1996) . Embryos were
either mounted in 80% glycerol or progressively dehydrated with
ethanol, cleared, and mounted in araldite. Preparations were analyzed
using a Zeiss Axiophot microscope. Tracings were made from an attached
video monitor.
Fig. 1.
The abdominal larval body wall muscles and
peripheral nerve branches. A, Tracings of the larval
body wall muscles and peripheral nerve branches in a single abdominal
hemisegment (A2-A7) in a late stage 16 embryo as viewed from internal (top) and external (bottom). NMJs form at late stage 16, and each muscle is
innervated at a characteristic position. Anterior is up,
and the ventral midline is left. Muscle nomenclature
according to Bate (1993) : D, dorsal acute;
DO, dorsal oblique; DT, dorsal
transverse; LL, lateral longitudinal; LT,
lateral transverse; LO, lateral oblique; SBM, segment border muscle; VL, ventral
longitudinal; VO, ventral oblique; VA,
ventral acute; VT, ventral transverse. Nerve branch nomenclature according to Thomas et al. (1984) : ISN,
intersegmental nerve; SN, segmental nerve;
TN, transverse nerve. B, Diagrammatic transverse section of the ventral nerve cord to illustrate the relative
dorsoventral positions of motorneuron cell bodies. We have arbitrarily
divided the dorsoventral axis of the ventral nerve cord into five
levels from dorsal (Level 1) to the neuropile (Level 2) to ventral (Level 5). We have
given a characteristic shading to each of these five levels. To include
information about dorsoventral position in the description of the
motorneurons we have shaded motorneuron cell bodies according to this
code (Figs. 3, 5). C, Diagrammatic dorsal view of the
ventral nerve cord (seen from interior of embryo) to illustrate the
organization of nerve roots. AC, Anterior commissure;
PC, posterior commissure; ISNa, anterior
root of the intersegmental nerve; ISNp, posterior root of the intersegmental nerve; SN, segmental nerve root;
TN, transverse nerve root. Anterior is
up.
[View Larger Version of this Image (52K GIF file)]
RESULTS
A map of the motorneurons, their central arborizations, and their
muscle targets
At late stage 16, NMJs have begun to form on the body wall
muscles, and the filopodia of motorneuron growth cones have generally been retracted from nontarget muscles (Broadie and Bate, 1993 ). Individual NMJs are reliably located at particular sites on the muscles
so that each NMJ can be specifically targeted for retrograde labeling
(Figs. 1A,
2, 3).
Fig. 2.
Photoconverted DiI preparations of retrogradely
labeled abdominal motorneurons and their target muscles. From dorsal to
ventral: (A) U motorneuron innervating muscle
DO1; (B) the motorneuron that innervates muscle
LT1. C, The motorneurons that innervate muscle VT1 were
labeled in two adjacent segments. Arrows point to the
somata and broad arrows to drops of DiI, which were
deposited at the NMJs. Dorsal is right and anterior is
up. The ventral midline is indicated by
triangles. Scale bar (shown in C):
A, 20 mm; B-C, 10 mm.
[View Larger Version of this Image (118K GIF file)]
Fig. 3.
a-g. The embryonic motorneurons, their
central and peripheral projections, and their target muscles. The
left column shows individual but representative tracings
of single motorneurons (therefore, dimensions of nerve cords and
motorneurons may vary slightly between panels), indicating the position
of the cell body and dendritic arborizations. Motorneuron names (where
they exist) are given at the top left, and the
neuroblast of origin (where known) is given at the bottom
left (uncertainties are indicated by question
marks). The nerve root through which the axon exits the
CNS is given at the bottom
right (AC, anterior commissure; PC, posterior commissure; ISNa, anterior
root of the intersegmental nerve; ISNp, posterior root
of the intersegmental nerve; SN, segmental nerve). The
center column shows the peripheral projection of the axon and the target muscle(s), which are named according to the nomenclatures of Bate (1993) , and in parentheses,
Crossley (1978) . The right column shows the NMJ in more
detail and indicates the peripheral nerve branch through which the
motor axon projects (bottom right). We have been unable
to show conclusively that muscles VA1 and VA2 are innervated by
distinct motorneurons, but on the basis of the number of motorneurons
projecting through the SN according to Sink and Whitington (1991a) , we propose that they are. To indicate that we are uncertain about which of the dorsal
and lateral muscles are innervated by VUM neurons, we have differentially highlighted those muscles that we think are the most
likely targets, in agreement with Sink and Whitington (1991a) . n = sample size for each labeled neuron.
[View Larger Versions of these Images (42 + 41 + 39 + 42 + 42 + 47 + 14K GIF file)]
To make the results of our analysis as comprehensible and accessible as
possible, we present the bulk of our data as a series of tracings and
diagrams illustrating for each muscle the neuron or neurons that
innervate it (Fig. 3). Throughout we
adhere to the muscle nomenclature of Bate (1993) . We have structured
the figure so that muscles are listed from dorsal to ventral and
grouped according to their orientation. In addition, we have included descriptions of the ventral unpaired median neurons (VUMs), each of
which innervates a particular subset of muscles.
Figure 3 includes details of each motorneuron: its existing name (if
any), the neuroblast of origin, the position of its cell body relative
to the commissures and connectives, the characteristic arborization
pattern of its dendrites, the nerve root through which its axon exits
the CNS, and its projection to its target muscle(s). To include details
of the relative dorsal-ventral positions of motorneuron cell bodies we
have arbitrarily subdivided the ventral nerve cord into five levels,
from level 1 (dorsal) to level 2 (neuropile) to level 5 (ventral).
Throughout we have given cell bodies characteristic shadings that
indicate their relative dorsal-ventral positions (Fig.
1B). These diagrams show a representative dye fill
for each motorneuron. On average we labeled each motorneuron nine
times, and in no case did we find evidence for significant variability.
