Previous Article | Next Article 
Volume 17, Number 5,
Issue of March 1, 1997
pp. 1616-1624
Copyright ©1997 Society for Neuroscience
Coexpression of Two Odorant-Binding Protein Homologs in
Drosophila: Implications for Olfactory Coding
Daria S. Hekmat-Scafe1,
R. Alexander Steinbrecht2, and
John R. Carlson1
1 Department of Biology, Yale University, New Haven,
Connecticut 06520-8103, and 2 Max-Planck-Institut für
Verhaltensphysiologie, D-82319 Seewiesen, Germany
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
FOOTNOTES
REFERENCES
ABSTRACT
Odorant-binding proteins (OBPs) are small soluble proteins present
in the aqueous medium surrounding olfactory receptor neurons. Their
function in olfaction is still unknown: they have been proposed to
facilitate the transit of hydrophobic molecules to olfactory receptors,
to deactivate the odorant stimulus, and/or to play a role in
chemosensory coding. In this study we examine the genomic organization
and expression patterns of two
olfactory-specific genes
(OS-E and OS-F) of
Drosophila melanogaster, the products of which are
members of a protein family in Drosophila sharing sequence similarity with moth OBPs. We show that the
OS-E and OS-F transcription units are
located <1 kb apart. They are oriented in the same direction and
display a similar intron-exon organization. Expression of both OS-E
and OS-F proteins is restricted spatially to the ventrolateral region
of the Drosophila antenna. Within this region both OS-E
and OS-F proteins are expressed within two different types of sensory
hairs: in most, if not all, sensilla trichodea and in ~40% of the
interspersed small sensilla basiconica. We consistently observe that
OS-E and OS-F are coexpressed, indicating that an individual sensillum
can contain more than one odorant-binding protein. The functional
significance of the observed expression pattern and its implications
for olfactory coding are discussed.
Key words:
odorant-binding protein;
Drosophila;
sensilla;
olfaction;
antenna;
pheromone-binding protein
INTRODUCTION
In the olfactory systems of terrestrial animals,
olfactory receptor neurons extend dendrites into an aqueous phase
(vertebrate nasal mucus or insect sensillar lymph) that protects them
from desiccation (Farbman, 1992
; Hildebrand, 1995
). It is not known how
hydrophobic odorant molecules traverse these aqueous barriers to reach
the odorant receptors. However, both vertebrate olfactory mucus and
insect sensillar lymph contain families of small, abundant water-soluble odorant-binding proteins (OBPs) that have been proposed to shuttle hydrophobic odorants to and/or from odorant receptors (Pelosi, 1994
; Pelosi and Maida, 1995
; Prestwich et al., 1995
).
In addition to potentially transporting odorant molecules, OBPs also
may play a role in olfactory coding. Multiple related OBPs have been
found within the same vertebrate or moth species (Pelosi, 1994
; Pelosi
and Maida, 1995
). These different OBPs may recognize different
odorants: two OBPs expressed in the moth Antheraea pernyi
have been shown to display different binding preferences for two moth
pheromones (Du and Prestwich, 1995
; Prestwich et al., 1995
). If OBPs
with different odorant specificities are restricted to different
regions of the olfactory system, they might influence which odorants
have access to the underlying olfactory receptors in these regions
(Vogt et al., 1991
).
Moths contain two classes of OBPs: pheromone-binding proteins (PBPs),
which bind pheromones in vitro (Vogt and Riddiford, 1981
),
and general odorant-binding proteins (GOBPs), the ligands of which are
unknown (Breer et al., 1990
). PBPs and GOBPs are present at high
concentrations in the sensillar lymph surrounding the dendrites of
receptor cells tuned to pheromones or general odorants, respectively
(Laue et al., 1994
; Steinbrecht et al., 1992
, 1995
).
In Drosophila, a family of genes has been isolated, the
predicted products of which share sequence similarity with moth OBPs and the transcripts of which are restricted to various subregions of
the olfactory system (McKenna et al., 1994
; Pikielny et al., 1994
). We
have concentrated on two such olfactory-specific genes (OS-E
and OS-F), the products of which are structurally
similar (68% amino acid identity). OS-E and OS-F
transcripts both are observed specifically in the ventrolateral region
of the antenna (McKenna et al., 1994
; Pikielny et al., 1994
). This
pattern is similar to the distribution of one class of olfactory
sensory hairs, the sensilla trichodea (Venkatesh and Singh, 1984
). The ventrolateral region of the Drosophila antenna also contains
a number of small sensilla basiconica, although most sensilla
basiconica are located in the reciprocal dorsomedial region of the
antenna (Venkatesh and Singh, 1984
; Stocker, 1994
).
Drosophila sensilla basiconica respond to general odorants
(Siddiqi, 1987
), as has been observed in other insects.
In this study, we show that the OS-E and OS-F
genes are located <1 kb apart and contain a similar intron-exon
organization. We demonstrate that expression of both OS-E and OS-F
proteins is restricted spatially to two distinct types of olfactory
hairs located in the ventrolateral region of the antenna: most, if not all, sensilla trichodea and a subset of the small sensilla basiconica. Most interestingly, our immunocytochemical EM studies reveal that OS-E
and OS-F are coexpressed, in the sense that all sensilla examined that
express one also express the other. Thus, an individual sensillum can
contain more than one odorant-binding protein. This finding has
potential implications for the roles of odorant-binding proteins in
olfactory coding.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Mapping the OS-E and OS-F genomic
region. The
GE1 and
GE3 clones, which carry OS-E
and OS-F genomic DNA, were isolated (McKenna et al., 1994
)
from a Canton-S genomic library in
EMBL3 (kindly provided by I. Dawson, Yale University) with an OS-E cDNA probe. Plasmid
subclones of portions of these genomic DNAs were prepared as follows: A
4.7 kb HindIII fragment of
GE1 (containing
OS-E as well as the first exon of OS-F)
was cloned into XbaI-cut pBluescript KS+
(Stratagene, La Jolla, CA) to create pDH58; a 1.9 kb SalI
fragment of
GE1 (containing the first exon of
OS-F) was cloned into BamHI-cut pBluescript KS+ to create pDH59; and a 12 kb
SalI fragment of
GE3 (containing the last three exons of
OS-F) was cloned into BamHI-cut
pBluescript KS+ to create pDH60. In all cases, the recessed
termini of the vector and insert were partially filled in with Klenow
and the first two dNTPs to create cohesive termini, as described (Hung
and Wensink, 1984
). Restriction mapping of pDH58-60 was performed by
standard procedures (Sambrook et al., 1989
).
