Apoptosis is a prominent metazoan cell death form. Yet, mutations in apoptosis regulators cause only minor defects in vertebrate development, suggesting that another developmental cell death mechanism exists. While some non-apoptotic programs have been molecularly characterized, none appear to control developmental cell culling. Linker-cell-type death (LCD) is a morphologically conserved non-apoptotic cell death process operating in Caenorhabditis elegans and vertebrate development, and is therefore a compelling candidate process complementing apoptosis. However, the details of LCD execution are not known. Here we delineate a molecular-genetic pathway governing LCD in C. elegans. Redundant activities of antagonistic Wnt signals, a temporal control pathway, and mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase signaling control heat shock factor 1 (HSF-1), a conserved stress-activated transcription factor. Rather than protecting cells, HSF-1 promotes their demise by activating components of the ubiquitin proteasome system, including the E2 ligase LET-70/UBE2D2 functioning with E3 components CUL-3, RBX-1, BTBD-2, and SIAH-1. Our studies uncover design similarities between LCD and developmental apoptosis, and provide testable predictions for analyzing LCD in vertebrates.
Apoptosis is a prominent metazoan cell death form. Yet, mutations in apoptosis regulators cause only minor defects in vertebrate development, suggesting that another developmental cell death mechanism exists. While some non-apoptotic programs have been molecularly characterized, none appear to control developmental cell culling. Linker-cell-type death (LCD) is a morphologically conserved non-apoptotic cell death process operating in Caenorhabditis elegans and vertebrate development, and is therefore a compelling candidate process complementing apoptosis. However, the details of LCD execution are not known. Here we delineate a molecular-genetic pathway governing LCD in C. elegans. Redundant activities of antagonistic Wnt signals, a temporal control pathway, and mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase signaling control heat shock factor 1 (HSF-1), a conserved stress-activated transcription factor. Rather than protecting cells, HSF-1 promotes their demise by activating components of the ubiquitin proteasome system, including the E2 ligase LET-70/UBE2D2 functioning with E3 components CUL-3, RBX-1, BTBD-2, and SIAH-1. Our studies uncover design similarities between LCD and developmental apoptosis, and provide testable predictions for analyzing LCD in vertebrates.
Animal development and homeostasis are carefully tuned to balance cell proliferation and
death. Cell death not only counters cell production, but also supports morphogenesis and
tissue sculpting, and destroys cells that could be harmful, such as autoreactive cells
in the immune system or genetically abnormal cells that may promote tumorigenesis.
Developmental and homeostatic cell elimination are not passive processes but rather
follow a highly coordinated, genetically encoded program (Green, 2011). A major goal has been to identify the molecular
basis of the programs controlling regulated cell demise in development. One such
program, apoptosis, has been studied extensively over the past four decades. Some
proteins that promote apoptosis, such as BCL2 and FAS, are mutated in human disease
(Fisher et al., 1995; Rieux-Laucat et al., 1995; Tsujimoto et al., 1985), indicating that apoptosis contributes to normal
human physiology.Nonetheless, caspase-dependent apoptosis does not account for many cell death events
that take place during normal animal development. For example, in the moth
Manduca sexta, salivary gland and body muscle remodeling is
apparently caspase-independent and the ultrastructural morphology acquired by dying
cells is non-apoptotic (Haas et al., 1995).
Similarly, mice homozygous for knockout alleles of key apoptotic genes, including
caspase-3, caspase-9, Apaf-1, or Bax and Bak, can survive to adulthood (Honarpour et al., 2000; Kuida et al., 1998; Lindsten et
al., 2000), a surprising observation given the prevalence of cell death in
murine development. Indeed, nearly half of spinal cord motor neurons generated during
vertebrate development are normally deleted, and this process occurs unabated in the
absence of caspase-3 or caspase-9 (Oppenheim et al.,
2001). While caspase-independent non-apoptotic processes may play key roles in
developmental cell death, little is known about their molecular underpinnings. To date,
none of the non-apoptotic cell death pathways that have been described have a role in
normal development (Zhou and Yuan, 2014).The Caenorhabditis elegans linker cell provides direct evidence that
caspase-independent non-apoptotic cell death pathways operate during animal development.
This male-specific gonadal leader cell guides the elongation of the gonad and
vas deferens during development, and then dies near the cloaca,
presumably to facilitate fusion of the vas deferens with the cloacal
sperm-exit channel (Kimble and Hirsh, 1979).
Linker cell death still occurs in the absence of the main apoptotic caspase, CED-3, and
even in animals lacking all four C. eleganscaspase-related genes
(Abraham et al., 2007; Denning et al., 2013). Other canonical apoptosis genes are also not
required, nor are genes implicated in autophagy or necrosis (Abraham et al., 2007). Consistent with these genetic observations,
the morphology of a dying linker cell, characterized by lack of chromatin condensation,
a crenellated nucleus, and swelling of cytoplasmic organelles, differs from the
morphology of apoptotic cells (Abraham et al.,
2007). Intriguingly, cell death with similar features (linker cell-type death
[LCD]; Blum et al., 2012) has been documented in
a number of developmental settings in vertebrates (Pilar and Landmesser, 1976) and is characteristic of neuronal degeneration in
patients with and mouse models of polyglutamine disease (Friedman et al., 2007).A molecular understanding of LCD is necessary to determine the prevalence and importance
of this process in development. Genetic studies of C. elegans linker
cell death have identified genes that promote this process, including
pqn-41, which encodes a glutamine-rich protein of unknown function,
and tir-1/TIR-domain and sek-1/MAPKK, which may
function in the same pathway (Blum et al.,
2012). Intriguingly, the Drosophila and vertebrate homologs of
TIR-1 promote distal axon degeneration following axotomy (Osterloh et al., 2012), supporting a conserved role for this
protein in cell and process culling. The let-7 microRNA and its
indirect target, the Zn-finger transcription factor LIN-29, also promote LCD, and may
act early in the process (Abraham et al., 2007;
Blum et al., 2012). Nonetheless, the
molecular logic of LCD is not understood.Here, we describe a molecular-genetic framework governing LCD in C.
elegans. Our studies represent the first such framework for a non-apoptotic
cell death program regulating developmental physiology. We demonstrate that LCD is
controlled by two Wnt signals, one pro-death and one pro-survival, that function in
parallel, and partially redundantly with the LIN-29, and SEK-1/MAPKK pathways to control
non-canonical activity of HSF-1, a conserved transcription factor that mediates
heat-shock and other stress responses. Our functional, genetic, and molecular studies
demonstrate that HSF-1 adopts a specific role, distinct from its well-described
protective role in the heat-shock response, to promote LCD. We show that
let-70, encoding a conserved E2 ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme, is an
important transcriptional target of this pro-death developmental activity of HSF-1, but
not of the HSF-1 stress-response function. LET-70 expression, as well as expression of
ubiquitin and some proteasome components, increases just before LCD onset, and this
increase requires the Wnt, LIN-29, SEK-1/MAPKK pathways, and HSF-1. CUL-3/cullin, RBX-1,
BTBD-2, and SIAH-1 E3-ubiquitin ligase components function in the same pathway as LET-70
and promote LCD.Our studies reveal design similarities between LCD and apoptosis. In C.
elegans, cell lineage specifies the initiation of developmental apoptosis by
transcriptional induction of the egl-1 gene (Thellmann et al., 2003), encoding a pro-apoptotic BH3-only
protein, or the ced-3 gene, encoding the key executioner caspase (Maurer et al., 2007). Pathways linking cell
lineage specification to transcriptional initiation of apoptosis have been described for
some cells and appear to consist of multiple coordinated inputs. Thus, in both LCD and
apoptosis diverse signals control specific transcriptional inputs that, in turn, control
protein degradation machinery.The molecular conservation of all the elements comprising the LCD program, together with
the characteristic cell death ultrastructure, suggest that this program may be broadly
conserved and provide an opportunity for probing the process in other settings.
Results
An EGL-20/Wnt pathway promotes linker cell death
To determine how LCD is initiated, we noted that mutations in the gene
him-4, encoding the secreted protein hemicentin, prevent
posterior migration of the linker cell, and result in low-level (~15%) linker cell
survival (Abraham et al., 2007). Thus, linker
cell position might, in part, dictate cell death onset. We considered the possibility
that secreted ligands of the Wnt pathway, which are expressed in restricted spatial
domains in C. elegans, contribute to LCD. We examined animals
carrying lesions in each of the five C. elegans Wnt genes and found
that in egl-20/Wnt mutants, the linker cell survives inappropriately
(Figure 1A,B), and surviving cells are not
engulfed (Figure 1—figure supplement 1).
Importantly, linker cell migration, a complex multi-step process dependent on many
genes (Schwarz et al., 2012), is unaffected
in egl-20 single mutants. Likewise, expression of reporter genes,
including lag-2 promoter::GFP (Figure 1B, Figure 1—figure supplement
1A,B), appears unaffected. Thus, egl-20 mutations do not
generally perturb linker cell fate, suggesting that the gene has a specific role in
LCD control.
Figure 1.
An egl-20/Wnt pathway promotes Llnker cell
death.
(A) Linker cell survival in indicated genotypes. Strains
contain qIs56[lag-2p::GFP] linker cell reporter
transgene and him-5(e1490) for males.
gsk-3(nr2047) is linked to
unc-101(sy216). *p<10–4, no. animals
scored is inside bars. (B) Adult
egl-20(n585) male expressing
lag-2p::GFP. (C) Linker cell survival in
mig-5(rh147) animals with indicated transgenes.
*p<10–4, **p<.002. (D)
bar-1(ga80) rescue with
hsp-16.2p::ΔN-BAR-1. *p<10–4.
(E) egl-20p::EGL-20::GFP expression in
L4 male. (F) bar-1p::GFP expression in L4
male. In (B), (E), (F), white
caret, linker cell; arrow, Ul/r.p cells; scale bar, 10 μm.
(G) EM of surviving linker cell in
bar-1(ga80) adult. Arrow, mitochondria. Arrowheads,
nuclear envelope. Carets, healthy ER. Scale bar, 1 μm. (H)
Linker cell survival in indicated genotypes. *p<10–4 from
the single mutant.
DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.003
(A,B) 2h-old egl-20(n585) adult male with a
surviving linker cell. lag-2p::GFP marks the linker cell
(white carets). lin-48::mCherry marks the U.l/rp cells
(arrowheads). Note that in (A), the U.l/rp cells abut the
surviving linker cell without surrounding it completely, whereas in
(B), the U.l/rp cells have entirely engulfed the linker
cell. Scale bars, 10 μm.
DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.004
(A,B) Shown are typical L4 males harboring reporters for
(A) mig-5;
(B) lin-17. White carets and dashed
circles, linker cell. Scale bars, 10 μm. (C) Expression of
lin-44p::GFP reporter in an L4 male. Intestinal
expression is an artifact of the vector. Dashed circle, linker cell.
Scale bars, 10 μm. (D) Expression of
wrm-1p::GFP in an L4 male. Dashed circle, linker cell.
Scale bars, 10 μm.
DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.005
Figure 1—figure supplement 1.
Surviving linker cells in egl-20 mutants are not
engulfed, but dying ones are.
(A,B) 2h-old egl-20(n585) adult male with a
surviving linker cell. lag-2p::GFP marks the linker cell
(white carets). lin-48::mCherry marks the U.l/rp cells
(arrowheads). Note that in (A), the U.l/rp cells abut the
surviving linker cell without surrounding it completely, whereas in
(B), the U.l/rp cells have entirely engulfed the linker
cell. Scale bars, 10 μm.
DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.004
An egl-20/Wnt pathway promotes Llnker cell
death.
(A) Linker cell survival in indicated genotypes. Strains
contain qIs56[lag-2p::GFP] linker cell reporter
transgene and him-5(e1490) for males.
gsk-3(nr2047) is linked to
unc-101(sy216). *p<10–4, no. animals
scored is inside bars. (B) Adult
egl-20(n585) male expressing
lag-2p::GFP. (C) Linker cell survival in
mig-5(rh147) animals with indicated transgenes.
*p<10–4, **p<.002. (D)
bar-1(ga80) rescue with
hsp-16.2p::ΔN-BAR-1. *p<10–4.
(E) egl-20p::EGL-20::GFP expression in
L4 male. (F) bar-1p::GFP expression in L4
male. In (B), (E), (F), white
caret, linker cell; arrow, Ul/r.p cells; scale bar, 10 μm.
(G) EM of surviving linker cell in
bar-1(ga80) adult. Arrow, mitochondria. Arrowheads,
nuclear envelope. Carets, healthy ER. Scale bar, 1 μm. (H)
Linker cell survival in indicated genotypes. *p<10–4 from
the single mutant.DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.003
Surviving linker cells in egl-20 mutants are not
engulfed, but dying ones are.
(A,B) 2h-old egl-20(n585) adult male with a
surviving linker cell. lag-2p::GFP marks the linker cell
(white carets). lin-48::mCherry marks the U.l/rp cells
(arrowheads). Note that in (A), the U.l/rp cells abut the
surviving linker cell without surrounding it completely, whereas in
(B), the U.l/rp cells have entirely engulfed the linker
cell. Scale bars, 10 μm.DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.004
Expression of receptive Wnt components in the linker cell.
(A,B) Shown are typical L4 males harboring reporters for
(A) mig-5;
(B) lin-17. White carets and dashed
circles, linker cell. Scale bars, 10 μm. (C) Expression of
lin-44p::GFP reporter in an L4 male. Intestinal
expression is an artifact of the vector. Dashed circle, linker cell.
Scale bars, 10 μm. (D) Expression of
wrm-1p::GFP in an L4 male. Dashed circle, linker cell.
Scale bars, 10 μm.DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.005To determine whether EGL-20 promotes LCD in the context of Wnt signaling, we examined
mutants defective in other pathway components. Animals carrying mutations in the
mig-14/Wntless gene, which is required for Wnt secretion, also
exhibit surviving linker cells at the cloaca (Figure
1A). Similarly, mig-5/Dishevelled and
bar-1/β-catenin mutants, as well as
lin-17/Frizzled; mom-5/Frizzled double mutants,
exhibit linker cell survival without defects in migration or reporter expression
(Figure 1A). Other Wnt mutants or mutant
combinations do not block LCD (Supplementary file 1A). The kinase GSK3β curtails Wnt signaling by
promoting degradation of β-catenin, and a gsk-3 mutation restores
LCD to egl-20 mutants (Figure
1A). Furthermore, a heat-shock-inducible promoter driving a cDNA encoding a
stabilized N-terminally-truncated BAR-1/β-catenin protein (hsp-16.2
promoter::ΔN-bar-1) displays heat-shock-dependent restoration of
LCD not only to bar-1/β-catenin mutants, but also to
mig-5/Dishevelled mutants (Figure
1C,D). These data support involvement of a canonical Wnt pathway in
promoting LCD.
EGL-20/Wnt pathway components function in the linker cell just before
death
Cells surrounding the hermaphrodite cloaca have been previously shown to express
EGL-20 (Whangbo and Kenyon, 1999). These
cells, including the U.l/rp cells that engulf the linker cell, but not the linker
cell, also express EGL-20 in males at the time of LCD (Figure 1E), consistent with a specific role in LCD.To determine whether receptive Wnt components function in the linker cell to promote
its demise, we examined their expression patterns. An 11-kb regulatory region
upstream of the bar-1/β-catenin gene fused to GFP is not expressed
in cloacal cells or in the trailing gonad but is strongly expressed in the linker
cell (Figure 1F). Likewise,
mig-5/Dishevelled::GFP and lin-17/Frizzled::GFP
reporters are expressed in the linker cell (Figure
1—figure supplement 2A,B). Consistent with these data, expression of a
mig-5/Dishevelled cDNA using a linker-cell-specific
mig-24 promoter (Tamai and
Nishiwaki, 2007) restores cell death to mig-5 mutant males
(Figure 1C), indicating a cell-autonomous
role for this gene.
Figure 1—figure supplement 2.
Expression of receptive Wnt components in the linker cell.
(A,B) Shown are typical L4 males harboring reporters for
(A) mig-5;
(B) lin-17. White carets and dashed
circles, linker cell. Scale bars, 10 μm. (C) Expression of
lin-44p::GFP reporter in an L4 male. Intestinal
expression is an artifact of the vector. Dashed circle, linker cell.
Scale bars, 10 μm. (D) Expression of
wrm-1p::GFP in an L4 male. Dashed circle, linker cell.
Scale bars, 10 μm.
DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.005
To examine when Wnt signaling is required for LCD, we heat shocked
bar-1/β-catenin mutants carrying a heat-inducible
hsp-16.2 promoter::ΔN-bar-1 transgene at
different time points during larval development, and assessed restoration of cell
death. We found that induction as late as the early L4 stage rescued inappropriate
linker cell survival (Figure 1D), suggesting
that bar-1 activity just before cell death onset is likely
sufficient to drive cell death. This observation also supports the notion that
EGL-20/Wnt signaling specifically controls LCD and not identity.Unlike surviving cells in pqn-41 or sek-1 mutants,
in which organelle changes accompanying cell death are evident (Blum et al., 2012), surviving linker cells in
bar-1/β-catenin mutants do not exhibit death-associated
ultrastructural features (Abraham et al.,
2007) (Figure 1G), supporting a role
for the Wnt pathway in cell death initiation. Taken together, our data suggest that
the linker cell responds to an EGL-20/Wnt signal emanating from surrounding cells
just prior to its death, using redundant activities of the receptors LIN-17 and MOM-5
and the signal transduction components MIG-5/Dishevelled and BAR-1/β-catenin.Unexpectedly, mutations in pop-1, the sole C.
elegans homolog of the canonical Wnt signaling transcription factor Tcf,
cause no or weak defects in LCD (Figure 2—figure
supplement 1A). Furthermore, while RNAi against pop-1/Tcf
promotes highly penetrant defects in other contexts in C. elegans
(Siegfried and Kimble, 2002), only
low-level linker cell survival is evident even in RNAi-sensitized backgrounds (Figure 2—figure supplement 1A).
pop-1/Tcf lesions also do not enhance or suppress linker cell
survival in egl-20/Wnt mutants (Figures 2A, Figure 2—figure supplement
1A), and a pop-1/Tcf activity reporter is not expressed in
the linker cell before or during death (Figure
2—figure supplement 1B–D). Likewise, while BAR-1/β-catenin physically and
functionally interacts with the transcription factor DAF-16/FOXO (Essers et al., 2005), we found that a
daf-16 mutation does not block LCD (Supplementary file 1A).
Figure 2—figure supplement 1.
pop-1 does not play a significant role in linker
cell death.
(A) Linker cell survival in 0-2h adults of the indicated
genotypes. All strains also contain the qIs56 reporter
transgene to visualize the linker cell and him-5(e1490)
to increase the incidence of males. pop-1(RNAi)
performed with RNAi-sensitizing rrf-3(pk1426) allele.
(B-D) All panels are images of strain
unc-119(ed4); him-5(e1490);
syIs187[POPTOP::HIS-24-mCherry]. Linker cell outlined in dashed
white. (B) Late L3/early L4 male. (C) Mid-L4
male. Note the already-apparent linker cell cytoplasmic changes in the
DIC image. (D) Late L4 male. mCherry-staining nucleus at the
top right of the linker cell in (D), belongs to a
neighboring overlying cell. Scale bars, 10 μm.
DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.007
Figure 2.
A lin-44/Wnt pathway promotes linker cell
survival.
(A) Linker cell survival in indicated genotypes. In
(A-C) strains also contain qIs56 and
him-5(e1490). *p<10–3; **p
<10–4; ns, not significant; Fisher’s exact test.
lit-1(t512) is linked to
unc-32(e189). (B) Linker cell survival in
egl-20(n585) and mig-1(e1787);
egl-20(n585) animals harboring a
mig-24p::mig-1 transgene.
*p<0.001. (C) Linker cell survival in indicated
genotypes. ns, not significant; Fisher’s exact test. (D)
Model for Wnt pathway interactions in LCD.
DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.006
(A) Linker cell survival in 0-2h adults of the indicated
genotypes. All strains also contain the qIs56 reporter
transgene to visualize the linker cell and him-5(e1490)
to increase the incidence of males. pop-1(RNAi)
performed with RNAi-sensitizing rrf-3(pk1426) allele.
(B-D) All panels are images of strain
unc-119(ed4); him-5(e1490);
syIs187[POPTOP::HIS-24-mCherry]. Linker cell outlined in dashed
white. (B) Late L3/early L4 male. (C) Mid-L4
male. Note the already-apparent linker cell cytoplasmic changes in the
DIC image. (D) Late L4 male. mCherry-staining nucleus at the
top right of the linker cell in (D), belongs to a
neighboring overlying cell. Scale bars, 10 μm.
DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.007
A lin-44/Wnt pathway promotes linker cell
survival.
(A) Linker cell survival in indicated genotypes. In
(A-C) strains also contain qIs56 and
him-5(e1490). *p<10–3; **p
<10–4; ns, not significant; Fisher’s exact test.
lit-1(t512) is linked to
unc-32(e189). (B) Linker cell survival in
egl-20(n585) and mig-1(e1787);
egl-20(n585) animals harboring a
mig-24p::mig-1 transgene.