Our data appear to be quite compatible with those published
previously by Sink and Whitington (1991a) , Cash et al. (1992) , Callahan
and Thomas (1994) , and Thor and Thomas (1997) , with two exceptions.
First, Sink and Whitington (1991a) described RP5 as arborizing over
muscles VL2 and VO4-6. We have been unable to resolve arborizations of
RP5 over any ventral muscles other than VL1 at late stage 16. Second,
Cash et al. (1992) showed that muscle LO1 and the SBM are innervated by
two distinct motorneurons. However, we could only detect a single
motorneuron innervating both muscles. Because the NMJs of these two
muscles are relatively inaccessible, and because the two muscles have
different orientations and therefore probably different functions, we
think it likely that they are innervated by distinct motorneurons, of
which we have identified only one. Most of the 31 motorneurons that we
have mapped are highly invariant in their targets, their positions, and
their dendritic arbors. For instance, as shown in Figure
4C, the motorneuron innervating muscle DT1 was retrogradely labeled in four adjacent segments. The cell bodies lie at the same position relative to the
neuropile in all four segments, and the main dendritic branch patterns
are characteristic and similar to one another.
Fig. 4.
Examples of photoconverted preparations of
clones from individually labeled NBs and of retrogradely labeled
motorneurons. Photoconverted DiI preparations of clones from
individual, identified, labeled NBs (A, D, G), of
motorneurons (B, E, F, H), and of NMJs (I), and a fluorescent image of
DiI-labeled motorneurons (C) are shown. The
images are collages of several focal planes, which were assembled with
Photoshop; the dorsal focal plane is uppermost. A, The two medial U motorneurons and the fpCC
interneuron derived from NB 7-1. The other motorneurons derived from NB
7-1 (the two mediolateral U neurons and the motorneurons that most
likely innervate muscles VO4-6) are not visible in this focal plane.
B, The motorneurons that innervate the four dorsal
muscles DA1-2 (aCC and RP2) and DO1-2 (the two medial U neurons) were
retrogradely labeled in one abdominal segment. C, A
fluorescent image of the motorneuron innervating muscle DT1, which was
labeled in four adjacent abdominal segments. Note the characteristic
cell body position and dendritic projection. The
asterisks indicate T-shaped sensory axons that were
labeled by chance in two of the segments. The motorneuron that
innervates muscle DO4 was labeled in one segment. D,
Motorneurons derived from two NB 3-2 clones. The anterior clone is
thoracic (T3); the posterior clone is abdominal
(A2). NB 3-2 gives rise to two morphological types
of motorneurons: first, motorneurons that project through the ISN and
innervate muscles DT1 (not visible in this focal plane), DO3-4, and
probably also DO5 (not visible in this focal plane); second,
motorneurons that project through SNa and innervate muscle LT3 and
probably also LT4. E, A photoconverted preparation
similar to the one shown in C. F, Three
motorneurons that project through SNa are shown. The motorneurons that
innervate muscles LT1-2 are morphologically and clonally distinct from
the ones innervating muscles LO1 and SBM. G, Two NB 3-1 clones, of which the anterior clone is thoracic (T3)
and the posterior clone is abdominal (A1). NB 3-1 gives rise to the four morphologically similar RP1, -3, -4, and -5 motorneurons that innervate the ventral longitudinal muscles VL1-4.
H, Most of the motorneurons that project through SNb and
SNd were retrogradely labeled in a single abdominal segment to
illustrate their relative cell body positions. In addition, the
motorneuron that innervates muscles VO1-2 was labeled in the next
posterior segment. Note that the V-neuron is morphologically distinct
from the RP neurons but that their dendritic arbors are overlapping
(arrowhead) (see text). The VUM neuron lies in the same
segment as the muscles that it innervates, whereas the RP and V-neurons
as well as the motorneurons that innervate muscles VO1-2 and VO4-5 lie
in the next anterior segment. I, The endplates of two
VUM neurons on the ventral oblique muscles VO1-6 in two adjacent
abdominal segments (the VUMs were retrogradely labeled on the
contralateral side). Anterior is up. The ventral midline is indicated by triangles and is on the
left in I. Scale bar, 10 µm.
[View Larger Version of this Image (113K GIF file)]
The segmental nerve (SN) branches SNb and SNd are composed of
intersegmental motor axons
The labeling technique readily reveals the nerve roots by which
the axons of individual motorneurons leave the CNS. In abdominal hemisegments A2-A7, motor axons project
into the periphery along six nerves: the transverse nerve (TN), the
intersegmental nerve (ISN), and four SN branches (from dorsal to
ventral: SNa, SNb, SNc, and SNd) (Fig. 1A). The TN
projects along the borders of the abdominal segments (Bodmer and Jan,
1987 ; Gorczyca et al., 1994 ). The ISN contains axons from motorneurons
located in the same and in the anterior segment next to the muscles
they innervate. The ISN has two roots (Fig. 1C): axons of
the motorneurons from the next anterior segment project through the
anterior root, and axons of the motorneurons located in the same
segment as the muscles they innervate run through the posterior root.
The SN has previously been defined as a nerve consisting exclusively of
axons from motorneurons located in the same segment as the muscles they
innervate (Thomas et al., 1984 ). Our map of the motorneurons shows,
however, that only SNa and SNc are truly segmental nerves in that only
these branches exclusively contain the axons of motorneurons from the same segment. It is these axons that exit the CNS through the segmental
nerve root. SNb and SNd, on the other hand, consist almost
entirely of the axons of motorneurons from the next anterior segment
that exit through the anterior root of the ISN (e.g., RP1,- 3, -4, and
-5). In addition, SNb and SNd also contain one axon of a segmental
motorneuron, namely a VUM neuron, which exits through the posterior
root of the ISN and projects through both nerve branches (Figs. 3,
4H,I). It may be reasonable to consider SNd a
branch of SNb and SNb a branch of the ISN. This view takes account of
the fact that SNb and SNd are formed by axons that extend through the
anterior root of the ISN before defasciculating from the ISN in the
periphery (Johansen et al., 1989 ; Sink and Whitington, 1991b ). At the
same time, it fits with the results of experiments which show that
increased adhesion between motor axons results in a fusion of SNb and
SNd with the ISN but has no such affect on SNa and SNc (Van Vactor et
al., 1993 ; Lin and Goodman, 1994 ; Desai et al., 1996 ; Fambrough and
Goodman, 1996 ).