A series of 5
and 3
primers was designed to span the OS-E
and OS-F cDNA sequences (McKenna et al., 1994
) (GenBank
accession numbers U02543[GenBank] and U02542[GenBank], respectively). These primers were
used to amplify OS-E and OS-F genomic sequences
(from pDH58 or pDH59-60, respectively) or cDNA sequences [from pDH50 or FF4 (McKenna et al., 1994
), respectively], using PCR. PCR
conditions were as follows: denaturation at 94°C for 5 min, followed
by 35 cycles of 48°C for 1 min, 72°C for 2 min, and 94°C for 45 sec, and then one cycle of 48°C for 3 min and 72°C for 10 min. PCR reaction products were analyzed by 1.2% agarose/Tris borate EDTA gel
electrophoresis. In cases in which PCR amplification of the corresponding genomic and cDNA clones produced fragments of identical size, we concluded that no intron was present in the corresponding stretch of genomic DNA. When the PCR product produced from a genomic template was larger than one made from the cDNA template, we concluded that one or more introns were present in the stretch of genomic DNA.
Both strands of the corresponding stretch of genomic DNA were subjected
to dideoxynucleotide sequence analysis with the appropriate PCR primers
and a Sequenase 2.0 kit (Stratagene), according to the manufacturer's
directions. In each case, the intron insertion site was determined from
both directions. Additional genomic sequence analysis of portions of
the long 5
untranslated region of OS-F (present in pDH59)
was performed to ensure that no additional introns were present.
Sequence analysis of the OS-E and OS-F 5
upstream regions in pDH58 and pDH60, respectively, was performed in an
analogous manner. Additional sequencing of the third OS-F
intron and the intervening region between OS-E and
OS-F was done by the W. M. Keck Foundation Biotechnology
Resource Laboratory at Yale University. The OS-E and
OS-F genomic sequences have been submitted to GenBank
(U81502[GenBank] and U81503[GenBank], respectively).
Two bacteriophage P1 (DS00431 and DS06666) carrying ~80 kb inserts of
Drosophila genomic DNA (Smoller et al., 1991
), which cross-hybridized to a hexamer-labeled (Feinberg and Vogelstein, 1983
)
OS-F probe, were identified by Southern hybridization
(Sambrook et al., 1989
). Bacteriophage DNAs were prepared as described
(Pierce and Sternberg, 1992
) from a series of isolates of the
Drosophila P1 library known to map to chromosomal region
83CD (Berkeley Drosophila Genome Project) and were bound to
nitrocellulose with a Hybri-Slot filtration manifold (BRL, Bethesda,
MD), essentially as described by the manufacturer. The position and
orientation of the OS-E and OS-F genomic locus on
a deduced restriction map encompassing DS06666 and a portion of DS00431
were used to determine the orientation of the OS-E and
OS-F locus relative to the centromere of Chromosome III.
Production and purification of His-tagged OS-E and OS-F proteins.
A DNA fragment corresponding to mature OS-E carrying a
6xHis tag at its C terminus was produced by PCR amplification of pDH50 (McKenna et al., 1994
) with the 5
primer E9 (5
GGG ATT CCA TAT GCA
GGA ACC AAG GCG CGA TGG) and the 3
primer E5 (5
GCT CTA GAT TAA TGG
TGA TGG TGA TGG TGG ACC AAA AAG TAG TGG ACA GG). One corresponding to
mature OS-F carrying a 6xHis tag at its C terminus was
produced by PCR amplification of FF4 (McKenna et al., 1994
) with the 5
primer F7 (5
GGA ATT CCA TAT GCT GAT CCT GCC GCC GGC TGC) and the 3
primer F4 (5
GCT CTA GAT TAA TGG TGA TGG TGA TGG TGC GGC AAG AAG TAG
TGC TTG G). Vent DNA polymerase (New England Biolabs, Beverly, MA) was
used as recommended by the manufacturer. PCR conditions were as
follows: denaturation at 94°C for 5 min, followed by 15 cycles of
55°C for 45 sec, 72°C for 1 min, and 94°C for 45 sec, and then
one cycle of 55°C for 45 sec and 72°C for 5 min. Tagged
OS-E and OS-F fragments were subcloned into the
T7-SS expression plasmid (a kind gift of S. J. Smerdon, Yale University) to create pDH97 and pDH98, respectively.
Cultures of Escherichia coli strain BL21 (
DE3) carrying
either pDH97 or pDH98 were harvested after 3 hr of induction with 4 mM isopropyl thiogalactoside (IPTG). Frozen cell pellets
were resuspended in 10 ml of buffer A (6 mM guanidinium
HCl, 0.1 M Na-phosphate, and 0.01 M Tris, pH
8.0) containing 10 mM
-mercaptoethanol (
-ME), and
His-tagged OS-E and OS-F proteins were isolated on Ni-NTA resin
(Qiagen, Hilden, Germany) under denaturing conditions as recommended by
the manufacturer, except that a batch procedure (Nonet et al., 1993
)
was used. Proteins were renatured under oxidizing conditions used
successfully for Antheraea polyphemus PBP (Prestwich, 1993
),
except that dialysis was concurrent with renaturation. Briefly, 5.5 ml
of each eluate was brought to 14.5 mM cysteine, pH 8, and
incubated on a room temperature rotator for 10 min to oxidize the
residual
-ME. Then the resulting samples were dialyzed overnight at
4°C in 0.1 M Tris, 5 mM cysteine, and 0.02%
sodium azide (NaN3), pH 8. The samples were concentrated to
~1 mg/ml in PBS, pH 8, using Centriprep-10 filters (Amicon, Beverly,
MA), as described by the manufacturer.