*p<0.001. (C) Linker cell survival in indicated
genotypes. ns, not significant; Fisher’s exact test. (D)
Model for Wnt pathway interactions in LCD.DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.006
pop-1 does not play a significant role in linker
cell death.
(A) Linker cell survival in 0-2h adults of the indicated
genotypes. All strains also contain the qIs56 reporter
transgene to visualize the linker cell and him-5(e1490)
to increase the incidence of males. pop-1(RNAi)
performed with RNAi-sensitizing rrf-3(pk1426) allele.
(B-D) All panels are images of strain
unc-119(ed4); him-5(e1490);
syIs187[POPTOP::HIS-24-mCherry]. Linker cell outlined in dashed
white. (B) Late L3/early L4 male. (C) Mid-L4
male. Note the already-apparent linker cell cytoplasmic changes in the
DIC image. (D) Late L4 male. mCherry-staining nucleus at the
top right of the linker cell in (D), belongs to a
neighboring overlying cell. Scale bars, 10 μm.DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.007
LIN-44/Wnt promotes linker cell survival
While testing genetic interactions between egl-20/Wnt mutants and
other C. elegans Wnt mutants, we found, surprisingly, that mutations
in lin-44/Wnt strongly suppressed inappropriate linker cell survival
in egl-20 mutants (Figure
2A). These data suggest that two opposing Wnt pathways control LCD: an
EGL-20/Wnt pathway promotes, and a LIN-44/Wnt pathway prevents cell death. To test
this idea, we examined genetic interactions between EGL-20/Wnt pathway components and
other related genes. LCD is also restored to egl-20/Wnt mutants by
mutations in mig-1/Frizzled, cfz-2/Frizzled,
lit-1/NLK or wrm-1/β-catenin.
lin-44/Wnt mutations also suppress inappropriate linker cell
survival in bar-1 mutants (Figure
2A).lin-44 is expressed in the C. elegans male tail
(Figure 1—figure supplement 2C) (Herman et al., 1995), consistent with a role in
LCD. wrm-1/β-catenin is expressed in the linker cell, as well as
other cells (Figure 1—figure supplement 2D).
Furthermore, expression of a mig-1/Frizzled cDNA specifically in the
linker cell restores inappropriate linker cell survival to
mig-1/Frizzled; egl-20/Wnt double mutants (Figure 2B). These results suggest that a
tail-derived LIN-44/Wnt signal impinges on the MIG-1/Frizzled and CFZ-2/Frizzled
receptors. These receptors function together in the linker cell, through
lit-1/NLK and wrm-1/β-catenin, to promote its
survival (Figure 2D). While we were unable to
score wrm-1; bar-1 double mutants, as these have a fully penetrant,
early block in linker cell migration (100%, n>100) as well as other defects in
larval development, our results suggest that the EGL-20/Wnt pathway antagonizes the
LIN-44/Wnt pathway at or downstream of WRM-1/β-catenin.
EGL-20/Wnt and LIN-44/Wnt function in parallel to known LCD regulators
Null alleles of egl-20/Wnt block LCD in about 60% of animals (Figure 1A), and early expression of
ΔN-BAR-1/β-catenin fails to promote premature onset of LCD (Figure 1D), suggesting that additional cues promote LCD
initiation. The linker cell dies at a specific place and time during C.
elegans male development, and previous studies showed that a
developmental timing cue transduced by the Zn-finger transcription factor LIN-29
partially controls LCD (Abraham et al., 2007)
(Figure 1H). In lin-29;
egl-20/Wnt and lin-29; bar-1/β-catenin double mutants,
nearly all linker cells survive inappropriately (Figure 1H), suggesting that the LIN-29 timing cue and the EGL-20/Wnt cue
function in parallel to control LCD initiation. We previously showed that the MAPKK
gene sek-1 also functions in parallel to lin-29
(Blum et al., 2012). In egl-20;
sek-1 double mutants, nearly all linker cells also survive (Figure 1H). Furthermore, although
lin-44/Wnt mutations suppress ectopic linker cell survival in
egl-20/Wnt and bar-1/β-catenin mutants, they do
not restore LCD to lin-29, sek-1, or pqn-41 mutants
(Figure 2C). Thus, EGL-20/Wnt and
LIN-44/Wnt, LIN-29, and SEK-1/MAPKK define three parallel, partially redundant
pathways initiating LCD.
HSF-1 promotes LCD independently of the heat-shock response
Heat-shock factors are transcriptional regulators, activated in response to certain
stresses including heat shock, whose targets include chaperones and other effectors
that maintain cell viability during stress. While exploring roles for stress response
genes in LCD, we found that a hypomorphic allele (sy441) of the
single C. elegansheat-shock factor gene, hsf-1,
causes inappropriate linker cell survival (Figure
3A). The hsf-1(sy441) allele is a loss-of-function allele
that truncates the region encoding the HSF-1 transcriptional transactivation domain
(Hajdu-Cronin et al., 2004). This
observation suggests, surprisingly, that rather than protecting the linker cell,
HSF-1 promotes its demise. Indeed, either a single copy hsf-1
promoter::hsf-1::GFP transgene, expressed at roughly the same
level as the native hsf-1 locus (Morton and Lamitina, 2013), or a wild-type hsf-1 cDNA
expressed specifically in the linker cell using the mig-24 promoter,
rescue the hsf-1(sy441) LCD defect (Figure 3A), showing that hsf-1 can function
cell-autonomously to promote LCD.
Figure 3.
HSF-1 promotes linker cell death.
(A) Linker cell survival in indicated genotypes. In
(A-C), strains also contain qIs56 and
him-5(e1490).
*p<10–2;**p<10–3; Fisher’s exact test.
hsf-1p::hsf-1(WT/R145A) transgenes
are fused to GFP. WT: animals raised at indicated temperature after
hatching. +HS: WT animals heat shocked at 37°C for 15 min at 6 hr or 4 hr
before the L4-adult molt. hsf-1(sy441):
mig-24p::hsf-1 bar is average of three
independent extrachromosomal array lines.
hsf-1p::hsf-1(R145A) bar is average
of two independent single-copy integrated lines.
hsf-1p::hsf-1(R145A): animals were
raised at the indicated temperature after hatching. (B)
Linker cell survival in indicated genotypes. HSF-1(R145),
hsf-1p::hsf-1(R145A). The
drSi28[hsf-1p::hsf-1(R145A)]
transgene was used. For
hsf-1p::hsf-1(R145A);
bar-1(ga80), two other independent single-copy
integrated lines gave similar results. (C) Linker cell
survival in indicated genotypes.
DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.008
(A-D) Shown are L4 males harboring reporters for
(A) hsp-1; (B)
hsp-16.2; (C)
hsp-16.41; (D) hsp-4. At
least 20 animals were examined for each reporter. hsp-4
is not a typical heat-shock hsf-1 target but harbors
cryptic heat-shock elements in its proximal promoter. (E)
DIC (left) and fluorescence (right) images of an L4 male treated with
NaN3 to induce HSF-1 nuclear stress granules. Dashed square
magnified 1.5x in inset. White carets, LC. White arrowheads in inset,
nuclear stress granules in the LC. Black arrowhead, stress granule in
another cell. Scale bars, 10 μm. (F) Same as
(E) except animal treated with tetramisole, which does not
induce HSF-1 granules.
DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.009
HSF-1 promotes linker cell death.
(A) Linker cell survival in indicated genotypes. In
(A-C), strains also contain qIs56 and
him-5(e1490).
*p<10–2;**p<10–3; Fisher’s exact test.
hsf-1p::hsf-1(WT/R145A) transgenes
are fused to GFP. WT: animals raised at indicated temperature after
hatching. +HS: WT animals heat shocked at 37°C for 15 min at 6 hr or 4 hr
before the L4-adult molt. hsf-1(sy441):
mig-24p::hsf-1 bar is average of three
independent extrachromosomal array lines.
hsf-1p::hsf-1(R145A) bar is average
of two independent single-copy integrated lines.
hsf-1p::hsf-1(R145A): animals were
raised at the indicated temperature after hatching. (B)
Linker cell survival in indicated genotypes. HSF-1(R145),
hsf-1p::hsf-1(R145A). The
drSi28[hsf-1p::hsf-1(R145A)]
transgene was used. For
hsf-1p::hsf-1(R145A);
bar-1(ga80), two other independent single-copy
integrated lines gave similar results. (C) Linker cell
survival in indicated genotypes.DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.008
Markers of the heat-shock response are not induced during linker cell
death.
(A-D) Shown are L4 males harboring reporters for
(A) hsp-1; (B)
hsp-16.2; (C)
hsp-16.41; (D) hsp-4. At
least 20 animals were examined for each reporter. hsp-4
is not a typical heat-shock hsf-1 target but harbors
cryptic heat-shock elements in its proximal promoter. (E)
DIC (left) and fluorescence (right) images of an L4 male treated with
NaN3 to induce HSF-1 nuclear stress granules. Dashed square
magnified 1.5x in inset. White carets, LC. White arrowheads in inset,
nuclear stress granules in the LC. Black arrowhead, stress granule in
another cell. Scale bars, 10 μm. (F) Same as
(E) except animal treated with tetramisole, which does not
induce HSF-1 granules.DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.009Compromised stress responses do not generally block LCD, as neither unfolded protein
response mutants (Blum et al., 2012), nor
daf-16/FOXO or daf-21/HSP90 mutants (Supplementary file 1A)
show LCD defects (Blum et al., 2012). This
raises the possibility that the role of HSF-1 in LCD may be different from its role
in the canonical heat-shock response. To test this idea directly, we examined
expression of GFP reporters for HSF-1 target genes normally induced during heat shock
and found that they are not induced in the linker cell during LCD (Figure 3—figure supplement 1A–D). Supporting
this conclusion, the hsp-16.2 gene is a target of HSF-1 in the
heat-shock response, and LCD is restored to bar-1 mutants by the
hsp-16.2 promoter::ΔN-bar-1 transgene following
a heat shock. However, no rescue is evident without heat exposure (Figure 1D), suggesting that the
hsp-16.2 promoter is not normally induced during LCD. Similarly,
while nuclear-cytoplasmic shuttling does not control HSF-1 activity in C.
elegans (Morton and Lamitina,
2013), HSF-1 does form nuclear aggregates in all cells following stress
exposure (Morton and Lamitina, 2013). While
aggregates can be seen in dying linker cells in stressed animals (Figure 3—figure supplement 1E), no aggregates
are evident in the dying linker cell, or the surrounding cells, of unstressed animals
(Figure 3—figure supplement 1F),
supporting a novel role for HSF-1 in LCD.