The distribution of the motorneurons in the CNS
Our data show that as in other insects (Burrows, 1996 ) there is no
systematic mapping of the peripheral muscle targets onto the central
positions of the motorneuron cell bodies. The distribution of the
neurons does not follow any coordinates of the muscle field, dorsal-ventral, anterior-posterior, or internal-external. This confirms the earlier findings of Sink and Whitington (1991a) and extends them to the complete neuron-muscle map. Nonetheless, there are
obvious groupings of motorneuron cell bodies in the CNS, often consisting of neurons that innervate operationally related muscles. Because there is no obvious functional significance of the position of
the neuron cell body in the insect CNS, it seems likely [as has been
suggested before by Bate (1976) ] that these groupings reflect an
underlying organization of the way in which different motorneurons are
produced during neuroblast divisions. We consider these groupings and
their developmental origins below.
Neuroblasts produce subsets of motorneurons with similar
morphologies and related muscle targets
By combining the retrograde labeling of motorneurons with
the analysis of clones generated by individual neuroblasts, we have been able to assign motorneurons to their neuroblasts of origin. We
have so far been able to do this for 26 of the 31 motorneurons we have
identified; these were the ones that are derived from the medial and
intermediate neuroblasts and midline progenitors where lineages have
been described (Bossing and Technau, 1994 ; Bossing et al., 1996 ). In
the clones derived from neuroblasts NB 2-2, NB 4-2, and NB 7-1, the
morphologies of most motorneurons were obscured by other cells derived
from the same lineage. In these instances we had to rely on the
peripheral projections of labeled axons to identify the motorneurons
that these neuroblasts produce. Some examples of clones from labeled
neuroblasts and several of the motorneurons to which they give rise are
illustrated in Figure 4. Our results show that NB 2-2 produces
motorneurons innervating muscles LT1-2. NB 3-1 produces the RP1, -3, -4, and -5 motorneurons, which innervate the ventral longitudinal
muscles VL1-4. NB 3-2 gives rise to two morphologically different sets of motorneurons. The first set of three to four motorneurons innervates the dorsal muscles DO3-4, DT1, and probably also muscle DO5. The second
set of two motorneurons derived from NB 3-2 innervates muscle LT3 and
probably also muscle LT4. NB 4-2 gives rise to the RP2 motorneuron that
innervates muscle DA2 and a distinct set of two motorneurons that
innervate muscles VO1-3. NB 5-2 is the progenitor of the V-motorneuron
that innervates muscle VL1. NB 7-1 gives rise to two sets of motorneurons:
the four U-motorneurons constitute one
of these sets and innervate muscles
DO1-2, DA3, and LL1. This set could be further
subdivided into two, consisting of the DO1-2 neurons on the one hand
and the more lateral and ventral DA3/LL1 neurons on the other. A
further distinction between the two pairs of U neurons is that it is
only the DO1-2 pair that sends a process into the contralateral
neuromere. The other distinct set of cells derived from 7.1 consists
most likely of the two motorneurons innervating the ventral oblique
muscles VO4-6 (our preparations of NB 7-1 clones did not conclusively
show endplates on muscles VO4-6, but axons project to the region that
is characteristic for SNd and VO4-6 innervation). The origin of aCC
from NB 1-1 has already been described (Doe et al., 1988 ; Udolph et
al., 1993 ), and it is known that the VUMs arise from midline
progenitors (Klämbt et al., 1991 ; Bossing and Technau, 1994 ).
When lineages and morphologies are compared (Fig. 3), it becomes clear
that morphologically similar motorneurons arise from a common
neuroblast, but that a single neuroblast may give rise to more than one
morphological type. For example, NB 3-2 gives rise to two
morphologically distinct types of motorneurons that innervate muscles
in different segments. Those that innervate the dorsal oblique muscles
of the next posterior segment have characteristic axonal projections
through the anterior root of the ISN and posteriorly running dendritic
arbors. Those that innervate the lateral transverse muscles of the same
segment have axonal projections through the SN and anteriorly running
dendritic arbors. When we relate the positions of muscles to the
motorneurons that innervate them and their lineages, it becomes clear
that muscles that have similar positions and orientations are often
innervated by motorneurons derived from a common neuroblast. Thus,
although there is no obvious relationship between the topography of
muscles and motorneurons, there does appear to be a distinct
relationship between the progeny of individual neuroblasts and the
innervation of particular muscle sets.
The distribution of the dendritic arbors
Motorneurons that innervate neighboring muscles have overlapping
dendritic trees. This is true even for neurons that are morphologically dissimilar and derived from different neuroblasts. For example, the
motorneurons that innervate the ventral longitudinal muscles, RP1, - 3, -4, -5 (NB 3-1), and the V-neuron (NB 5-2), project their dendritic
arbors to a common region of the neuropile located lateral to the
posterior commissure (Figs. 4H,
5E). Similarly, the dendritic
trees of the motorneurons innervating the ventral oblique muscles
(VO1-3; NB 4-2 and VO4-6; NB 7-1) are clustered in a region of the
neuropile that overlaps and is immediately posterior to that defined by
the dendritic arbors of the RP1, -3, -4, and -5, and V-neurons (Fig.