Production and affinity purification of anti-E and anti-F
antisera. For production of each antiserum, four mice were
immunized with 50 µg of the corresponding His-tagged protein, boosted
with an additional 50 µg of protein after 3 and 5 weeks, and then
boosted with 10 µg of protein every 4 weeks thereafter. The protein
preparations were mixed with equal volumes of Complete Freund's
adjuvant for the initial immunizations and of Incomplete Freund's
adjuvant for the subsequent boosts. Aliquots (100 µl) of anti-E and
anti-F antisera were affinity-purified on 100 µg of the corresponding His-tagged protein coupled to Reacti-Gel 6x beads (Pierce) in 0.1 M Na-borate, pH 8.5, as indicated by the manufacturer. The affinity purification procedure of Harlow and Lane (1988)
was adapted
for a microfuge tube; all steps were performed at room temperature.
Each serum sample was diluted fivefold with 10 mM Tris, pH
7.5, and incubated with the corresponding beads for 45 min on a
rotator, compacted (~0.5 min at 500 × g), and washed with 10 mM Tris, pH 7.5, and then with 10 mM
Tris, pH 7.5/0.5 mM NaCl. Bound protein was eluted by a 15 min incubation with 0.1 M glycine, pH 2.5 (corresponding to
2.5× the original volume of serum), and the eluate was combined
immediately with an equal volume of 1 M Tris, pH 8.0, 100 µg/ml bovine serum albumin, and 0.02% NaN3.
For preparation of subtracted anti-E antibody, the primary anti-E serum
(diluted fivefold with 10 mM Tris, pH 7.5) was added to
OS-F-coupled beads and incubated on a rotator for 1.5 hr at room
temperature. Then the beads were compacted and the unbound antibody
fraction applied to OS-E-coupled beads and affinity-purified as
described above, except that bound protein was eluted with a volume of
0.1 M glycine, pH 2.5, which corresponded to 12.5× the
original volume of serum. The reciprocal purification scheme was used
to prepare the subtracted anti-F antibody. All affinity-purified antibodies were stored at 4°C.
Western analysis and immunolocalization. The
Drosophila strain used for all immunological analyses, D222,
is a derivative of Canton S-5 (Helfand and Carlson, 1989
) made isogenic
for Chromosome III (where OS-E and OS-F are
located). Drosophila antennae were collected from equal
numbers of males and females after immersion in liquid nitrogen as
described by Störtkuhl et al. (1994)
. SDS-PAGE sample buffer
(Sambrook et al., 1989
) was added directly to the frozen antennae, the
sample heated to 95°C for 10 min, and the sample microfuged at top
speed for 10 min to pellet cellular debris.
SDS-PAGE and Western transfer to BA83 nitrocellulose (Schleicher & Schuell, Keene, NH) were done by standard methods (Sambrook et al.,
1989
). Protein was detected with a Western light chemiluminescent detection system (Tropix, Bedford, MA) essentially as described by the
manufacturer, except that blocking was done overnight at 4°C.
Preimmune sera were diluted 1:1000, the 5× more dilute
affinity-purified antisera 1:200, and the 25× more dilute subtracted
antisera 1:40.
Immunohistochemistry on Drosophila head sections was
performed as described by Raha and Carlson (1994)
, except that tissue fixation was accomplished by a 1 min incubation in Histochoice (AMRESCO, Solon, OH), and detection was performed with a Vectastain ABC
elite kit (Vector Labs, Burlingame, Ca) essentially as described by the
manufacturer. Preimmune sera were diluted 1:2000 and affinity-purified antisera, 1:200. The secondary antibody, biotinylated anti-mouse IgG
(Vector Labs), was diluted 1:300.
For immunocytochemistry at the electron microscopic level,
Drosophila antennae and maxillary palps were cryofixed by
plunging the heads with the attached appendages into super-cooled
propane at
180°C. Then specimens were freeze-substituted in acetone
(pure or containing 3% glutaraldehyde) at
80°C, embedded in LR
White resin (London Resin) at room temperature and polymerized at
60°C (Steinbrecht, 1993
). Ultrathin sections were cut with a diamond knife on a Reichert OmU2 ultramicrotome and picked up on Formvar-coated single-hole grids. The affinity-purified anti-E and anti-F antisera were diluted from 1:200 to 1:1000; the corresponding subtracted antibodies were diluted from 1:60 to 1:200. Preimmune sera, used as
control, were diluted from 1:200 to 1:10000. Goat anti-mouse IgG
conjugated with 10 nm of colloidal gold (BioCell, Cardiff, UK) was used
as the secondary antibody and was diluted 1:20. Silver intensification
(Danscher, 1981
) enlarged the grains to ~40 nm. Further details of
the immunocytochemical protocol are described by Steinbrecht et al.
(1995)
.
RESULTS
OS-E and OS-F genes are located in close
proximity to each other
A detailed analysis of the genomic region encompassing OS-E
and OS-F is shown in Figure
1A. The OS-E and
OS-F transcription units are 0.64 and 3.7 kb, respectively.
The two transcription units are oriented in the same direction ~930
bp apart (Fig. 1A). Two small introns are present in
the OS-E coding region: one of 62 bp between E24
and W25 and another of 50 bp between D49 and
E50 (Fig. 1B). OS-F has three
introns in its coding region: one of 79 bp between N38 and
Y39, one of 429 bp between E63 and
A64, and one of 54 bp between K149 and
H150. OS-F has a fourth intron of ~2.2 kb in
its 5
noncoding region. The two introns in OS-E are present
at locations identical to those of two of the introns in
OS-F (Fig. 1B).
Fig. 1.
Genomic organization of OS-E and
OS-F genes. A, Genomic organization of
the OS-E and OS-F transcription units.