Figure 3—figure supplement 1.
Markers of the heat-shock response are not induced during linker cell
death.
(A-D) Shown are L4 males harboring reporters for
(A) hsp-1; (B)
hsp-16.2; (C)
hsp-16.41; (D) hsp-4. At
least 20 animals were examined for each reporter. hsp-4
is not a typical heat-shock hsf-1 target but harbors
cryptic heat-shock elements in its proximal promoter. (E)
DIC (left) and fluorescence (right) images of an L4 male treated with
NaN3 to induce HSF-1 nuclear stress granules. Dashed square
magnified 1.5x in inset. White carets, LC. White arrowheads in inset,
nuclear stress granules in the LC. Black arrowhead, stress granule in
another cell. Scale bars, 10 μm. (F) Same as
(E) except animal treated with tetramisole, which does not
induce HSF-1 granules.
DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.009
In addition to functional differences between the role of HSF-1 in the heat-shock
response and LCD, we also found distinct genetic requirements. The HSF-1(R145A)
protein contains a mutation in the putative HSF-1 DNA binding domain. Previous
studies demonstrated that expression of this protein restores the heat-shock response
to hsf-1(sy441) mutants lacking the distal portion of the HSF-1
transactivation domain (Morton and Lamitina,
2013). Trans-complementation in the active HSF-1 trimer likely explains how
these two loss-of-function lesions can, together, promote a normal heat-shock
response. However, instead of rescuing the LCD defect of
hsf-1(sy441) mutants, we found that a single copy
hsf-1(R145A) transgene enhanced inappropriate linker cell
survival from 29% to 61% (Figure 3A).Taken together, our results show that the role of HSF-1 in LCD is functionally and
genetically distinct from its role in the heat-shock response. A prediction arising
from these data is that the LCD and heat-shock functions of HSF-1 might compete with
each other. To test this, we first observed that while the linker cell of wild-type
males raised at 20°C always dies, some wild-type adult males raised at 25°C harbor a
surviving linker cell (Figure 3A), suggesting
that the heat-shock role of HSF-1 might compete with its LCD role. To test this more
directly, we subjected males to a 37°C heat shock 4 hr prior to LCD onset and found
that these animals also exhibit a surviving linker cell. Importantly, males
heat-shocked 6 hr before LCD onset exhibit fewer surviving linker cells (Figure 3A). These results are consistent with the
idea that heat-shock functionally sequesters HSF-1 away from its LCD role, and that
activity of HSF-1 just before the cell dies is required to promote LCD. These results
also explain why we were able to rescue bar-1 mutants with the
hsp-16.2 promoter::ΔN-bar-1 transgene, as heat
shock was performed 10 hr before LCD onset, well before the activity of HSF-1 is
required.
HSF-1 promotes death downstream of known LCD regulators
An examination of males carrying the hsf-1(R145A) transgene in an
otherwise wild-type background revealed that LCD progressed to completion in all
animals even at 25°C (Figure 3A). This result
suggests that in a wild-type hsf-1 background,
hsf-1(R145A) functions as a gain-of-function allele, promoting
LCD. One possibility for how this might occur is that the allele preferentially
disrupts HSF-1 complexes promoting the heat-shock response, thereby promoting LCD.
Regardless of the precise mode of action, our serendipitous discovery of the
gain-of-function nature of the R145A protein allowed us to dissect the functional
relationships between HSF-1 and the parallel pathways controlling LCD onset.
Strikingly, we found that three independent hsf-1(R145A) single-copy
transgene isolates restored LCD to egl-20/Wnt and
bar-1/β-catenin mutants (Figure
3B). Importantly, a lin-44/Wnt mutation could not restore
cell death to hsf-1(sy441) animals (Figure 2C). Likewise, hsf-1(R145A) transgenes also
restored LCD to lin-29, sek-1/MAPKK, and
pqn-41/Q-rich mutants (Figure
3B). These results suggest that the Wnt, LIN-29, and SEK-1/PQN-41 pathways
all require HSF-1 function to promote LCD.Consistent with these observations, we found a synergistic increase in linker cell
survival in animals carrying mutations in egl-20, lin-29, sek-1, or
pqn-41 and the hsf-1(sy441) partial
loss-of-function mutation (Figure 3C), as
might be predicted if HSF-1 functions downstream of all LCD initiation pathways we
described.
LET-70/UBE2D2, an E2 ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme, is required for linker cell
death
To understand the mechanism by which HSF-1 promotes LCD, we sought genes that
function downstream. We previously performed a genome-wide RNA interference (RNAi)
screen identifying genes required for LCD (described in Blum et al., 2012). From this screen, we found that males fed
bacteria expressing dsRNA targeted against the gene let-70, encoding
a putative E2 ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme, exhibit robust linker cell survival,
indicating that the gene is required for LCD (Figure
4A-C, 4E). As RNAi can induce off-target effects, we confirmed our results
by examining two non-overlapping RNAi targeting fragments and obtained similar
results (Figure 4A,E).
let-70(RNAi) animals exhibit surviving linker cells with normal
ultrastructure (Figure 4C), indicating that
let-70 likely acts in promoting LCD and not in corpse
degradation. Consistent with this observation, surviving linker cells are unengulfed
(Figure 4—figure supplement 1A).
Figure 4.
let-70 promotes linker cell death.
(A) let-70 gene structure and
mutations/RNAi clones used in our studies. Black boxes, exons; white
boxes, 5’ or 3’ untranslated regions. Scale bar, 200 bp. (B)
Combined DIC and fluorescent images of let-70(RNAi)
adult male. lag-2p::GFP marks the linker cell. Arrow,
linker cell. White line, cloaca. Scale bar, 10 μm. (C) EM of
surviving let-70(RNAi) linker cell. Scale bar, 2 μm.
Asterisk, mitochondria, Arrowhead, ER, N, nucleus, nl, nucleolus.
(D) Purified 6xHis-LET-70, Drosophila
UBA1, DIAP1 and ubiquitin. causes DIAP1 auto-ubiquitination.
(E-H) Linker cell survival in indicated genotypes. No.
animals scored, inside bars. Error bars, SEM. *p<0.001; **p<0.0001;
Fisher’s Exact Test; ns, not significant. Animals contained
qIs56 and him-5(e1490). In
(F) animals also contained rrf-3(pk1426)
for increased RNAi efficiency. In LC-only experiments,
mig-24p was used to drive rde-1 cDNA
in rde-1(ne219); him-8(e1489); qIs56 mutants. ND, not
determined.
DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.010
(A) Surviving let-70(RNAi) linker cell fail
is not engulfed. Scalebar, 5 μm. Arrow/red cell, linker cell. Green
cells, engulfing U.l/rp cells. (B) Cell-specific linker cell
RNAi by restoring rde-1 expression in
rde-1 mutants only to the linker cell using a
mig-24 promoter::rde-1 cDNA
transgene. lag-2::GFP is used to mark the linker cell.
Top left: GFP is expression in animals with RNAi against GFP without
rde-1 rescue in the linker cell. Bottom left: GFP
expression is reduced in animals with rde-1 rescued in
the linker cell subjected to GFP RNAi. Right: Quantification of
fluorescence intensity. n=16 for each genotype. Error bars, SD.
p<0.0001, Student’s t-test. Scalebar = 10 μm.
DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.011
(A) siah-1p::GFP. Left, merged
DIC/fluorescent image of a dying linker cell at the cloaca; middle,
fluorescent image of the linker cell at left; right, merged
DIC/fluoresent image of a migrating linker cell. Scalebar, 10 μm. Arrow,
linker cell. (B) Same as (A) except
rbx-1p::GFP. (C) Same as
(A) except cul-3p::GFP.
DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.012
Figure 4—figure supplement 1.
let-70(RNAi) animals have unengulfed linker
cells.
(A) Surviving let-70(RNAi) linker cell fail
is not engulfed. Scalebar, 5 μm. Arrow/red cell, linker cell. Green
cells, engulfing U.l/rp cells. (B) Cell-specific linker cell
RNAi by restoring rde-1 expression in
rde-1 mutants only to the linker cell using a
mig-24 promoter::rde-1 cDNA
transgene. lag-2::GFP is used to mark the linker cell.
Top left: GFP is expression in animals with RNAi against GFP without
rde-1 rescue in the linker cell. Bottom left: GFP
expression is reduced in animals with rde-1 rescued in
the linker cell subjected to GFP RNAi. Right: Quantification of
fluorescence intensity. n=16 for each genotype. Error bars, SD.
p<0.0001, Student’s t-test. Scalebar = 10 μm.
DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.011
let-70 promotes linker cell death.
(A) let-70 gene structure and
mutations/RNAi clones used in our studies. Black boxes, exons; white
boxes, 5’ or 3’ untranslated regions. Scale bar, 200 bp. (B)
Combined DIC and fluorescent images of let-70(RNAi)
adult male. lag-2p::GFP marks the linker cell. Arrow,
linker cell. White line, cloaca. Scale bar, 10 μm. (C) EM of
surviving let-70(RNAi) linker cell. Scale bar, 2 μm.
Asterisk, mitochondria, Arrowhead, ER, N, nucleus, nl, nucleolus.
(D) Purified 6xHis-LET-70, DrosophilaUBA1, DIAP1 and ubiquitin. causes DIAP1 auto-ubiquitination.
(E-H) Linker cell survival in indicated genotypes. No.
animals scored, inside bars. Error bars, SEM. *p<0.001; **p<0.0001;
Fisher’s Exact Test; ns, not significant. Animals contained
qIs56 and him-5(e1490). In
(F) animals also contained rrf-3(pk1426)
for increased RNAi efficiency. In LC-only experiments,
mig-24p was used to drive rde-1 cDNA
in rde-1(ne219); him-8(e1489); qIs56 mutants. ND, not
determined.DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.010
let-70(RNAi) animals have unengulfed linker
cells.
(A) Surviving let-70(RNAi) linker cell fail
is not engulfed. Scalebar, 5 μm. Arrow/red cell, linker cell. Green
cells, engulfing U.l/rp cells. (B) Cell-specific linker cell
RNAi by restoring rde-1 expression in
rde-1 mutants only to the linker cell using a
mig-24 promoter::rde-1 cDNA
transgene. lag-2::GFP is used to mark the linker cell.