5F). The dendritic trees of motorneurons that
innervate dorsal muscles are clustered in the neuropile between the
commissures (Figs. 4E, 5A-C), and,
finally, the dendritic arbors of the segmental motorneurons, which
innervate the lateral transverse and the ventral acute muscles, are
primarily localized lateral to the anterior commissure (Figs.
4F, 5D,G). Thus, relationships between
neuroblasts, the motorneurons they give rise to, their dendritic
morphology, and the muscles they innervate are becoming clear: the cell
bodies of motorneurons derived from a common neuroblast are usually
clustered, their axons project to muscles of similar position and
orientation, and their dendrites overlap. Motorneurons that are derived
from different neuroblasts but innervate neighboring muscles differ in
cell body position and axonal projection, yet their dendrites branch in
a common area of the neuropile. The shared feature of most motorneurons
with overlapping dendrites is that they innervate muscles that have
similar positions and orientations and hence are likely to have related
functions during muscle contraction. Thus, the different domains of
dendritic arborization that we describe may represent distinct areas of
the neuropile that serve as integrative regions for motorneurons
innervating functionally related subsets of the body wall muscles.
Fig. 5.
Tracings of groups of motorneurons that
innervate muscles that are related in operation by position and
orientation. A-G, Composites of tracings from several
preparations (A, 2; B, 3; C, 4; D, 3; E, 2;
F, 3; G, 2). A, The aCC
and RP2 motorneurons that innervate muscles DA1-2. B,
The four U neurons that innervate the dorsal and lateral muscles DO1-2,
DA3, and LL1 (note that this cluster of four neurons may be subdivided
further by morphology and target muscles; see text for details).
C, The motorneurons innervating the dorsal oblique
muscles DO3-5 and muscle DT1. D, The motorneurons that
innervate the lateral muscles LT1-4, LO1, and SBM. Note that muscles
LO1 and SBM might be innervated by two distinct motorneurons, one of
which is shown here. E, The RP1, -3, -4, -5, and the
V-neurons innervate the ventral longitudinal muscles. F,
Motorneurons innervating the ventral oblique muscles. G,
Motorneurons innervating the ventral acute muscles. Note that there is
uncertainty as to whether muscles VA1 and VA2 are innervated by two
distinct motorneurons (Fig. 3). H, All embryonic
motorneurons that innervate the larval body wall muscles of abdominal
segment A7 at stage 16 (adapted from Sink and Whitington,
1991a ). For details of the individual dendritic arborizations, refer to
Figure 3. Anterior is up.
[View Larger Version of this Image (30K GIF file)]
DISCUSSION
The embryonic motorneurons of Drosophila melanogaster
have stereotypic morphologies and are uniquely identifiable
To identify and characterize embryonic motorneurons we have used
the lipophilic fluorescent dye DiI to label motorneurons retrogradely
from their NMJs to their cell bodies. The technique allows us to assign
motorneurons to each of the 30 abdominal body wall muscles of the late
stage 16 Drosophila embryo. We have characterized these
motorneurons with respect to the muscles they innervate, their
positions in the ventral nerve cord, and their dendritic arborizations.
The map of the motorneurons, their axons, dendrites, and target muscles
complements the description of the sensory neurons in the embryo
(Merritt and Whitington, 1995 ) and provides a baseline from which to
investigate the functional architecture of the nervous system and its
developmental origins.
Additional motorneurons innervate larval muscles
Although we have described most of the motorneurons, we have not
included all of them, because in late stage 16 embryos we detect only
single axons innervating most body wall muscles. Many of these muscles
are known to have multiple innervations in the third instar larva
(Keshishian et al., 1993 ). Much of this additional innervation is
accounted for by the maturation of the widespread terminations of the
VUM neurons, which have been tentatively identified as the source of
the octopaminergic type II innervation of the larval body wall muscles
(Monastirioti et al., 1995 ). Our description is limited to the primary
innervation by type I endings (Johansen et al., 1989 ), present at stage
16. The identification of this early differentiating set of
motorneurons reveals interesting new data about the organization of the
motor innervation and its developmental origins.
Organization of the primary motor innervation in the stage 16 embryo and its developmental origins
Morphologically similar motorneurons are clonally related
Most (26 of 31) motorneurons are derived from a few neuroblasts
located ventrally in the neuroectoderm. Each of these neuroblasts produces one or more sets of motorneurons, and it is an important finding that morphologically similar motorneurons are in general clonally related and innervate neighboring muscles in the periphery. For example, considering neurons that innervate ventral longitudinal muscles (RP1, -3, -4, and -5 and V) (Fig. 5F), we
find that RP1, -3, -4, and -5 are morphologically similar, with axons
that project contralaterally through the anterior commissure, whereas
the V-neuron is morphologically distinct and projects its axon
contralaterally through the posterior commissure. RP1, -3, -4, and -5 arise from NB 3-1, whereas V is derived from a separate neuroblast, NB
5-2. Similarly, the lateral transverse muscles are targeted by two morphologically distinct groups of motorneurons (Fig. 5E)
that arise from two separate neuroblasts: first, a group of two very ventrally located motorneurons from NB 2-2 that innervate adjacent muscles LT1 and LT2, and second, two ventrally located motorneurons, most likely both from NB 3-2, that innervate adjacent muscles LT3 and
LT4.
