1. Matthias Landgraf  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Cambridge, United Kingdom

Metamorphosis is a wonderful and curious process in which animals undergo a transformation from one form and lifestyle to another. It is thought that insects that undergo metamorphosis – which include flies, beetles, bees and butterflies – make up the majority of animal species on Earth. However, the first insects to evolve did not undergo this process. Instead, much like modern-day silverfish, these earliest insects had embryos that developed into essentially miniature versions of the adult forms. Metamorphosing insects evolved later and have embryos that develop into simple larvae. These larvae move, feed and grow until they reach a critical size, at which point they form a pupa and undergo metamorphosis. The transformation involves many of the tissues that had developed in the embryo being broken down so that new adult structures – such as legs, wings, eyes, antennae and genitalia – can form.

The metamorphosis of an insect’s body is paralleled by changes to its nervous system. The nerve cells required for the simple larva are born in the embryo from other cells called neuroblasts. This process, which is called neurogenesis, also occurs in a late stage larva when new nerve cells are needed to build the adult’s nervous system.

In the early 1990s, it was elegantly demonstrated that the active neuroblasts in larvae of the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster are in fact embryonic neuroblasts that have been re-activated (Prokop and Technau, 1991). However many researchers study neurogenesis in either the embryo or the larva, but not both. This means that for decades these two fields of research have remained largely disconnected, as if they concerned two different beasts. However, last year, Gerhard Technau and colleagues at the University of Mainz started to bridge this gap by studying these two phases of neurogenesis in D. melanogaster (Birkholz et al., 2015). Now, in eLife, Haluk Lacin and James Truman of the Janelia Research Campus report how they have built on this work to complete the job (Lacin and Truman, 2016).

The nervous systems of different insect species develop from ‘ground plans’ that are found in each segment of an insect’s body and defined by neuroblasts. Figuring out how these different ground plans are modified is essential if we are to understand how the nervous systems of insects evolved and develop. Metamorphosing insects, such as D. melanogaster, present an interesting riddle. The fruit fly larva is a small, worm-like creature and most of its body segments perform very similar roles. About 32 neuroblasts in the embryo produce the nerve cells needed for the comparatively simple nervous system in the thorax and abdomen of a larva (Bate, 1976; Birkholz et al., 2013). When neurogenesis resumes in a late stage larvae, 23 neuroblasts whir into action in the thorax, but only a few are re-activated in the abdomen (Truman and Bate, 1988). This larval neurogenesis produces about 90% of the nerve cells found in an adult fly, including those that control its legs and wings.

The work at Mainz and Janelia has now revealed which neuroblasts are exclusively active in the embryo, and which become re-activated in thorax and abdomen of the larva. Technau and colleagues used an approach called the “Flybow” technique to track neuroblast cells (plus the cells descended from these neuroblasts) from the embryo to the late-stage larva just before metamorphosis (Birkholz et al., 2015; Hadjieconomou et al., 2011). Lacin and Truman, on the other hand, used new genetic tools that allowed them to follow lineages of specific neuroblasts and their descendants all the way into the pupal and adult stages (Lacin and Truman, 2016; Awasaki et al., 2014).

While both studies largely agreed, there are some discrepancies. For example, Lacin and Truman discovered a new neuroblast in the larva’s thorax. It appears that this neuroblast (which they named NB5-7) most likely arose via a duplication of a neighbouring neuroblast (called NB5-4). What is more, while both of these neuroblasts produce similar nerve cells associated with motor control of the legs in adult flies (Harris et al., 2015), only NB5-4 also gives rise to cells in the embryo. Together these data point to NB5-7 being a recent evolutionary modification of the basic neuroblast ground plan, and producing the additional cells for the adult nervous system that might boost the control of leg movements. Lacin and Truman also demonstrate that the presence of the NB5-4 neuroblasts depended on specific genes that control the development of animal body plans – the so-called HOX genes (see also Bello et al., 2003).

So how should we now look at neurogenesis in metamorphosing insects? It is possible that the evolution of metamorphosis ushered in a separate mode of nervous system development that is specific to the adult stage. Alternatively, the pause in nerve cell birth that is seen at the end of embryonic development may simply be just that: a pause. Drawing on a wealth of data, Lacin and Truman show that, for D. melanogaster, the pause is just a pause. Moreover, it has now become clear that – rather than being two distinct phases – larval neurogenesis appears to simply resume where embryonic production left off. For example, some neuroblasts in the late embryo produce nerve cells ready for the adult’s nervous system, which remain mostly undifferentiated until the larval stages. When the same neuroblasts become active again in the larva, they then produce new nerve cells that are similar to those last made in the embryo. Finally, although some details remain to be ironed out, by casting embryonic and larval neurogenesis in Drosophila as a continuum, Lacin and Truman have opened new avenues for studying the development and evolution of nervous systems.