Top left: GFP is expression in animals with RNAi against GFP without
rde-1 rescue in the linker cell. Bottom left: GFP
expression is reduced in animals with rde-1 rescued in
the linker cell subjected to GFP RNAi. Right: Quantification of
fluorescence intensity. n=16 for each genotype. Error bars, SD.
p<0.0001, Student’s t-test. Scalebar = 10 μm.DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.011
Expression of siah-1, rbx-1, and
cul-3 in migrating and dying linker cells.
(A) siah-1p::GFP. Left, merged
DIC/fluorescent image of a dying linker cell at the cloaca; middle,
fluorescent image of the linker cell at left; right, merged
DIC/fluoresent image of a migrating linker cell. Scalebar, 10 μm. Arrow,
linker cell. (B) Same as (A) except
rbx-1p::GFP. (C) Same as
(A) except cul-3p::GFP.DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.012To confirm the let-70RNAi results, we sought animals carrying
inactivating mutations in the gene. Animals homozygous for a previously isolated
allele, tm2777, or a CRISPR/Cas9-induced deletion we generated,
ns636, exhibit larval lethality and adult sterility as previously
reported for the s689 allele (Zhen
et al., 1993), precluding studies of LCD. However, ns770,
a CRISPR/Cas9-induced C-to-T point mutation we made that is predicted to generate a
P61S alteration in the LET-70 protein, is viable (Figure 4A). A similar lesion confers instability to the S.
cerevisiae UBC4E2 enzyme at 39°C (Tongaonkar et al., 1999), suggesting that ns770 may be a
partial loss-of-function allele. Indeed, we found that 57% of
let-70(ns770) animals possess surviving linker cells (Figure 4E). This defect is not temperature
dependent in the growth range of C. elegans (15°C: 62%, n=78; 25°C:
57%, n=87), perhaps because these temperatures are much lower than those abolishing
function in yeast.To determine where LET-70 acts to promote death, we generated
let-70(ns770) animals carrying a mig-24
promoter::let-70 cDNA construct expressed specifically in the
linker cell. As shown in Figure 4E, LCD is
restored in these animals, suggesting that let-70 acts within the
linker cell to promote its demise (Figure 4E).
To confirm this idea, we carried out linker-cell-specific let-70RNAi. RDE-1 is an argonaute protein required for RNAi, and in rde-1(ne219);
mig-24 promoter::rde-1 cDNA animals, RNAi is only
functional in the linker cell (Figure 4—figure
supplement 1B). RNAi against let-70 in these animals also
prevents LCD (Figure 4E). We conclude that
LET-70 acts cell autonomously to kill the linker cell.let-70 is predicted to encode a protein 94% identical to the
mammalian E2 ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme UBE2D2 (Zhen et al., 1993). To confirm that LET-70 indeed functions as an E2
enzyme, we assayed its ability to mediate ubiquitin transfer in an in vitro
ubiquitylation assay. Incubation of LET-70 with the DrosophilaUBA1
E1-activating enzyme and the Drosophila E3 ligase DIAP1 results in
DIAP autoubiquitylation in the presence of ATP, magnesium ions, and ubiquitin (Figure 4D). A similar reaction without LET-70
does not yield DIAP ubiquitylation, suggesting that LET-70 functions as an E2. To
determine whether LET-70 functions as an E2 enzyme in vivo, we first examined
let-70(ns770) animals expressing a mig-24
promoter::let-70(C85S) cDNA transgene predicted to change the
LET-70 catalytic cysteine 85 to serine. However, transgenic animals exhibited
hermaphrodite sterility (presumably due to expression in the hermaphrodite distal tip
cell required for gonad development), suggesting that LET-70(C85S) is a dominant
negative protein. However, in another set of experiments, we found that while a
silently-mutated RNAi-resistant let-70 cDNA partially rescues the
LCD defect of let-70(RNAi) animals, a similar cDNA encoding the C85S
mutation does not (Figure 4E). Taken together,
our studies suggest that the ubiquitin-conjugating activity of LET-70 is required in
vivo for LCD.To determine whether other E2 enzymes are also required for LCD, we performed RNAi
against 13/22 E2-encoding genes with available dsRNA bacterial clones and found no
evidence of inappropriate linker cell survival, indicating that LET-70 likely acts
specifically to promote LCD (Supplementary file 1B).
The proteasome and other UPS components promote linker cell death
To determine whether LET-70 functions as part of the ubiquitin proteasome system
(UPS) for LCD, we first tested if UBA-1, the sole E1 activating enzyme in C.
elegans, is also required. While systemic RNAi against
uba-1 is early-larval lethal, linker-cell-specific RNAi against
uba-1 produces a robust defect in LCD (Figure 4F). Similarly, weak uba-1(it129) mutant
animals survive to adulthood and display weak but significant linker cell survival
(17 ± 2% survival, n=209). Furthermore, RNAi against the gene encoding ubiquitin,
ubq-1, also blocks LCD (Figure
4F). Thus, LCD requires canonical components of the ubiquitin-mediated
protein degradation pathway.We also examined the effects of inhibiting components of the 19S proteasome
regulatory subunit on LCD and found that systemic RNAi against the rpn-3,
rpn-8, or rpn-11 genes results in linker cell survival
in about one third of animals (Figure 4F), and
linker cell-specific RNAi against these genes results in similar inhibition (Figure 4F). Taken together, our results strongly
suggest that LET-70 functions in the linker cell as a component of the UPS.
The E3 components CUL-3, RBX-1, BTBD-2, and SIAH-1, function with LET-70 to
promote linker cell death
E2 enzymes such as LET-70 function through E3 proteins to mediate protein degradation
(Hershko et al., 1983). We therefore
sought to identify E3 ubiquitin ligase components that mediate LET-70 activity.
Cullin proteins are subunits of many E3 enzymes, and the C. elegans
genome encodes six such proteins (CUL-1-6). We tested whether any of these is
involved in LCD and found that RNAi against the cul-3 gene results
in inappropriate linker cell survival (Figure
4G, Supplementary
file 1C). Linker-cell-specific RNAi against cul-3 also
yields surviving linker cells, supporting a cell autonomous function for this gene.
Strikingly, cul-3(RNAi); let-70(ns770) animals
exhibit a synergistic increase in linker cell survival well above each single mutant,
indicating that these genes likely function together, in sequence or in parallel, to
promote LCD (Figure 4G).Previous studies had demonstrated interactions between CUL-3 and the RING protein
RBX-1 in C. elegans (Pintard et
al., 2003). While many RING-finger encoding genes we tested by RNAi do not
appear to have roles in LCD (Supplementary file 1B), we found that RNAi against the
rbx-1 gene does promote modest linker cell survival (Figure 4G), suggesting a role in LCD. Supporting
this notion, cul-3 and rbx-1 are both expressed in
the linker cell (Figure 4—figure supplement
2).
Figure 4—figure supplement 2.
Expression of siah-1, rbx-1, and
cul-3 in migrating and dying linker cells.
(A) siah-1p::GFP. Left, merged
DIC/fluorescent image of a dying linker cell at the cloaca; middle,
fluorescent image of the linker cell at left; right, merged
DIC/fluoresent image of a migrating linker cell. Scalebar, 10 μm. Arrow,
linker cell. (B) Same as (A) except
rbx-1p::GFP. (C) Same as
(A) except cul-3p::GFP.
DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.012
CUL-3 E3 complexes often contain BTB-domain substrate binding proteins. We screened
23 BTB proteins by RNAi and/or mutation, and identified two that block LCD when
inactivated (Supplementary
file 1C). One of these, EOR-1, will be described elsewhere. The other,
BTBD-2, is homologous to humanBTBD2, and its inactivation results in linker cell
survival in roughly half of animals examined (Figure
4G). Expression of BTBD-2 using the mig-24
linker-cell-specific promoter restored linker cell death to
btbd-2(gk474281) mutants (47 ± 3% survival in
btbd-2(gk474281) mutants (N=90) vs. 31 ± 4% survival in
transgenic lines, 2 lines examined (N=81)).We also examined 55 genes encoding protein domains commonly found in E3 enzymes
(Supplementary file
1B,C). We found that RNAi against the seven-in-absentia homolog
siah-1 causes a modest but significant linker cell survival
defect (Figure 4G). To confirm this
observation, we examined animals defective for the siah-1(tm1968)
mutation, which deletes most of exon 4 of the gene and is likely a molecular null,
and found a similar survival defect. Interestingly, both siah-1(tm1968);
cul-3(RNAi) and siah-1(tm1968); rbx-1(RNAi) double
mutants exhibit greater linker cell survival than either single mutant (Figure 4G). We conclude that CUL-3, RBX-1,
BTBD-2, and SIAH-1, all function to promote LCD and likely do so downstream of
LET-70.
LET-70 expression is induced at the time of linker cell death and requires known
linker cell death genes
To study the expression and localization of LET-70, we generated animals carrying
let-70 promoter::let-70::GFP or
let-70 promoter::GFP transgenes. We found that both reporters are
expressed in the linker cell and that the translational fusion reporter is evenly
distributed between the nucleus and cytoplasm (Figure
5B, data not shown). Importantly, we found that expression of neither
reporter is constitutive. Rather, while GFP fluorescence is not detected during
migration of the linker cell, it is induced 1–2 hr before obvious morphological
features of cell death appear (Figure 5A–C).
Similar induction is seen with a fosmid recombineered to contain 18.9 kb surrounding
the genomic let-70 locus fused to GFP (n>25). We wondered whether
the expression of other components of the UPS might also be induced in the linker
cell with similar kinetics. Although some reporter genes we tested are not induced
(Figure 4—figure supplement 2),
expression of GFP reporter fusions to the ubq-1 gene, encoding
C. elegansubiquitin, and to the proteasome component gene
rpn-3 is induced (Figures
5D–I). These results suggest that expression of some UPS components is
upregulated in the linker cell just prior to cell death onset.
Figure 5.
let-70, ubq-1, and rpn-3 expression is
induced just before linker cell death onset.
(A-C) let-70p::let-70::GFP
expression in migrating (A) or dying (B) linker
cell. Scale bar, 10 μm. (C) Expression quantification in
(A,B). Error bars, SEM. Number inside bar, no. animals
scored. (D-F) Same as (A-C) for
ubq-1p::ubq-1::GFP. (G-I)
Same as (A-C) for rpn-3p::GFP.
(J) Expression of indicated GFP reporters in surviving linker
cells in him-8(e1489) animals of indicated genotype.
(K) All animals contained qIs56 and
him-5(e1490). *let-70(RNAi) instead of
let-70(ns770).
DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.013
let-70, ubq-1, and rpn-3 expression is
induced just before linker cell death onset.