The evolution of the nerve-muscle pairs
These relationships between neuroblasts, the motorneurons they
give rise to, and their target muscles prompt us to speculate about the
evolution of neuromuscular networks. The fact that clusters of possibly
sibling cells derived from a single neuroblast innervate related
muscles suggests that (1) there is an underlying developmental mechanism that links progeny of particular neuroblasts with particular muscle subsets and (2) this relationship may have influenced the formation of new nerve-muscle pairs during the evolution of the neuromuscular system. For example, four ventral longitudinal muscles could have arisen during the course of evolution by multiplication of a
single functional unit consisting of an RP motorneuron and a ventral
longitudinal muscle. A simple way to bring about such a multiplication
of particular sets of interacting cells would be by duplication of
their respective precursors, i.e., the RP motorneuron ganglion mother
cell and the VL muscle founder cell or its progenitor (Bate, 1990 ;
Carmena et al., 1995 ). Instances in which we find that two putatively
related muscles are co-innervated by a single motorneuron (such as VL3
and VL4 or VO1 and VO2), as well as instances in which we find that two
motorneurons related by lineage innervate a single muscle (such as RP1
and RP4 innervating muscle VL2), suggest an evolutionary mechanism
whereby the progenitors of muscles and motorneurons are duplicated
independently of one another. The newly generated motorneuron-muscle
units would subsequently be modified in ways that would make them
distinct from one another, thus allowing for the adaptation of newly
formed motor units for the fine-tuning of movement while retaining a
specific neuromuscular connectivity. Interestingly, the expression
pattern and function of the Drosophila islet gene (Thor and
Thomas, 1997 ) supports our hypothesis of the evolution of the
neuromuscular network by multiplication of a few ancestral
nerve-muscle units: Drosophila islet is expressed in sets
of motorneurons of common origin that innervate related muscles (e.g.,
RP1, -3, -4, and -5 derived from NB 3-1, and motorneurons for muscles
VO4-6 derived from NB 7-1) and is required in these motorneurons for
proper axonal projections to their respective targets.
Motorneuron subsets share common domains of
dendritic arborization
It is also an important aspect of our findings that neurons
innervating similar muscles are not necessarily related by lineage or
position, but that in these instances they share a common domain of
dendritic arborization within the CNS. The most obvious case is where a
single muscle is innervated by two neurons of different developmental
origins. VL1, for example, is innervated by two motorneurons (V- and
RP5 neurons) that are derived from separate neuroblasts. Their cell
bodies are not clustered and they have different axonal morphologies,
but their dendrites project to the same part of the neuropile. This is
a special case of what appears to be a general rule: muscles that are
apparently related by function (by proximity and orientation) are
innervated by sets of neurons that share a common domain of dendritic
arborization, whether they are related by lineage or not. We have so
far identified three such domains (which are likely to be further
refined by future studies): one for dorsal intersegmental motorneurons
(Fig. 5A-C), one for ventral intersegmental motorneurons
(Fig. 5E,F), and one for the segmental motorneurons
(Fig. 5D,G). Provisionally we assume that these regions
within the developing neuropile represent sites at which, in the mature
system, integrative events that are related to the operation of subsets
of the neuromuscular system can occur.
In some instances, the neurons that contribute to a common domain
of dendritic arborization are not ones innervating muscles that are
obviously functionally related. The fact that the dendrites of the
LT1-4 motorneurons and the SBM/LO1 neuron project to a common neuropile
region might be predicted on the grounds of proximity and the
orientation of the muscles concerned or both. However, we also find
that VA1-3 motorneurons project dendrites to this domain, and at first
sight there seems to be no likely functional relationship between
ventral acute and lateral transverse muscles. The dendrites of RP2
represent the converse case and appear to be particularly anomalous
(Fig. 5A). We might expect on functional grounds that the
dendrites of RP2 would cluster with those of other dorsal
intersegmental motorneurons. However, they actually span the region of
the anterior commissure where the dendrites of segmental motorneurons
are clustered. One reason for this may be that RP2, alone among the
motorneurons with axons in the ISN, innervates a muscle in the same
segment (apart from VUMs). This would imply that the position of the
dendrites is influenced by the segmental origins of the motorneurons
and that this could be the deciding factor in laying out the
foundations of the neuropile, rather than any functional relationships
between the neurons.
Subdividing the neuropile
Perhaps the most interesting question that emerges from this study
is the nature of the developmental mechanism that underlies the
apparent partitioning of the neuropile during embryogenesis. We know
very little about dendritic arborization and its control in
Drosophila, but we might expect that, like guidance of
growing axons, the formation of dendritic branches is regulated in part by the expression of cell adhesion molecules on the surfaces of neurons
and cells with which they come in contact. The mechanisms that underlie
the clustering of the dendritic trees of functionally related
motorneurons may be similar to those governing axonal pathfinding and
target recognition in the periphery, where axons are ordered into
fascicles through a series of adhesive preferences (Lin et al., 1994 ;
Lin and Goodman, 1994 ; Desai et al., 1996 ; Fambrough and Goodman, 1996 ;
Krueger et al., 1996 ). As far as the neuromuscular system is concerned,
it is particularly interesting that the homophilic cell adhesion
molecule Connectin is expressed on the surfaces of segmental
motorneurons (that is, neurons projecting through SNa or SNc), with the
single exception of the DT1 motorneuron, the cell body of which lies in
the next anterior segment with an axon exiting through the anterior
root of the ISN. In the periphery, axons of Connectin-expressing
motorneurons fasciculate and innervate Connectin-expressing muscles,
and in the CNS the dendrites of the segmental Connectin-expressing
motorneurons (LT1-4, LO1, SBM, VA1-3; see above) cluster together in
the region lateral to the anterior commissure. The DT1 motorneuron is
the exceptional case among the Connectin-expressing motorneurons,
because it forms in the next anterior segment. However, the projection
of the DT1 motorneuron dendrites supports the notion that Connectin
expression may be one of the properties that governs branching in a
common region of neuropile: a branch of the DT1 projection runs
posteriorly and branches in the region shared by the other
Connectin-expressing motorneurons. Experiments are now in progress to
test the idea that the patterned expression of cell adhesion molecules
is required for normal partitioning of dendrites in the developing CNS,
as it is for proper innervation of the muscle field.