References

    1. Bate CM
    (1976)
    Embryogenesis of an insect nervous system. I. A map of the thoracic and abdominal neuroblasts in Locusta migratoria
    Journal of Embryology and Experimental Morphology 35:107–123.
    1. Prokop A
    2. Technau GM
    (1991)
    The origin of postembryonic neuroblasts in the ventral nerve cord of Drosophila melanogaster
    Development 111:79–88.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Matthias Landgraf

    Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    ml10006@cam.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The author declares that no competing interests exist.

Publication history

  1. Version of Record published:

Copyright

© 2016, Landgraf

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 1,135
    views
  • 144
    downloads
  • 0
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Matthias Landgraf
(2016)
Development: Neurogenesis reunited
eLife 5:e14955.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.14955

Further reading

    1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    2. Developmental Biology
    Leif Benner, Savannah Muron ... Brian Oliver
    Research Article

    Differentiation of female germline stem cells into a mature oocyte includes the expression of RNAs and proteins that drive early embryonic development in Drosophila. We have little insight into what activates the expression of these maternal factors. One candidate is the zinc-finger protein OVO. OVO is required for female germline viability and has been shown to positively regulate its own expression, as well as a downstream target, ovarian tumor, by binding to the transcriptional start site (TSS). To find additional OVO targets in the female germline and further elucidate OVO’s role in oocyte development, we performed ChIP-seq to determine genome-wide OVO occupancy, as well as RNA-seq comparing hypomorphic and wild type rescue ovo alleles. OVO preferentially binds in close proximity to target TSSs genome-wide, is associated with open chromatin, transcriptionally active histone marks, and OVO-dependent expression. Motif enrichment analysis on OVO ChIP peaks identified a 5’-TAACNGT-3’ OVO DNA binding motif spatially enriched near TSSs. However, the OVO DNA binding motif does not exhibit precise motif spacing relative to the TSS characteristic of RNA polymerase II complex binding core promoter elements. Integrated genomics analysis showed that 525 genes that are bound and increase in expression downstream of OVO are known to be essential maternally expressed genes. These include genes involved in anterior/posterior/germ plasm specification (bcd, exu, swa, osk, nos, aub, pgc, gcl), egg activation (png, plu, gnu, wisp, C(3)g, mtrm), translational regulation (cup, orb, bru1, me31B), and vitelline membrane formation (fs(1)N, fs(1)M3, clos). This suggests that OVO is a master transcriptional regulator of oocyte development and is responsible for the expression of structural components of the egg as well as maternally provided RNAs that are required for early embryonic development.

    1. Developmental Biology
    Saira Amir, Olatunbosun Arowolo ... Alexander Suvorov
    Research Article

    Over the past several decades, a trend toward delayed childbirth has led to increases in parental age at the time of conception. Sperm epigenome undergoes age-dependent changes increasing risks of adverse conditions in offspring conceived by fathers of advanced age. The mechanism(s) linking paternal age with epigenetic changes in sperm remain unknown. The sperm epigenome is shaped in a compartment protected by the blood-testes barrier (BTB) known to deteriorate with age. Permeability of the BTB is regulated by the balance of two mTOR complexes in Sertoli cells where mTOR complex 1 (mTORC1) promotes the opening of the BTB and mTOR complex 2 (mTORC2) promotes its integrity. We hypothesized that this balance is also responsible for age-dependent changes in the sperm epigenome. To test this hypothesis, we analyzed reproductive outcomes, including sperm DNA methylation in transgenic mice with Sertoli cell-specific suppression of mTORC1 (Rptor KO) or mTORC2 (Rictor KO). mTORC2 suppression accelerated aging of the sperm DNA methylome and resulted in a reproductive phenotype concordant with older age, including decreased testes weight and sperm counts, and increased percent of morphologically abnormal spermatozoa and mitochondrial DNA copy number. Suppression of mTORC1 resulted in the shift of DNA methylome in sperm opposite to the shift associated with physiological aging – sperm DNA methylome rejuvenation and mild changes in sperm parameters. These results demonstrate for the first time that the balance of mTOR complexes in Sertoli cells regulates the rate of sperm epigenetic aging. Thus, mTOR pathway in Sertoli cells may be used as a novel target of therapeutic interventions to rejuvenate the sperm epigenome in advanced-age fathers.