(A-C) let-70p::let-70::GFP
expression in migrating (A) or dying (B) linker
cell. Scale bar, 10 μm. (C) Expression quantification in
(A,B). Error bars, SEM. Number inside bar, no. animals
scored. (D-F) Same as (A-C) for
ubq-1p::ubq-1::GFP. (G-I)
Same as (A-C) for rpn-3p::GFP.
(J) Expression of indicated GFP reporters in surviving linker
cells in him-8(e1489) animals of indicated genotype.
(K) All animals contained qIs56 and
him-5(e1490). *let-70(RNAi) instead of
let-70(ns770).DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.013To understand how the induction of UPS genes is regulated, we looked at the
expression of let-70 promoter::let-70::GFP and
ubq-1 promoter::ubq-1::GFP reporter transgenes
in surviving cells in mutants of the Wnt, LIN-29, and SEK-1/MAPKK pathways we
identified as LCD regulators. Wild-type rpn-3 promoter::GFP
expression decreases in all cells in the first hours of adulthood and was not bright
enough to reliably score in mutant backgrounds. We found that surviving linker cells
in mutants of all three pathways often failed to express either GFP reporter (Figure 5J), but the effects were more pronounced
for the let-70 reporter. Double mutants between mutant components of
each of the three regulatory pathways and let-70(ns770 or RNAi)
demonstrate additive interactions (Figure 5K),
as would be expected with combinations of partial loss-of-function mutants
functioning in the same pathway. Taken together, our results are consistent with a
model in which LET-70 functions downstream of the Wnt, LIN-29, and SEK-1/MAPKK
signals.
LET-70 functions downstream of HSF-1
To examine the relationship between let-70 and
hsf-1, we looked at the expression of the let-70
promoter::let-70::GFP and ubq-1
promoter::ubq-1::GFP reporter transgenes in an
hsf-1(sy441) partial loss-of-function mutant. As shown in Figure 6A, GFP expression was significantly
reduced for both, with a more pronounced effect for the let-70
reporter. These studies indicate that wild-type HSF-1 activity is required to induce
let-70 expression, and, therefore, that LET-70 functions
downstream of HSF-1. let-70 promoter::let-70::GFP
expression is not induced by heat shock, consistent with previous Northern blot
studies (Figure 6B) (Zhen et al., 1993). Therefore, consistent with our
characterization of HSF-1, HSF-1 must be acting in a manner distinct from the
heat-shock response to induce let-70 expression and cell death in
the linker cell.
Figure 6.
HSF-1 controls LET-70 expression.
(A) Expression of indicated GFP reporter in surviving linker
cells in him-8(e1489) animals of indicated genotype.
**p<0.0001, *p<0.005, Fisher’s exact test. Error bars, SEM.
(B)
let-70p::let-70::gfp expression in head
region after heat shock. Error bars, SD. ns, not significant, Student’s
t-test. (C) let-70 promoter sequence
alignment across indicated nematodes. Red, conserved nucleotides.
(D) Same as (C) but for
rpn-3. (E) let-70p::GFP
and let-70∆HSE::GFP expression. Error bar, SEM.
*p<0.0001, Fisher’s exact test. (F)
let-70 and btbd-2 interactions with
hsf-1. Error bars, SEM. Number within bars, no. of
animals scored. Animals contained qIs56 and
him-5(e1490). ND= not determined.
DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.014
(A) Male containing an integrated wild-type
let-70p::let-70::GFP transgene;
inset: higher magnification image of linker cell. Scale bar, 10 μm.
Arrow, linker cell. (B) Same as (A) except with
∆HSE.
DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.015
HSF-1 controls LET-70 expression.
(A) Expression of indicated GFP reporter in surviving linker
cells in him-8(e1489) animals of indicated genotype.
**p<0.0001, *p<0.005, Fisher’s exact test. Error bars, SEM.
(B)
let-70p::let-70::gfp expression in head
region after heat shock. Error bars, SD. ns, not significant, Student’s
t-test. (C) let-70 promoter sequence
alignment across indicated nematodes. Red, conserved nucleotides.
(D) Same as (C) but for
rpn-3. (E) let-70p::GFP
and let-70∆HSE::GFP expression. Error bar, SEM.
*p<0.0001, Fisher’s exact test. (F)
let-70 and btbd-2 interactions with
hsf-1. Error bars, SEM. Number within bars, no. of
animals scored. Animals contained qIs56 and
him-5(e1490). ND= not determined.DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.014
∆HSE reduces let-70
promoter::let-70::GFP expression in the linker
cell.
(A) Male containing an integrated wild-type
let-70p::let-70::GFP transgene;
inset: higher magnification image of linker cell. Scale bar, 10 μm.
Arrow, linker cell. (B) Same as (A) except with
∆HSE.DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.015The DNA motif TTCTAGAA is enriched in regulatory regions of genes induced in
C. elegans in response to heat shock (GuhaThakurta et al., 2002), and the motif TTCnnGAAnnTTC has
been defined as an HSF binding element from yeast to mammals. A comparison of
let-70 genomic sequences upstream of the ATG start codon revealed
a region highly conserved between C. elegans and at least three
other related nematode species (Figure 6C).
Within this region we identified two conserved motifs. The upstream motif (motif 1)
is identical to the HSF consensus binding site, whereas the downstream motif (motif
2) contains two potential HSF monomer binding sites (TTC and GAA). We also identified
a highly conserved heat-shock element (HSE) upstream of the rpn-3
gene (Figures 5G-I, 6D). A consensus HSF binding site was not found within the
regulatory sequences used for the ubq-1 reporter studies; however, a
number of one-off sites were found, perhaps explaining the weaker regulation of our
ubq-1 reporter by HSF-1.To test the functional relevance of the let-70 heat-shock element
homology region for let-70 expression, we generated animals
harboring a let-70 promoter::GFP reporter transgene in which a 97
nucleotide region including conserved motif 1 and 2 were deleted
(let-70∆HSE::GFP). As shown in Figure 6E, transgenic animals failed to express the reporter in the dying
linker cell in about 40% of animals, consistent with the similar defect we observed
in let-70::GFP expression in hsf-1(sy441)
loss-of-function mutants. Importantly, GFP expression in other cells of
let-70∆HSE::GFP animals was not perturbed (Figure 6E, Figure 6—figure
supplement 1), suggesting a specific role for this DNA element in
controlling linker cell expression of let-70.
Figure 6—figure supplement 1.
∆HSE reduces let-70
promoter::let-70::GFP expression in the linker
cell.
(A) Male containing an integrated wild-type
let-70p::let-70::GFP transgene;
inset: higher magnification image of linker cell. Scale bar, 10 μm.
Arrow, linker cell. (B) Same as (A) except with
∆HSE.
DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.015
Our results demonstrate that let-70 expression is under the control
of HSF-1, likely acting through a consensus heat-shock element in the
let-70 5’ control region, but not through the canonical
heat-shock response pathway. To functionally probe this model, we tested the genetic
relationship between let-70 and hsf-1. hsf-1(sy441);
let-70(ns770) animals harboring partial loss-of-function perturbations of
each gene, have increased linker survival compared to either single mutant alone
(Figure 6F). More importantly, while the
hsf-1(R145A) gain-of-function transgene restores cell death to
all previously tested LCD mutants (see above), it fails to rescue inappropriate
linker cell survival in let-70(ns770) mutants (Figure 6F). Likewise, the hsf-1(R145A)
gain-of-function transgene fails to restore cell death to
btbd-2(gk474281) mutants (Figure
6F).Taken together, our results suggest that LET-70 and BTBD-2 function downstream of a
linker-cell-specific non-canonical function of HSF-1 to promote LCD. Our data also
suggest that other HSF-1 targets are likely relevant, and that
let-70 may be under the control of additional regulators.
Discussion
A new pathway for non-apoptotic cell death
The results presented here allow us to construct a model for the initiation and
execution of LCD in C. elegans (Figure 7). The logic of the LCD pathway may be similar to that of
developmental apoptotic pathways. In C. elegans and
Drosophila, where the control of specific cell deaths has been
primarily examined, cell lineage or fate determinants control the expression of
specific transcription factors that then impinge on proteins regulating caspase
activation (Fuchs and Steller, 2011).
Likewise, LCD is initiated by redundant determinants that require a transcription
factor to activate protein degradation genes.
Green, upstream regulators. Orange, HSF-1. Purple, proteolytic
components.DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12821.016Our data suggest that three partially redundant signals control LCD initiation. The
antagonistic Wnt pathways we describe may provide positional information to the
linker cell, as the relevant ligands are expressed only near the region where the
linker cell dies. The LIN-29 pathway, which controls timing decisions during the
L4-adult molt, may ensure that LCD takes place only at the right time. Finally, while
the TIR-1/SEK-1 pathway could act constitutively in the linker cell, it may also
respond to specific cues from neighboring cells. Indeed, MAPK pathways are often
induced by extracellular ligands. We propose that these three pathways, together,
trigger activation of HSF-1. Our data support a model in which HSF-1 is present in
two forms, HSF-1LC, promoting LCD, and HSF-1HS, protecting
cells from stresses, including heat shock. We postulate that the redundant LCD
initiation pathways tip the balance in favor of HSF-1LC, allowing this
activity to bind to promoters and induce transcription of key LCD effectors,
including LET-70/UBE2D2 and other components of the ubiquitin proteasome system
(UPS), functioning through E3 ligase complexes consisting of CUL-3, RBX-1, BTBD-2,
and SIAH-1.Importantly, the molecular identification of LCD components and their interactions
opens the door to testing the impact of this cell death pathway on vertebrate
development. For example, monitoring UBE2D2 expression during development could
reveal upregulation in dying cells. Likewise, genetic lesions in pathway components
we identified may lead to a block in cell death. Double mutants in apoptotic and LCD
genes would allow testing of the combined contributions of these processes.
The proteasome and LCD
As is the case with caspase proteases that mediate apoptosis (Pop and Salvesen, 2009), how the UPS induces LCD is not clear,
and remains an exciting area of future work. That loss of BTBD-2, a specific E3
ligase component, causes extensive linker cell survival suggests that a limited set
of targets may be required for LCD. Previous work demonstrated that BTBD2, the
vertebrate homolog of BTBD-2, interacts with topoisomerase I (Khurana et al., 2010; Xu et
al., 2002), raising the possibility that this enzyme may be a relevant
target, although other targets may exist.The UPS has been implicated in a number of cell death processes in which it appears
to play a general role in cell dismantling, most notably, perhaps, in intersegmental
muscle remodeling during metamorphosis in moths (Haas et al., 1995). However, other studies suggest that the UPS can have
specific regulatory functions, as with caspase inhibition by IAP E3 ligases (Ditzel et al., 2008).During Drosophila sperm development, caspase activity is induced by
the UPS to promote sperm individualization, a process that resembles
cytoplasm-specific activation of apoptosis (Arama et
al., 2007). While C. eleganscaspases are dispensible for
LCD, it remains possible that they participate in linker cell dismantling or serve as
a backup in case the LCD program fails.Finally, the proteasome contains catalytic domains with target cleavage specificity
reminiscent of caspases; however, inactivation of the caspase-like sites does not,
alone, result in overt cellular defects (Britton et
al., 2009), suggesting that this activity may be needed to degrade only
specific substrates. Although the proteasome generally promotes proteolysis to short
peptides, site-specific cleavage of proteins by the proteasome has been described
(Chen et al., 1999). It is intriguing to
speculate, therefore, that caspases and the proteasome may have common, and specific,
targets in apoptosis and LCD.