FOOTNOTES
Received June 16,1997; revised Sept. 26, 1997; accepted Oct. 6, 1997.
This work was supported by grants from the Sir Halley Stewart Trust and
the Medical Research Council (M.L.), the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (Te 130/7-1) and the European Economic Community (CT92-0790) (G.M.T.), and the Wellcome Trust (M.B.). We are
grateful to Andreas Prokop, Paul Whitington, and Helen Skaer for their
helpful comments.
Correspondence should be addressed to Michael Bate, Department of
Zoology, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EJ,
England.
REFERENCES
-
Bate CM
(1976)
Embryogenesis of an insect nervous system I. A map of the thoracic and abdominal neuroblasts in Locusta migratoria.
J Embryol Exp Morphol
35:107-123[Web of Science][Medline].
-
Bate M
(1990)
The embryonic development of larval muscles in Drosophila.
Development
110:791-804[Abstract/Free Full Text].
-
Bate M
(1993)
The mesoderm and its derivatives.
In: The development of Drosophila melanogaster (Bate M,
Martinez Arias A,
eds), pp 1013-1090. Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory.
-
Bodmer R,
Jan YN
(1987)
Morphological differentiation of the embryonic peripheral neurons in Drosophila.
Roux's Arch Dev Biol
196:69-77.
-
Bossing T,
Technau GM
(1994)
The fate of the CNS midline progenitors in Drosophila as revealed by a new method for single cell labelling.
Development
120:1895-1906[Abstract].
-
Bossing T,
Udolph G,
Doe CQ,
Technau GM
(1996)
The embryonic central nervous system lineages of Drosophila melanogaster. I. The neuroblast lineages derived from the ventral half of the neuroectoderm.
Dev Biol
179:41-64[Web of Science][Medline].
-
Broadie KS,
Bate M
(1993)
Development of the embryonic neuromuscular synapse of Drosophila melanogaster.
J Neurosci
13:144-166[Abstract].
-
Broadie K,
Sink H,
Van Vactor D,
Fambrough D,
Whitington PM,
Bate M,
Goodman CS
(1993)
From growth cone to synapse: the life history of the RP3 motor neuron.
Development [Suppl]
119:227-238.
-
Broadus J,
Skeath JB,
Spana E,
Bossing T,
Technau GM,
Doe CQ
(1995)
New neuroblast markers and the origin of the aCC/pCC neurons in the Drosophila CNS.
Mech Dev
54:1-10.
-
Burrows M
(1996)
In: The neurobiology of an insect brain. Oxford: Oxford UP.
-
Callahan CA,
Thomas JB
(1994)
Tau-b-galactosidase, an axon-targeted fusion protein.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
91:5972-5976[Abstract/Free Full Text].
-
Campos-Ortega JA,
Hartenstein V
(1985)
In: The embryonic development of Drosophila melanogaster. Berlin: Springer.
-
Carmena A,
Bate M,
Jimenez F
(1995)
lethal of scute, a proneural gene, participates in the specification of muscle progenitors during Drosophila embryogenesis.
Genes Dev
9:2373-2383[Abstract/Free Full Text].
-
Cash S,
Chiba A,
Keshishian H
(1992)
Alternate neuromuscular target selection following the loss of single muscle fibers in Drosophila.
J Neurosci
12:2051-2064[Abstract].
-
Chiba A,
Snow P,
Keshishian H,
Hotta Y
(1995)
Fasciclin III is a synaptic recognition molecule in Drosophila.
Nature
374:166-168[Medline].
-
Crossley A C
(1978)
The morphology and development of the Drosophila muscular system.
In: The genetics and biology of Drosophila, Vol 2b (Ashburner M,
Wright T,
eds), pp 499-560. New York: Academic.
-
Desai CJ,
Gindhart JG,
Goldstein LSB,
Zinn K
(1996)
Receptor tyrosine phosphatases are required for motor axon guidance in the Drosophila embryo.
Cell
84:599-609[Web of Science][Medline].
-
Doe CQ
(1992)
Molecular markers for identified neuroblasts and ganglion mother cells in the Drosophila central nervous system.
Development
116:855-863[Abstract].
-
Doe CQ,
Technau GM
(1993)
Identification and cell lineage of individual neural precursors in the Drosophila CNS.
Trends Neurosci
16:510-514[Web of Science][Medline].
-
Doe CQ,
Hiromi Y,
Gehring WJ,
Goodman CS
(1988)
Expression and function of the segmentation gene fushi tarazu during Drosophila neurogenesis.
Science
239:170-175[Abstract/Free Full Text].
-
Fambrough D,
Goodman CS
(1996)
The Drosophila beaten path gene encodes a novel secreted protein that regulates defasciculation at motor axon choice points.
Cell
87:1049-1058[Web of Science][Medline].
-
Goodman CS,
Doe CQ
(1993)
Embryonic development of the Drosophila central nervous system.
In: The Development of Drosophila melanogaster (Bate M,
Martinez Arias A,
eds), pp 1131-1206. Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory.
-
Gorczyca MG,
Randall WP,
Budnik V
(1994)
The role of tinman, a mesodermal cell fate gene, in axon pathfinding during the development of the transverse nerve in Drosophila.
Development
120:2143-2152[Abstract].
-
Halpern ME,
Chiba A,
Johansen J,
Keshishian H
(1991)
Growth cone behavior underlying the development of stereotypic synaptic connections in Drosophila embryos.
J Neurosci
11:3227-3238[Abstract].
-
Hartenstein V,
Campos-Ortega JA
(1984)
Early neurogenesis in wild-type Drosophila melanogaster.
Roux's Arch Dev Biol
193:308-325.
-
Johansen J,
Halpern ME,
Keshishian H
(1989)
Axonal guidance and the development of muscle fiber-specific innervation in Drosophila embryos.
J Neurosci
9:4318-4332[Abstract].