Both genes are transcribed from left to
right, as indicated by the arrows. Exons
of cDNAs are indicated by thick boxes, and introns are
shown as thin lines below these boxes.
Coding sequences are shown as striated boxes; noncoding
sequences are indicated by solid boxes. B, Sequence of a portion of OS-E and
OS-F showing the location of two introns found at
identical positions in each gene. The sequence alignment between
OS-E and OS-F corresponds to amino acids
24-51 of OS-E and 38-65 of OS-F. The
first of six conserved cysteine residues is boxed.
Intron sizes and insertion sites (arrowheads) are
indicated. Note that the two introns in OS-E (62 and 50 bp in size) are located at positions corresponding to those of two introns in OS-F (79 and 429 bp in size).
[View Larger Version of this Image (13K GIF file)]
Genomic DNA upstream of the presumptive OS-E and
OS-F transcriptional start sites, as determined by 5
reverse transcriptase amplification of cDNA (McKenna et al., 1994
;
Pikielny et al., 1994
), revealed a TATAAA sequence at
29 relative to
the 5
end of the OS-F cDNA. Although no clear TATA box was seen in the
OS-E upstream DNA, the sequence ATAAAA was present at
32
from the 5
end of the cDNA. Analysis of several hundred nucleotides of genomic DNA sequence upstream of OS-E and OS-F
does not reveal extensive sequence similarities between the upstream
regions of the two genes. However, the 225 bp upstream of the
OS-E 5
end contains five precise repeats and one variant
repeat (containing one different nucleotide) of the octamer PyCATTTPuPy
(data not shown), which may represent a repeated enhancer motif. The
425 bp upstream of the OS-F 5
end contains three precise
and three variant repeats of the related heptamer CATTTPuPy (data not
shown).
Low-stringency Southern hybridization of EcoRI,
HindIII, BamHI, or XbaI-digested
genomic DNA with either an OS-E or OS-F cDNA probe revealed
only the expected OS-E and OS-F fragments (data not shown), suggesting that there are no other genes closely related to
OS-E/OS-F either in this cluster or elsewhere in the
Drosophila genome.
OS-E and OS-F are found in two types of sensilla
Recombinant bacterially expressed proteins corresponding to mature
OS-E or OS-F (each with a "6xHis tag" of six Histidine residues at
the C terminus) were used to generate polyclonal anti-E and anti-F
antisera in mice. Western analysis revealed that affinity-purified anti-E and anti-F antisera both recognize small proteins expressed in
antennae, but not heads (Fig. 2). The sizes of the
antennal proteins detected with the anti-E and anti-F antisera were
14.5 and 13.5, respectively, which are in reasonable agreement with those expected for mature OS-E and OS-F
14.4 and 14.1 kDa,
respectively (McKenna et al., 1994
). Neither preimmune serum
demonstrates discernible reactivity with proteins present in either the
antennal or head extract. Male and female antennae showed no
significant differences in the sizes or abundance of OS-E and OS-F
proteins (data not shown).
Fig. 2.
Western analysis of OS-E and OS-F proteins in
Drosophila antennae and heads. Body parts were collected
from equal numbers of male and female Drosophila.
Fractions of the resulting extracts corresponding to 25 antennae
(A) or 11/2 heads depleted of antennae (H) were subjected to 15% SDS-PAGE and
transferred to nitrocellulose. Primary antisera were either
affinity-purified anti-OS-E (
-E), affinity-purified anti-OS-F (
-F), or preimmune
sera from the corresponding mice. Positions of molecular weight markers
are indicated on the right.
[View Larger Version of this Image (70K GIF file)]
Immunohistochemical analysis with the affinity-purified anti-E and
anti-F antisera shows labeling in the lateral and ventral region of the
antenna (Fig. 3A), where their transcripts
are also present (McKenna et al., 1994
). Labeling often was found
beneath individual sensilla trichodea (Fig. 3B) and,
occasionally, sensilla basiconica (data not shown). Although the
resolution of this analysis does not allow a precise identification of
the cells labeled, we note that the location of the label directly
beneath the cuticle corresponds to the position of the sensillar
auxiliary cells and the sensillum lymph cavities; neuronal cell bodies
are located further below the cuticle (R. A. S., unpublished
observations). In some cases staining extends into the sensory hair
itself (Fig. 3B). No discernible staining was observed in
the brain or other chemosensory organs (maxillary palps and proboscis)
with either the anti-E or anti-F antiserum (Fig. 3C and data
not shown). The anti-F antiserum did show some staining in the eye.
Because no OS-F transcript is detectable in the eye by RNA
in situ hybridization (McKenna et al., 1994
) nor OS-F
protein in heads by Western (Fig. 2), this staining most likely
reflects nonspecific labeling.
Fig. 3.
Immunohistochemical staining of OS-E and OS-F in
Drosophila antennae. A, Representative
immunohistochemical staining of a Drosophila antenna
with affinity-purified
-E (1:200). The antenna is oriented such that
lateral is right and ventral is down.
Strong staining is observed beneath the cuticle in the lateral portion of the antenna. The strongest staining is in the region whose boundaries are indicated by arrows; weaker staining is
observed in the area indicated by the dotted lines.
Magnification is 200×. B, Representative
immunohistochemical staining of a Drosophila antenna
with affinity-purified
-F (1:200). Again, lateral is right and ventral is down. Staining
observed beneath three individual sensilla trichodea is indicated by
arrows. Magnification is 400×. C,
Immunohistochemical staining of a Drosophila head
section with affinity-purified
-E (1:200). The right half of the
head is shown such that lateral is right and ventral is
down. Note the absence of discernible specific staining
in the brain (left, center to top) and eye (right). Magnification is
50×.