A pro-death developmental function for HSF-1
Our discovery that C. elegansheat-shock factor, HSF-1, promotes
cell death is surprising. Heat-shock factors are thought to be protective proteins,
orchestrating the response to protein misfolding induced by a variety of stressors,
including elevated temperature. Although a role for HSF1 has been proposed in
promoting apoptosis of mouse spermatocytes following elevated temperatures (Nakai et al., 2000), it is not clear whether
this function is physiological. In this context, HSF1 induces expression of the gene
Tdag51 (Hayashida et al., 2006). Both pro-
and anti-apoptotic activities have been attributed to Tdag51 (Toyoshima et al., 2004), and which is activated in sperm is not
clear. Recently, pathological roles for HSF1 in cancer have been detailed (e.g. Mendillo et al., 2012), but in these capacities
HSF1 still supports cell survival.Developmental functions for HSF1 have been suggested in which HSF1 appears to act
through transcriptional targets different from those of the heat-shock response
(Jedlicka et al., 1997), although target
identity remains obscure. Here, we have shown that HSF-1 has at least partially
non-overlapping sets of stress-induced and developmental targets. Indeed, typical
stress targets of HSF-1, such as the small heat-shock gene hsp-16.49
as well as genes encoding larger chaperones, like hsp-1, are not
expressed during LCD, whereas let-70, a direct transcriptional
target for LCD, is not induced by heat shock. Interestingly, the yeastlet-70 homologs ubc4 and ubc5
are induced by heat shock (Seufert and Jentsch,
1990), supporting a conserved connection between HSF and UBE2D2-family
proteins. However, the distinction between developmental and stress functions is
clearly absent in this single-celled organism, raising the possibility that this
separation of function may be a metazoan innovation.What distinguishes the stress-related and developmental forms of HSF-1? One
possibility is that whereas the stress response appears to be mediated by HSF-1
trimerization, HSF-1 monomers or dimers might promote LCD roles. Although this model
would nicely account for the differential activities in stress responses and LCD of
the HSF-1(R145A) transgenic protein, which would be predicted to favor inactivation
of a larger proportion of higher order HSF-1 complexes, the identification of
conserved tripartite HSEs in the let-70 and rpn-3
regulatory regions argues against this possibility. Alternatively, selective
post-translational modification of HSF-1 could account for these differences. In
mammals, HSF1 undergoes a variety of modifications including phosphorylation,
acetylation, ubiquitination, and sumoylation (Xu et
al., 2012), which, depending on the site and modification, stimulate or
repress HSF1 activity. In this context, it is of note that p38/MAPK-mediated
phosphorylation of HSF1 represses its stress-related activity (Chu et al., 1996), and the LCD regulator SEK-1 encodes a MAPKK.
However, no single MAPK has been identified that promotes LCD (E.S.B., M.J.K.
unpublished results), suggesting that other mechanisms may be at play.Our finding that POP-1/TCF does not play a significant role in LCD raises the
possibility that Wnt signaling exerts direct control over HSF-1 through interactions
with β-catenin. However, we have not been able to demonstrate physical interactions
between these proteins to date (M.J.K, unpublished results).Finally, a recent paper (Labbadia and Morimoto,
2015) demonstrated that in young adult C. elegans, around
the time of LCD, global binding of HSF-1 to its stress-induced targets is reduced
through changes in chromatin modification. Remarkably, we showed that chromatin
regulators play a key role in let-70 induction and LCD (J.A.M.,
M.J.K and S.S., manuscript in preparation), suggesting, perhaps, that differences in
HSF-1 access to different loci may play a role in distinguishing its two
functions.
LCD and neurodegeneration
Previous studies from our lab raised the possibility that LCD may be related to
degenerative processes that promote vertebrate neuronal death. Nuclear crenellation
is evident in dying linker cells and in degenerating cells in polyQ disease (Abraham et al., 2007) and the TIR-1/Sarm adapter
protein promotes LCD in C. elegans as well as degeneration of distal
axonal segments following axotomy in Drosophila and vertebrates
(Osterloh et al., 2012). The studies we
present here, implicating the UPS and heat-shock factor in LCD, also support a
connection with neurodegeneration. Indeed, protein aggregates found in cells of
patients with polyQ diseases are heavily ubiquitylated (Kalchman et al., 1996). Chaperones also colocalize with protein
aggregates in brain slices from SCApatients, and HSF1 has been shown to alleviate
polyQ aggregation and cellular demise in both polyQ-overexpressing flies and in
neuronal precursor cells (Neef et al.,
2010). While the failure of proteostatic mechanisms in neurodegenerative
diseases is generally thought to be a secondary event in their pathogenesis, it is
possible that this failure reflects the involvement of a LCD-like process, in which
attempts to engage protective measures instead result in activation of a specific
cell death program.
Materials and methods
Strains
C. elegans strains were cultured using standard methods (Brenner, 1974) and were grown at 20°C unless
otherwise indicated. Wild-type animals were the Bristol N2 subspecies. Most strains
harbor one of two mutations that generate a high percentage of male progeny,
him-8(e1489) IV or him-5(e1490) V, as well as
one of two integrated linker cell markers, qIs56[lag-2p::GFP]V or
nsIs65[mig-24p::Venus] X. Other alleles and transgenes used are
as follows:LGI: hsf-1(sy441), lin-44(n1792),
mig-1(e1787), lin-17(n3091), unc-101(sy216), gsk-3(nr2047), pop-1(q624),
pop-1(q645), pop-1(hu9), daf-16(mu86), unc-13(e1091).LGII: mig-14(ga62), lin-29(n333),
lin-29(n546), mig-5(rh147), cam-1(gm122), cwn-1(ok546), rrf-3(pk1426),
drSi13[hsf-1p::hsf-1-gfp],
drSi28[hsf-1p::hsf-1(R145A)-GFP],
nsSi2[hsf-1p::hsf-1(R145A)-GFP],
nsSi3[hsf-1p::hsf-1(R145A)-GFP].LGIII: pqn-41(ns294), wrm-1(ne1982),
lit-1(t512), unc-32(e189), mom-4(ne1539), mom-4(or39), unc-119(ed4).LGIV: siah-1(tm1968), egl-20(n585),
cwn-2(ky756), cwn-2(ok895), let-70(ns770), uba-1(it129),
btbd-2(gk474281).LGV: rde-1(ne219), cfz-2(ok1201),
mom-2(ne834), daf-21(p673).LGX: bar-1(ga80), sek-1(ag1),
lin-18(e620).
Transgenic strains
See Supplemental file
2A.
MosSCI
Two additional lines of hsf-1p::hsf-1 (R145A)-GFP
were generated from pOG124 (a gift of T. Lamitina), by the ‘direct’ method, as
previously described (Frøkjaer-Jensen et al.,
2014). One line failed to exhibit bar-1 mutant
suppression, but also did not enhance hsf-1(sy441) survival,
suggesting it was inactive, and was therefore not used in analysis. Inserts were
verified by PCR and expression of HSF-1::GFP.
Generation of let-70(ns770), encoding LET-70(P61S)
let-70(ns770) was generated using co-CRIPSR-based
CRISPR/Cas9-mediated genome editing as previously described (Arribere et al., 2014). pJA42 (Addgene, Cambridge, MA) was
edited using PCR mutagenesis with a ‘universal’ forward primer (5’-
GTTTTAGAGCTAGAAATAGCAAGTTAAAATAAGGCTAG -3’) and a let-70 specific
reverse primer (TTTCTAGCTCTAAAACATGGATAGTCTGTTGGGAAG CAAGACATCTCGCAATAG) to generate
the let-70 targeting vector. Single-stranded oligodeoxynucleotide
‘repair’ templates were ordered from Sigma for let-70(ns770) (5’
TTAAATTTATTTTTTTCCAATTTCGATCAATACCTTTGGTGGTTTAAATGAATAGTCTGTTGGGAAGTGGATAGTGAGGAAGAAGACACCTCCCTGATAGG
3’) and dpy-10(cn64) (Arribere et
al., 2014). N2 animals were injected with the following mix: 50 ng pDD162
(Addgene), 25 ng pJA58 (dpy-10 sgRNA, Addgene), 25 ng
let-70 targeting vector, 20 ng
dpy-10(cn64) repair oligo, 20 ng
let-70(ns770) repair oligo in 1x injection
buffer (20mM potassium phosphate, 3mM potassium citrate, 2% PEG, pH 7.5).F1 generation was screened for animals with a roller or dumpy-roller phenotype,
indicating successful repair of the dpy-10 break using the provided
dpy-10 oligonucleotide template, which were picked to individual
plates. These animals were allowed to lay eggs and then genotyped for successful
co-conversion of the let-70 locus by PCR and Sanger sequencing.
Non-roller F2 animals were then picked from successfully
let-70-converted F1s and homozygosed for
let-70(ns770) before outcrossing twice.
Plasmid construction
See Supplemental file
2B.
RNAi experiments
RNAi was performed by feeding on the strains indicated (Blum et al., 2012). Bleached embryos from gravid hermaphrodites
were synchronized at the L1 stage by leaving them overnight in M9. L1s animals
(30–50% of which were male) were added to each RNAi plate and grown for approximately
48 hr at 20–22°C. 0–2 hr adults were scored using a fluorescent dissecting scope
(Leica). Clones were either newly created by cloning into the L4440 vector, or were
already published clones from the Ahringer feeding library.
RNAi-Resistant let-70 cDNA
Total RNA was extracted using TRIzol (Theromfisher, Waltham, MA) using standard
protocols. cDNAs were amplified from day one adult Caenorhabditis
briggsae using the SuperScript II Reverse Transcriptase (Thermofisher).
C. briggsaelet-70 cDNA with silent mutations was generated using
GeneArt Gene Synthesis (Thermofisher) and cloned into plasmid using standard
conditions. C85S point mutation was generated using Pfu turbo polymerase (Agilent,
Santa Clara, CA) and DpnI digest (NEB, Ipswich, MA) using standard Quikchange
protocol (Agilent).