-
Keshishian H,
Chiba A,
Ning Chan T,
Halfon M,
Harkins E,
Jarecki J,
Wang L,
Anderson MD,
Cash S,
Halpern ME
(1993)
Cellular mechanisms governing synaptic development in Drosophila melanogaster.
J Neurobiol
24:757-787[Web of Science][Medline].
-
Keshishian H,
Broadie K,
Chiba A,
Bate M
(1996)
The Drosophila neuromuscular junction: a model system for studying synaptic development and function.
Annu Rev Neurosci
19:545-575[Web of Science][Medline].
-
Klämbt C,
Jacobs JR,
Goodman CS
(1991)
The midline of the Drosophila central nervous system: a model for the genetic analysis of cell fate, cell migration, and growth cone guidance.
Cell
64:801-815[Web of Science][Medline].
-
Krueger NX,
Van Vactor D,
Wan HI,
Gelbart WM,
Goodman CS,
Saito H
(1996)
The transmembrane tyrosine phosphatase DLAR controls motor axon guidance in Drosophila.
Cell
84:611-622[Web of Science][Medline].
-
Lin DM,
Goodman CS
(1994)
Ectopic and increased expression of Fasciclin II alters motoneuron growth cone guidance.
Neuron
13:507-523[Web of Science][Medline].
-
Lin DM,
Fetter RD,
Kopczynski C,
Grenningloh G,
Goodman CS
(1994)
Genetic analysis of Fasciclin II in Drosophila: defasciculation, refasciculation, and altered fasciculation.
Neuron
13:1055-1069[Web of Science][Medline].
-
Merritt DJ,
Whitington PM
(1995)
Central projections of sensory neurons in the Drosophila embryo correlate with sensory modality, soma position, and proneural gene function.
J Neurosci
15:1755-1767[Abstract].
-
Monastirioti M,
Gorczyca M,
Rapus J,
Eckert M,
White K,
Budnik V
(1995)
Octopamine immunoreactivity in the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster.
J Comp Neurol
356:275-287[Web of Science][Medline].
-
Sink H,
Whitington PM
(1991a)
Location and connectivity of abdominal motoneurons in the embryo and larva of Drosophila melanogaster.
J Neurobiol
22:298-311[Web of Science][Medline].
-
Sink H,
Whitington PM
(1991b)
Pathfinding in the central nervous system and periphery by identified embryonic Drosophila motor axons.
Development
112:307-316[Abstract].
-
Thomas JB,
Bastiani MJ,
Bate M,
Goodman CS
(1984)
From grasshopper to Drosophila: a common plan for neural development.
Nature
310:203-206[Medline].
-
Thor S,
Thomas JB
(1997)
The Drosophila islet gene governs axon pathfinding and neurotransmitter identity.
Neuron
18:397-409[Web of Science][Medline].
-
Udolph G,
Prokop A,
Bossing T,
Technau GM
(1993)
A common precursor for glia and neurons in the embryonic CNS of Drosophila gives rise to segment-specific lineage variants.
Development
118:765-775[Abstract].
-
Van Vactor D,
Sink H,
Fambrough D,
Tsoo R,
Goodman CS
(1993)
Genes that control neuromuscular specificity in Drosophila.
Cell
73:1137-1153[Web of Science][Medline].
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
K. D. Tran and C. Q. Doe
Pdm and Castor close successive temporal identity windows in the NB3-1 lineage
Development,
November 1, 2008;
135(21):
3491 - 3499.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
P. Ungerer and G. Scholtz
Filling the gap between identified neuroblasts and neurons in crustaceans adds new support for Tetraconata
Proc R Soc B,
February 22, 2008;
275(1633):
369 - 376.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
L. Nicholson, G. K. Singh, T. Osterwalder, G. W. Roman, R. L. Davis, and H. Keshishian
Spatial and Temporal Control of Gene Expression in Drosophila Using the Inducible GeneSwitch GAL4 System. I. Screen for Larval Nervous System Drivers
Genetics,
January 1, 2008;
178(1):
215 - 234.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
C. M. Miller, A. Page-McCaw, and H. T. Broihier
Matrix metalloproteinases promote motor axon fasciculation in the Drosophila embryo
Development,
January 1, 2008;
135(1):
95 - 109.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. Serpe and M. B. O'Connor
The metalloprotease Tolloid-related and its TGF-{beta}-like substrate Dawdle regulate Drosophila motoneuron axon guidance
Development,
December 15, 2006;
133(24):
4969 - 4979.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
L. Parker, J. E. Ellis, M. Q. Nguyen, and K. Arora
The divergent TGF-{beta} ligand Dawdle utilizes an activin pathway to influence axon guidance in Drosophila
Development,
December 15, 2006;
133(24):
4981 - 4991.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. C. Ayoob, J. R. Terman, and A. L. Kolodkin
Drosophila Plexin B is a Sema-2a receptor required for axon guidance
Development,
June 1, 2006;
133(11):
2125 - 2135.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. Garces and S. Thor
Specification of Drosophila aCC motoneuron identity by a genetic cascade involving even-skipped, grain and zfh1
Development,
April 15, 2006;
133(8):
1445 - 1455.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
L. E. Fox, D. R. Soll, and C.-F. Wu
Coordination and Modulation of Locomotion Pattern Generators in Drosophila Larvae: Effects of Altered Biogenic Amine Levels by the Tyramine beta Hydroxlyase Mutation
J. Neurosci.,
February 1, 2006;
26(5):
1486 - 1498.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. Fujioka, R. J. Wessells, Z. Han, J. Liu, K. Fitzgerald, G. L. Yusibova, M. Zamora, P. Ruiz-Lozano, R. Bodmer, and J. B. Jaynes
Embryonic even skipped-Dependent Muscle and Heart Cell Fates Are Required for Normal Adult Activity, Heart Function, and Lifespan
Circ. Res.,
November 25, 2005;
97(11):
1108 - 1114.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
I. Miguel-Aliaga and S. Thor
Segment-specific prevention of pioneer neuron apoptosis by cell-autonomous, postmitotic Hox gene activity
Development,
December 15, 2004;