[View Larger Version of this Image (82K GIF file)]
The sensillar and subcellular distribution of OS-E and OS-F proteins
was examined at higher resolution with immunocytochemical electron
microscopy. In the electron microscope, sensilla trichodea can be
distinguished from sensilla basiconica by the thicker cuticular wall of
the sensilla trichodea. In addition, sensilla trichodea have
essentially unbranched outer dendritic segments and a smaller number of
pores per unit of surface area, as compared with the sensilla
basiconica, which display branched dendrites and a high pore density
(Venkatesh and Singh, 1984
; R. A. S., unpublished observations).
However, on a single section this discrimination may not always be
unequivocal, because the sensilla trichodea display progressively
thinner walls and some dendritic branching toward the tip. Hence,
accurate assessment of sensillar type requires a reconstruction of a
series of sections through the same sensillum. Another potential
complication is that intermediate sensillar types have been observed in
other insect species and most likely occur in Drosophila as
well (Steinbrecht, 1996a
).
Sensilla that were labeled by anti-E or anti-F antibodies displayed the
highest labeling density over the extracellular sensillum lymph in the
lumen of the sensory hair as well as in the sensillum lymph cavity
below the base of the hair (Fig.
4A-C). We did not observe labeling of
either dendrites or cell bodies of olfactory receptor neurons. Some
intracellular labeling was found in the sensillar auxiliary cells (Fig.
4B). Neither epidermal cells nor hemolymph was
labeled. The cuticle often showed some nonspecific background, which
also was observed when preimmune serum was substituted for
affinity-purified antibody.
Fig. 4.
Immunocytochemical localization of OS-E and OS-F
in Drosophila olfactory sensilla. A,
Longitudinal section through the base of a sensillum trichodeum labeled
with
-F (1:1000). The sensillum lymph in the hair lumen and in the
cavity below the hair base is strongly labeled. P, Pore;
D, dendrite, C, cuticle.
B, Cross section of an olfactory sensillum below the
hair base labeled with
-E (1:200). Most gold grains
are found over the extracellular sensillum lymph (SL)
between the microvilli and microlamellae of the auxiliary cells, but
there is also some intracellular labeling in the tormogen cell
(To). Part of another labeled sensillum is seen in the
bottom right corner. Dendrites (D) and
epidermal cells (E) are not labeled. The few grains
found over the cuticle (C) represent nonspecific
background. C, Representative cross section through the
distal portion of the third antennal segment after immunolabeling with
-E (1:200). A sensillum trichodeum (T) and three unspecified sensilla (
) are labeled, showing a high density of
gold grains. A sensillum basiconicum (B), a sensillum
coeloconicum (Co), and two unspecified sensilla
(O) are not labeled. The few scattered gold grains
observed in nonlabeled areas represent nonspecific background.
[View Larger Version of this Image (162K GIF file)]
The immunolabeled sections revealed no differences between males and
females, and the data from both sexes were, therefore, pooled. OS-E and
OS-F were labeled in all typical sensilla trichodea (n = 102) and in 8 of 10 intermediate cases in which discrimination between sensilla trichodea and basiconica was uncertain. A fraction of
the small sensilla basiconica, which are found intermingled between the
sensilla trichodea on the ventrolateral portion of the antenna, also
was labeled (15 of 34 sensilla examined). The labeling density on these
sensilla was consistently lower than on the sensilla trichodea (Fig.
5). No labeling was observed in the large sensilla
basiconica (n = 24), which are found primarily in the
dorsomedial portion of the antenna, nor in hairs of another class, the
sensilla coeloconica (n = 17).
Fig. 5.
Representative immunocytochemical labeling of two
classes of olfactory sensilla with subtracted antiserum against OS-E
(1:60). Two sensilla trichodea (T) are strongly
labeled; a sensillum basiconicum (B) shows weaker
labeling (reduced density of gold grains). In the bottom left
corner, part of another labeled sensillum is visible. S, Spinule (noninnervated microtrichium).
[View Larger Version of this Image (140K GIF file)]
OS-E and OS-F colocalize in individual sensilla
Antisera that are specific for OS-E or OS-F were produced by
removing the fraction of one antiserum that bound to the second protein
(cross-linked to beads), followed by affinity purification of the
subtracted antiserum on beads containing the first protein (Fig.
6A). The antisera were specific for
either OS-E or OS-F, respectively, on Western blots of extracts from
bacteria expressing OS-E or OS-F (Fig. 6B). We noted
the presence of faintly labeled dimer-sized bands of ~30 kDa in
extracts prepared from bacteria expressing either OS-E or OS-F.
Fig. 6.
Subtracted anti-OS-E and anti-OS-F antisera are
specific. A, Preparation of the subtracted anti-OS-E
antiserum (
-E). (The reciprocal procedure was used to prepare
subtracted anti-OS-F antiserum.) Briefly, the primary anti-OS-E
antiserum was incubated with purified OS-F (conjugated to beads) to
deplete it of antibodies that also recognize OS-F. Then the depleted
anti-OS-E antiserum was affinity-purified by binding to purified OS-E
(conjugated to beads) and then by subsequent elution. B,
Western analysis showing that the subtracted anti-OS-E and anti-OS-F
antisera are each specific for the corresponding purified protein. 0.1 µg of OS-E (E) and OS-F (F)
protein, purified from E. coli, were subjected to 15%
SDS-PAGE and transferred to nitrocellulose. The subtracted affinity-purified
-E (left) or
-F
(right) antiserum served as the primary antibody.
Positions of molecular weight markers are indicated on the
right. Note the presence of a faint dimer-sized band of
~30 kDa in the extreme left lane.
[View Larger Version of this Image (19K GIF file)]
Using these subtracted affinity-purified antisera on alternating
sections (Fig. 7A,B), we were able to check
for the presence of both OS-E and OS-F in a series of individual
sensilla. Whenever a sensillum was labeled by subtracted anti-OS-E, it
also was labeled by anti-OS-F, and vice versa (n = 113 sensilla). There were also a number of sensilla that were not labeled
by either antiserum, in particular those in the dorsomedial region of
the antenna. The simplest interpretation of these results is that at
least some individual sensilla contain more than one odorant-binding protein.
Fig. 7.
