1. Developmental Biology
Download icon

Intrinsic control of muscle attachment sites matching

  1. Alexandre Carayon
  2. Laetitia Bataillé
  3. Gaëlle Lebreton
  4. Laurence Dubois
  5. Aurore Pelletier
  6. Yannick Carrier
  7. Antoine Wystrach
  8. Alain Vincent
  9. Jean-Louis Frendo  Is a corresponding author
  1. French National Centre for Scientific Research, France
  2. Université de Toulouse, France
Research Article
  • Cited 0
  • Views 192
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2020;9:e57547 doi: 10.7554/eLife.57547

Abstract

Myogenesis is an evolutionarily conserved process. Little known, however, is how the morphology of each muscle is determined, such that movements relying upon contraction of many muscles are both precise and coordinated. Each Drosophila larval muscle is a single multinucleated fiber whose morphology reflects expression of distinctive identity Transcription Factors (iTFs). By deleting transcription cis-regulatory modules of one iTF, Collier, we generated viable muscle identity mutants, allowing live imaging and locomotion assays. We show that both selection of muscle attachment sites and muscle/muscle matching is intrinsic to muscle identity and requires transcriptional reprogramming of syncytial nuclei. Live-imaging shows that the staggered muscle pattern involves attraction to tendon cells and heterotypic muscle-muscle adhesion. Unbalance leads to formation of branched muscles, and this correlates with locomotor behavior deficit. Thus, engineering Drosophila muscle identity mutants allows to investigate, in vivo, physiological and mechanical properties of abnormal muscles.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Alexandre Carayon

    CBI UMR 5547, Université de Toulouse, French National Centre for Scientific Research, Toulouse, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Laetitia Bataillé

    CBI UMR 5547, Université de Toulouse, French National Centre for Scientific Research, Toulouse, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Gaëlle Lebreton

    CBI UMR 5547, Université de Toulouse, French National Centre for Scientific Research, Toulouse, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Laurence Dubois

    UMR 5547, Univeristé de Toulouse, French National Centre for Scientific Research, Toulouse, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Aurore Pelletier

    CBI UMR 5547, Université de Toulouse, French National Centre for Scientific Research, Toulouse, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Yannick Carrier

    CBI UMR 5547, Université de Toulouse, French National Centre for Scientific Research, Toulouse, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Antoine Wystrach

    CBI CRCA, French National Centre for Scientific Research, Toulouse, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Alain Vincent

    Centre de Biologie du Développement, Université de Toulouse, Toulouse, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-2769-7501
  9. Jean-Louis Frendo

    CBI UMR 5547, Université de Toulouse, French National Centre for Scientific Research, Toulouse, France
    For correspondence
    jean-louis.frendo@univ-tlse3.fr
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0118-5556

Funding

Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique

  • Alexandre Carayon
  • Laetitia Bataillé
  • Gaëlle Lebreton
  • Laurence Dubois
  • Aurore Pelletier
  • Yannick Carrier
  • Antoine Wystrach
  • Alain Vincent
  • Jean-Louis Frendo

Centre de Biologie Integrative de Toulouse (AOCBI2018)

  • Jean-Louis Frendo

AFM-Téléthon (Research grant 21887)

  • Alain Vincent

Agence Nationale de la Recherche (13-BSVE2-0010-01)

  • Alain Vincent

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. K VijayRaghavan, National Centre for Biological Sciences, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, India

Publication history

  1. Received: April 3, 2020
  2. Accepted: July 23, 2020
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: July 24, 2020 (version 1)

Copyright

© 2020, Carayon et al.

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

Metrics

  • 192
    Page views
  • 54
    Downloads
  • 0
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.

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)

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

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

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Developmental Biology
    Guillermo Marques et al.
    Feature Article

    A variety of microscopy techniques are used by researchers in the life and biomedical sciences. As these techniques become more powerful and more complex, it is vital that scientific articles containing images obtained with advanced microscopes include full details about how each image was obtained. To explore the reporting of such details we examined 240 original research articles published in eight journals. We found that the quality of reporting was poor, with some articles containing no information about how images were obtained, and many articles lacking important basic details. Efforts by researchers, funding agencies, journals, equipment manufacturers and staff at shared imaging facilities are required to improve the reporting of experiments that rely on microscopy techniques.

    1. Developmental Biology
    2. Immunology and Inflammation
    Chew Leng Lim et al.
    Research Article Updated

    There is strong evidence that the pro-inflammatory microenvironment during post-partum mammary involution promotes parity-associated breast cancer. Estrogen exposure during mammary involution drives tumor growth through neutrophils’ activity. However, how estrogen and neutrophils influence mammary involution are unknown. Combined analysis of transcriptomic, protein, and immunohistochemical data in BALB/c mice showed that estrogen promotes involution by exacerbating inflammation, cell death and adipocytes repopulation. Remarkably, 88% of estrogen-regulated genes in mammary tissue were mediated through neutrophils, which were recruited through estrogen-induced CXCR2 signalling in an autocrine fashion. While neutrophils mediate estrogen-induced inflammation and adipocytes repopulation, estrogen-induced mammary cell death was via lysosome-mediated programmed cell death through upregulation of cathepsin B, Tnf and Bid in a neutrophil-independent manner. Notably, these multifaceted effects of estrogen are mostly mediated by ERα and unique to the phase of mammary involution. These findings are important for the development of intervention strategies for parity-associated breast cancer.