131(24):
6093 - 6105.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. J. Certel and S. Thor
Specification of Drosophila motoneuron identity by the combinatorial action of POU and LIM-HD factors
Development,
November 1, 2004;
131(21):
5429 - 5439.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. W. Truman, H. Schuppe, D. Shepherd, and D. W. Williams
Developmental architecture of adult-specific lineages in the ventral CNS of Drosophila
Development,
October 15, 2004;
131(20):
5167 - 5184.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. C. Ayoob, H.-H. Yu, J. R. Terman, and A. L. Kolodkin
The Drosophila Receptor Guanylyl Cyclase Gyc76C Is Required for Semaphorin-1a-Plexin A-Mediated Axonal Repulsion
J. Neurosci.,
July 28, 2004;
24(30):
6639 - 6649.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. C. Choi, D. Park, and L. C. Griffith
Electrophysiological and Morphological Characterization of Identified Motor Neurons in the Drosophila Third Instar Larva Central Nervous System
J Neurophysiol,
May 1, 2004;
91(5):
2353 - 2365.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. Fujioka, B. C. Lear, M. Landgraf, G. L. Yusibova, J. Zhou, K. M. Riley, N. H. Patel, and J. B. Jaynes
Even-skipped, acting as a repressor, regulates axonal projections in Drosophila
Development,
November 15, 2003;
130(22):
5385 - 5400.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
K. G. Johnson and D. Van Vactor
Receptor Protein Tyrosine Phosphatases in Nervous System Development
Physiol Rev,
January 1, 2003;
83(1):
1 - 24.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. Lohr, T. Godenschwege, E. Buchner, and A. Prokop
Compartmentalization of Central Neurons in Drosophila: A New Strategy of Mosaic Analysis Reveals Localization of Presynaptic Sites to Specific Segments of Neurites
J. Neurosci.,
December 1, 2002;
22(23):
10357 - 10367.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. Rohrbough and K. Broadie
Electrophysiological Analysis of Synaptic Transmission in Central Neurons of Drosophila Larvae
J Neurophysiol,
August 1, 2002;
88(2):
847 - 860.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. D. Kim, P. Kolodziej, and A. Chiba
Growth Cone Pathfinding and Filopodial Dynamics Are Mediated Separately by Cdc42 Activation
J. Neurosci.,
March 1, 2002;
22(5):
1794 - 1806.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. Lee and P. A. Kolodziej
Short Stop provides an essential link between F-actin and microtubules during axon extension
Development,
January 3, 2002;
129(5):
1195 - 1204.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
B. D. Wolf and A. Chiba
Axon pathfinding proceeds normally despite disrupted growth cone decisions at CNS midline
Development,
May 15, 2000;
127(10):
2001 - 2009.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. Lee, K.-L. Harris, P. M. Whitington, and P. A. Kolodziej
short stop Is Allelic to kakapo, and Encodes Rod-Like Cytoskeletal-Associated Proteins Required for Axon Extension
J. Neurosci.,
February 1, 2000;
20(3):
1096 - 1108.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. Certel, P. Clyne, J. Carlson, and W. Johnson
Regulation of central neuron synaptic targeting by the Drosophila POU protein, Acj6
Development,
January 6, 2000;
127(11):
2395 - 2405.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
B Kuang, S. Wu, Y Shin, L Luo, and P Kolodziej
split ends encodes large nuclear proteins that regulate neuronal cell fate and axon extension in the Drosophila embryo
Development,
January 4, 2000;
127(7):
1517 - 1529.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A Schmid, A Chiba, and C. Doe
Clonal analysis of Drosophila embryonic neuroblasts: neural cell types, axon projections and muscle targets
Development,
January 11, 1999;
126(21):
4653 - 4689.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
C Englund, A. Uv, R Cantera, L. Mathies, M. Krasnow, and C Samakovlis
adrift, a novel bnl-induced Drosophila gene, required for tracheal pathfinding into the CNS
Development,
January 4, 1999;
126(7):
1505 - 1514.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
C. Desai, P. Garrity, H Keshishian, S. Zipursky, and K Zinn
The Drosophila SH2-SH3 adapter protein Dock is expressed in embryonic axons and facilitates synapse formation by the RP3 motoneuron
Development,
January 4, 1999;
126(7):
1527 - 1535.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. Prokop, J. Uhler, J. Roote, and M. Bate
The kakapo Mutation Affects Terminal Arborization and Central Dendritic Sprouting of Drosophila Motorneurons
J. Cell Biol.,
November 30, 1998;
143(5):
1283 - 1294.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
E. Shishido, M. Takeichi, and A. Nose
Drosophila Synapse Formation: Regulation by Transmembrane Protein with Leu-Rich Repeats, CAPRICIOUS
Science,
June 26, 1998;
280(5372):
2118 - 2121.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
B Wolf, M. Seeger, and A Chiba
Commissureless endocytosis is correlated with initiation of neuromuscular synaptogenesis
Development,
January 10, 1998;
125(19):
3853 - 3863.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
K. Menon and K Zinn
Tyrosine kinase inhibition produces specific alterations in axon guidance in the grasshopper embryo
Development,
January 10, 1998;
125(20):
4121 - 4131.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. J. Renger, W.-D. Yao, M. B. Sokolowski, and C.-F. Wu
Neuronal Polymorphism among Natural Alleles of a cGMP-Dependent Kinase Gene, foraging, in Drosophila
J. Neurosci.,
October 1, 1999;
19(19):
RC28 - RC28.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
|