Immunocytochemical demonstration of OS-E and OS-F
colocalization in olfactory hairs. A and
B represent sections (~0.4 µM apart) of
a section series through the same two sensilla. A is
labeled by subtracted
-F (1:60), whereas
B is labeled by subtracted
-E (1:60).
In both sections, the sensillum trichodeum (T) is
strongly labeled, whereas the sensillum basiconicum (B)
remains unlabeled. S, Spinule.
[View Larger Version of this Image (123K GIF file)]
DISCUSSION
In this article we present evidence that OS-E and
OS-F, two members of a Drosophila family of genes
that encode proteins structurally related to moth OBPs, are located <1
kb apart and are coordinately expressed. We find that both OS-E and
OS-F proteins are expressed in the same region of the
Drosophila antenna and that both are present within two
distinct classes of olfactory sensilla. Moreover, we consistently
observe coexpression of OS-F in the same sensilla that express OS-E.
This is the first demonstration of colocalization of two different OBPs
within the same olfactory sensilla.
The localization of OS-E and OS-F proteins is consistent with the
notion that they represent Drosophila homologs of moth OBPs. Both OS-E and OS-F are present in the sensillum lymph of sensory hairs
housing olfactory receptor neurons as well as in the underlying auxiliary cells. Most likely, OS-E and OS-F are soluble proteins synthesized by the sensillar auxiliary cells, which then secrete them
into the sensillar lymph surrounding the olfactory receptor neurons, as
also is believed to be the case for the moth OBPs (Steinbrecht et al.,
1992
, 1995
; Laue et al., 1994
).
Expression of OS-E and OS-F is restricted to sensilla located in the
ventrolateral region of the antenna. Within this region two sensillar
types contain OS-E and OS-F proteins: most, if not all, sensilla
trichodea and ~40% of the interspersed small sensilla basiconica. We
do not know whether the proteins have an identical function in the two
sensillar types. However, expression of OS-E and OS-F may reflect a
similar functional specialization of the sensilla that express them. In
moths, different functional classes of sensilla express different
classes of OBPs. The pheromone-binding proteins are associated with
pheromone-sensitive sensilla
primarily the specialized sensilla
trichodea of the males (Steinbrecht et al., 1992
)
whereas another
group of OBPs, termed general odorant-binding proteins, is associated
with sensilla that respond to general odorants
primarily the sensilla
basiconica present in males and females (Laue et al., 1994
; Steinbrecht
et al., 1995
). This distinction between PBP or GOBP expression seems to
reflect a difference in sensillar function rather than simply a
property of the morphological type. In Bombyx mori, PBPs are
expressed in the sensilla trichodea of males, which respond to female
pheromones, whereas GOBPs are expressed in the sensilla trichodea of
females, which in this species respond to general plant odors
(Steinbrecht et al., 1995
).
The coexpression of different Drosophila OBPs (such as OS-E
and OS-F) in subsets of sensory hairs could be important for the coding
of olfactory information. Different moth OBPs can bind preferentially
to distinct odorants (De Kramer and Hemberger, 1987
; Du and Prestwich,
1995
). Also, comparative immunocytochemical studies suggest a role for
OBPs in olfactory coding (Steinbrecht, 1996
b). Unlike the olfactory
receptor cells of vertebrates, which project into a common OBP-filled
mucus layer (Pevsner et al., 1988
; Pevsner and Snyder, 1990
), those of
insects are compartmentalized into separate sensilla with distinct
sensillum-lymph cavities. Expression of different combinations of OBPs
within these various sensilla thus could influence which odorants have
access to the enclosed olfactory receptor neurons. The coexpression of
OS-E and OS-F within the same sensillum potentially could broaden the range of odorants to which the olfactory receptor neurons can respond.
Different Drosophila sensilla may contain different
combinations of the various OBP family members. In this regard, we note
that the OS-E and OS-F proteins may not be the only OBPs expressed in
the sensilla we examined. For example, there is at least one other OBP
gene, PBPRP-1, the transcripts of which also are expressed in the ventrolateral region of the antenna (Pikielny et al., 1994
) and
which well may be expressed in a subset of the sensilla that express
OS-E and OS-F. We note the formal possibility that the subtracted
anti-E and anti-F antisera, which appear specific on Western blots
(Fig. 6B) do cross-react to some degree in immuno-EM experiments. However, this is unlikely, because then we should have
observed reciprocal differences in the intensity of the labeling of
different hairs with the two antisera.
Another means of combinatorial coding suggested by our results is the
possibility that OBPs coexpressed within a single sensillum could
multimerize. We note that faint dimer-sized OS-E and OS-F bands are
observed consistently in extracts prepared from bacteria that
overexpress one or the other protein (Fig. 6B). If OS-E and OS-F are capable of dimerization, three distinct dimers (E-E, F-F, and
E-F) and two monomers potentially could be present, each of which might
have a different odorant speci- ficity. If different heterodimers transport different odorants to receptors, the possibility for heterodimer formation among a variety of OBPs that are expressed in
overlapping sets of sensory hairs might provide a means of combinatorial coding of olfactory information.
The close proximity, similar sequences, common orientation, and shared
intron positions of the OS-E and OS-F genes
suggest that the two genes arose by a gene duplication event. The two additional introns in OS-F might have arisen after such a
duplication event. The coordinated expression of OS-E and OS-F proteins
may result from the close proximity of the OS-E and
OS-F genes. OS-E and OS-F likely share
enhancer elements, some of which may have been duplicated during the
initial expansion. The other presumptive Drosophila OBP
genes are located at different chromosomal locations (Pikielny et al.,
1994
), and it is unknown whether their intron-exon organization
resembles that of OS-E and OS-F. In
Caenorhabditis elegans (Troemel et al., 1995
) and mouse
(Sullivan et al., 1996
), families of genes that encode chemosensory
G-protein-coupled receptors are also present in clusters. However,
genes within a single cluster are not regulated coordinately, because
they are expressed in different chemosensory neurons (Troemel et al.,
1995
; Sullivan et al., 1996
).
The close proximity of the OS-E and OS-F genes
may present the opportunity to manipulate both genes simultaneously via
a variety of genetic and molecular means (Ashburner, 1989
).
Electrophysiological or behavioral analyses of the odorant responses of
the resulting Drosophila strains may be useful in addressing
the function(s) of OS-E and OS-F proteins. It also may be possible to
compare electrophysiologically the odorant responses of individual
trichoid and basiconic sensilla that express altered levels of OS-E and OS-F via single-unit recordings (Siddiqi, 1987
; P. Clyne and J. Carlson, unpublished data). Such experiments may provide
additional insight into the roles of OBPs in olfactory signal
transduction and chemosensory coding.
FOOTNOTES
Received Aug. 28, 1996; revised Dec. 17, 1996; accepted Dec. 23, 1996.
This work was supported by a National Institute of Deafness and Other
Communication Disorders grant to J.C. (R01 DC02174-10) and a research
service award to D.H. (DC00139). We are grateful to Barbara
Müller for her skillful assistance at the immunocytochemical studies. We thank Michael McKenna, Charles Scafe, and Michael Laue for
helpful discussions.
Correspondence should be addressed to Dr. Carlson at the above
address.
REFERENCES
-
Ashburner M
(1989)
In: Drosophila: a laboratory handbook. Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor.
-
Breer H,
Krieger J,
Raming K
(1990)
A novel class of binding proteins in the antennae of the silk moth Antheraea pernyi.
Insect Biochem
20:735-740.
-
Danscher G
(1981)
Localization of gold in biological tissue: a photochemical method for light and electron microscopy.
Histochemistry
71:81-88 .
[Web of Science][Medline]
-
De Kramer JJ,
Hemberger J
(1987)
In: The neurobiology of pheromone reception. New York: Academic.
-
Du G,
Prestwich GD
(1995)
Protein structure encodes the ligand-binding specificity in pheromone-binding proteins.
Biochemistry
34:8726-8732 .
[Medline]
-
Farbman A
(1992)
In: Cell biology of olfaction. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UP.
-
Feinberg A,
Vogelstein B
(1983)
A technique for radiolabelling DNA restriction endonuclease fragments to high specific activity.
Anal Biochem
132:6-13 .
[Web of Science][Medline]
-
Harlow E,
Lane D
(1988)
In: Antibodies: a laboratory manual. Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor.
-
Helfand SH,
Carlson JR
(1989)
Isolation and characterization of an olfactory mutant in Drosophila with a chemically specific defect.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
86:2908-2912.
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Hildebrand JG
(1995)
Analysis of chemical signals by nervous systems.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
92:67-74 .
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Hung M-C,
Wensink PC
(1984)
Different restriction enzyme-generated sticky DNA ends joined in vitro.
Nucleic Acids Res
12:1863-1874 .
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Laue M,
Steinbrecht RA,
Ziegelberger G
(1994)
Immunocytochemical localization of general odorant-binding protein in olfactory sensilla of the silkmoth Antheraea polyphemus.
Naturwissenschaften
81:178-180.
[Web of Science]
-
McKenna MP,
Hekmat-Scafe DS,
Gaines P,
Carlson JR
(1994)
Putative Drosophila pheromone-binding proteins expressed in a subregion of the olfactory system.
J Biol Chem
269:16340-16347 .
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Nonet ML,
Grundahl K,
Meyer BJ,
Rand JB
(1993)
Synaptic function is impaired but not eliminated in C. elegans mutants lacking synaptotagmin.
Cell
73:1291-1305 .
[Web of Science][Medline]
-
Pelosi P
(1994)
Odorant-binding proteins.
Crit Rev Biochem Mol Biol
29:199-228 .
[Web of Science][Medline]
-
Pelosi P,
Maida R
(1995)
Odorant-binding proteins in insects.
Comp Biochem Physiol [B]
111:503-514.
[Medline]
-
Pevsner J,
Snyder SH
(1990)
Odorant-binding protein: odorant transport function in the vertebrate nasal epithelium.
Chem Senses
15:217-222.
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Pevsner J,
Hwang PM,
Sklar PB,
Venable JC,
Snyder SH
(1988)
Odorant-binding protein and its mRNA are localized to lateral nasal gland implying a carrier function.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
85:2383-2387 .
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Pierce JC,
Sternberg NL
(1992)
Using bacteriophage P1 system to clone high molecular weight genomic DNA.
Methods Enzymol
216:549-574 .
[Web of Science][Medline]
-
Pikielny CW,
Hasan G,
Rouyer F,
Rosbash M
(1994)
Members of a family of Drosophila putative odorant-binding proteins are expressed in different subsets of olfactory hairs.
Neuron
12:35-49 .
[Web of Science][Medline]
-
Prestwich GD
(1993)
Bacterial expression and photoaffinity labelling of a pheromone binding protein.
Protein Sci
2:420-428 .
[Web of Science][Medline]
-
Prestwich GD,
Du G,
LaForest S
(1995)
How is pheromone specificity encoded in proteins?
Chem Senses
20:461-469 .
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Raha D,
Carlson J
(1994)
OS9: a novel olfactory gene of Drosophila expressed in two olfactory organs.
J Neurobiol
25:169-184 .
[Web of Science][Medline]
-
Sambrook J,
Fritsch EF,
Maniatis T
(1989)
In: Molecular cloning: a laboratory manual. Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor.
-
Siddiqi O
(1987)
Neurogenetics of olfaction in Drosophila melanogaster.
Trends Genet
3:137-142.
-
Smoller DA,
Petrov D,
Hartl DL
(1991)
Characterization of bacteriophage P1 library containing inserts of Drosophila DNA of 75-100 kilobase pairs.
Chromosoma
100:487-494 .
[Web of Science][Medline]
-
Steinbrecht RA
(1993)
Freeze-substitution for morphological and immunocytochemical studies in insects.
Microsc Res Tech
24:488-504 .
[Web of Science][Medline]
-
Steinbrecht RA
(1996a)
Structure and function of insect olfactory sensilla.
In: Olfaction in mosquito-host interactions (Bock GR,
Cardew G,
eds), pp 158-177. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
-
Steinbrecht RA
(1996)
Are odorant-binding proteins involved in odorant discrimination?
Chem Senses
21:719-727 .
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Steinbrecht RA,
Ozaki M,
Ziegelberger G
(1992)
Immunocytochemical localization of pheromone-binding protein in moth antennae.
Cell Tissue Res
270:287-302.
[Web of Science]
-
Steinbrecht RA,
Laue M,
Ziegelberger G
(1995)
Immunolocalization of pheromone-binding and general odorant-binding protein in olfactory sensilla of the silkmoths Antheraea and Bombyx.
Cell Tissue Res
282:203-217.
[Web of Science]
-
Stocker RF
(1994)
The organization of the chemosensory system in Drosophila melanogaster: a review.
Cell Tissue Res
275:3-26 .
[Web of Science][Medline]
-
Störtkuhl KF,
Hofbauer A,
Keller V,
Gendre N,
Stocker RF
(1994)
Analysis of immunocytochemical staining patterns in the antennal system of Drosophila melanogaster.
Cell Tissue Res
275:27-38 .
[Web of Science][Medline]
-
Sullivan SL,
Adamson MC,
Ressler KJ,
Kozak CA,
Buck LB
(1996)
The chromosomal distribution of mouse odorant receptor genes.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
93:884-888 .
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Troemel ER,
Chou JH,
Dwyer ND,
Colbert HA,
Bargmann CI
(1995)
Divergent seven transmembrane receptors are candidate chemosensory receptors in C. elegans.
Cell
83:207-218 .
[Web of Science][Medline]
-
Venkatesh S,
Singh R
(1984)
Sensilla on the third antennal segment of Drosophila melanogaster meigen.
Int J Insect Morphol Embryol
13:51-63.
-
Vogt RG,
Riddiford LM
(1981)
Pheromone binding and inactivation by moth antennae.
Nature
293:161-163.
[Medline]
-
Vogt RG,
Prestwich GD,
Lerner MR
(1991)
Odorant-binding-protein subfamilies associate with distinct classes of olfactory receptor neurons in insects.
J Neurobiol
22:74-84 .
[Web of Science][Medline]
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. R.H. Anholt and T. I. Williams
The Soluble Proteome of the Drosophila Antenna
Chem Senses,
November 16, 2009;
(2009)
bjp073v1.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
D. S. Hekmat-Scafe, C. R. Scafe, A. J. McKinney, and M. A. Tanouye
Genome-Wide Analysis of the Odorant-Binding Protein Gene Family in Drosophila melanogaster
Genome Res.,
September 1, 2002;
12(9):
1357 - 1369.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. Koganezawa and I. Shimada
Novel Odorant-binding Proteins Expressed in the Taste Tissue of the Fly
Chem Senses,
May 1, 2002;
27(4):
319 - 332.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. G. Vogt, M. E. Rogers, M.-d. Franco, and M. Sun
A comparative study of odorant binding protein genes: differential expression of the PBP1-GOBP2 gene cluster in Manduca sexta (Lepidoptera) and the organization of OBP genes in Drosophila melanogaster (Diptera)
J. Exp. Biol.,
March 15, 2002;
205(6):
719 - 744.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
K. Galindo and D. P. Smith
A Large Family of Divergent Drosophila Odorant-Binding Proteins Expressed in Gustatory and Olfactory Sensilla
Genetics,
November 1, 2001;
159(3):
1059 - 1072.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
E. Jacquin-Joly, R. G. Vogt, M.-C. Francois, and P. Nagnan-Le Meillour
Functional and Expression Pattern Analysis of Chemosensory Proteins Expressed in Antennae and Pheromonal Gland of Mamestra brassicae
Chem Senses,
September 1, 2001;
26(7):
833 - 844.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S.-g. Zhang, R. Maida, and R. A. Steinbrecht
Immunolocalization of Odorant-binding Proteins in Noctuid Moths (Insecta, Lepidoptera)
Chem Senses,
September 1, 2001;
26(7):
885 - 896.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. R. Carlson
Functional expression of a Drosophila odor receptor
PNAS,
July 31, 2001;
98(16):
8936 - 8937.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
D. S. Hekmat-Scafe, R. L. Dorit, and J. R. Carlson
Molecular Evolution of Odorant-Binding Protein Genes OS-E and OS-F in Drosophila
Genetics,
May 1, 2000;
155(1):
117 - 127.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
R.G. Vogt, F.E. Callahan, M.E. Rogers, and J.C. Dickens
Odorant Binding Protein Diversity and Distribution among the Insect Orders, as Indicated by LAP, an OBP-related Protein of the True Bug Lygus lineolaris (Hemiptera, Heteroptera)
Chem Senses,
October 1, 1999;
24(5):
481 - 495.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. de Bruyne, P. J. Clyne, and J. R. Carlson
Odor Coding in a Model Olfactory Organ: The Drosophila Maxillary Palp
J. Neurosci.,
June 1, 1999;
19(11):
4520 - 4532.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
Q. Wang, G. Hasan, and C. W. Pikielny
Preferential Expression of Biotransformation Enzymes in the Olfactory Organs of Drosophila melanogaster, the Antennae
J. Biol. Chem.,
April 9, 1999;
274(15):
10309 - 10315.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. Freeman, A Dobritsa, P Gaines, W. Segraves, and J. Carlson
The dare gene: steroid hormone production, olfactory behavior, and neural degeneration in Drosophila
Development,
January 10, 1999;
126(20):
4591 - 4602.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M.-S. Kim, A. Repp, and D. P. Smith
LUSH Odorant-Binding Protein Mediates Chemosensory Responses to Alcohols in Drosophila melanogaster
Genetics,
October 1, 1998;
150(2):
711 - 721.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
|
 |
|