Germline transformation and rescue experiments
Germline transformation was carried out as previously described (Mello et al., 1991). For GFP expression
analysis, all plasmids were injected into unc-119(ed3) III;
him-8(e1489) IV hermaphrodites with unc-119(+)
(Maduro and Pilgrim, 1995) as a
transformation marker. All plasmids were injected at between 1–50 ng/ul. pBluescript
(Agilent) was used to adjust the DNA concentration of injection mixtures if
necessary. For rescue studies, animals were picked under a fluorescent dissecting
microscope (Leica) the previous night as L3s with YFP- or mCherry-expressing linker
cells to a new RNAi plate and scored the following day. Throughout, only
correctly-migrated linker cells were used in determining survival percentages.
Linker cell survival, migration, and GFP expression assays
Linker cell death was scored as previously described (Blum et al., 2012). Briefly, worms were synchronized by treating
gravid hermaphrodites with alkaline bleach and allowing the eggs to hatch in M9
medium overnight. Synchronized L1s were released onto fresh NGM plates seeded with
OP50 or HT115E. coli containing the RNAi clone of interest, and
maintained at 20°C. Animals were picked to a new plate as late L4s with a fully
retracted tail tip with rays visible under the unshed L4 cuticle. Two hours later,
newly molted adults were mounted on slides on 2% agarose-water pads, anaesthetized in
30 mM sodium azide or 5 mM tetramisole, and examined on a Zeiss Axioplan 2 or
AxioScope A1 under Nomarski optics and widefield fluorescence at 40x or 63x. Images
were acquired through a Zeiss AxioCam and the Axiovision software. The linker cell
was identified by green fluorescence (from reporter transgenes) as well as by its
location and morphology. A linker cell was scored as surviving if its nucleus was
circular with an intact nucleolus, if the cell shape was not rounded, and if the cell
had not shed any large blebs. All other cells were scored as dead or dying. Rescuing
extrachromosomal arrays contained a lag-2p::mCherry construct, and,
in an effort to prevent selection bias towards survival, males with
mCherry-expressing linker cells were picked as L3s for scoring the following day as
young adults, as above. Some Wnt pathway mutants exhibited two linker cells. For
these strains, animals with only one visible linker cell were picked as L3s to score
the following day. Throughout, only correctly migrated cells that had reached the
cloaca were used in determining survival percentages.For GFP expression assays, 0–2 hr adults containing the
let-70p::let-70::GFP (nsIs241)
or ubq-1p::let-70p::GFP (nsIs386)
transgenes were scored for the presence or absence of GFP expression in the linker
cell. The fraction of animals expressing GFP was divided by the fraction of animals
with surviving linker cells in order to obtain an accurate measure of linker cell
expression. This method was verified by looking at GFP expression of reporters with a
lag-2p::mCherry coinjection marker; results using the two
different methodologies showed similar expression patterns.
Electron microscopy
Just-molted (0–2 hr) qIs56 him-5(e1490); bar-1(ga80) or
let-70(RNAi) adult males with surviving linker cells were imaged
using a Zeiss Axioplan 2 compound microscope to measure the relative location of the
linker cell within the worm using the AxioVision software (Zeiss). Animals were then
fixed, stained, embedded in resin, and sectioned using standard methods (Lundquist et al., 2001). Images were acquired
on an FEI TECNAI G2 Spirit BioTwin Transmission Electron Microscope with a Gatan 4K x
4K digital camera at The Rockefeller University EM Resource Center.
Statistical methods
An unpaired t-test was used for GFP quantification in rde-1
knockdown animals and in let-70p::let-70::GFP
animals following heat shock. Fisher’s Exact Tests were used for quantification of
LCD experiments as well as quantification of GFP+ linker cells.
Ubiquitination assay
let-70 cDNA cloned into the vector pET28b(+) (Novagen, ) was
transformed into BL21(DE3) cells using heat shock. Cells were induced overnight with
500 mM IPTG at 25°C. Purification was performed using a previously described protocol
(Sandu et al., 2010). In vitro
ubiquitination assay: A 40 μL reaction containing 3 μg each of purified
DrosophilaUba1, Diap1, and ubiquitin (Gift from C. Sandu) were
incubated with C. elegansHis-LET-70 and reaction buffer (25 mM
Tris, pH 7.5, 50 mM NaCl, 250 μM DTT, 4 mM ATP and 4 mM MgCl2) for 30 min
at 25°C (Sandu et al., 2010). One half of
the reaction was run on an SDS-PAGE gel and stained with Coomassie Blue to visualize
proteins.
Heat-shock assays
Animals were cultured on 4 cm NGM agar plates seeded with E. coliOP50. These plates were sealed with parafilm, placed in a water bath at the indicated
temperature for the indicated time, agar face down, and subsequently returned to the
20°C incubator, until animals were picked for scoring as above.In the interests of transparency, eLife includes the editorial decision letter and
accompanying author responses. A lightly edited version of the letter sent to the
authors after peer review is shown, indicating the most substantive concerns; minor
comments are not usually included.Thank you for submitting your work entitled "HSF-1 Activates the UPS to Promote
Non-Apoptotic Developmental Cell Death in C. elegans" for
consideration by eLife. Your article has been reviewed by two peer
reviewers, and the evaluation has been overseen by Oliver Hobert as a Reviewing Editor
and Naama Barkai as the Senior Editor.The reviewers have discussed the reviews with one another and the Reviewing Editor has
drafted this decision to help you prepare a revised submission.Summary:The importance of the description of mechanistic aspects of linker cell death was
appreciated. However, there was a general sense that much more clarity and caution needs
to be applied to the description of experiments, results and, most importantly,
conclusions. These concerns can be addressed by some significant re-writing of a number
of the conclusions. No further experiments are required.Essential revisions:1) While the implication of a number of interesting genes in this pathway was
appreciated, there was a substantial concern about the interpretation of the genetic
interaction data. Throughout the manuscript, in a number of cases, genetic interaction
arguments were based on examining the enhancement of phenotypes based on the combination
of non-null alleles (or RNAi). Observed enhancements, even if synergistic in nature, do
not prove that genes act in the same pathway; they are equally consistent with genes
acting in separate pathways. The interpretation of all these genetic interaction tests
needs to be more correctly, and carefully, phrased.2) The evidence that hsf-1 controls let-70 expression
is very preliminary and this should be made explicitly clear and conclusions be toned
down accordingly.3) The authors try to describe a molecular-genetic framework governing the initiation
and execution of LCD. The initiation and execution process should be more clearly
defined and genes be more clearly categorized.4) In the Introduction, the authors claimed that "our studies reveal intriguing
design similarities between LCD and apoptosis" This is overstated. How similar are
these two pathways? Depending on transcriptional factors and protein degradation? The
hsf-1/transcriptional evidence is weak and the involvement of
protein degradation relies on the implication of components of the proteasome pathway
but those can play roles in protein-degradation independent processes. While it is
interesting to speculate on difference, the conclusions need to be significantly toned
down.Essential revisions: 1) While the implication of a number of interesting genes
in this pathway was appreciated, there was a substantial concern about the
interpretation of the genetic interaction data. Throughout the manuscript, in a
number of cases, genetic interaction arguments were based on examining the
enhancement of phenotypes based on the combination of non-null alleles (or RNAi).
Observed enhancements, even if synergistic in nature, do not prove that genes act in
the same pathway; they are equally consistent with genes acting in separate pathways.
The interpretation of all these genetic interaction tests needs to be more correctly,
and carefully, phrased.We completely agree with this comment. Although none of our final conclusions depend on
the data of synergy between non-null alleles, we have, nonetheless changed the text
where such results may have appeared to be overreaching. The following specific changes
were made:Results section:“as would be predicted if HSF-1 functions” changed to “as might be predicted if HSF-1
functions”.“indicating that these genes likely function together to promote LCD” changed to
“indicating that these genes likely function together, in sequence or in parallel, to
promote LCD”.“We conclude that SIAH-1, CUL-3, and RBX-1 likely function together to promote LCD and
likely do so downstream of LET-70” changed to “We conclude that SIAH-1, CUL-3, and RBX-1
all function to promote LCD and likely do so downstream of LET-70”.“consistent with the two genes acting in the same pathway” was removed.2) The evidence that hsf-1 controls let-70 expression is very preliminary and
this should be made explicitly clear and conclusions be toned down
accordingly.Our data demonstrate that (1) both
hsf1 and let-70 are required for linker cell death,
(2) that let-70::GFP
expression is induced upon cell death onset, (3)
that hsf-1 is required for this transcriptional induction, (4) that a conserved HSF-1 binding site is present
upstream of let-70 coding sequences, (5) that deletion of these upstream sequences inhibits induction of
let-70::GFP expression, and (6) that unlike all previously described LCD genes, let70
lesions cannot be rescued by an hsf-1 gain of function allele. We therefore feel that
the conclusion that HSF-1 controls let-70 expression is reasonably well
substantiated.Nonetheless, we agree with the reviewer comment in the sense that we have not
demonstrated that HSF-1 directly binds regulatory sequences upstream of the
let-70 gene in vivo. However, this is a very tall order, as the
experiment would require performing chromatin IP from single linker cells, which is
currently a major technical challenge.To avoid confusion about our claims, we have introduced the following changes:Results section: “Taken together, our results strongly suggest that LET-70 functions
downstream of a linker-cell-specific non-canonical function of HSF-1 to promote LCD”
changed to “Taken together, our results suggest that LET-70 functions downstream of a
linker-cell-‐specific non-canonical function of HSF-1 to promote LCD. Our data also
suggest that other HSF-1 targets are likely relevant, and that let- 70 may be under the
control of additional regulators.”3) The authors try to describe a molecular-genetic framework governing the
initiation and execution of LCD. The initiation and execution process should be more
clearly defined and genes be more clearly categorized.We thank the reviewer for this comment, as we were indeed not consistent in our use of
these terms, and, in addition, the figure legend for our model had an error in color
assignment. We have now made several changes to the text, and have reserved use of the
terms “initiation” and “execution” only as they refer to the upstream or downstream
pathway components, respectively. The following specific changes have been made:Figure 7 legend: Pathway color designations
changed to reflect the actual colors.Introduction:“Here we describe a molecular-genetic framework governing the initiation and execution
of LCD in C. elegans” changed to “Here we describe a molecular-genetic
framework governing LCD in C. elegans”.“We demonstrate that LCD initiation is controlled” changed to “We demonstrate that LCD
is controlled”.“increases just before LCD initiation” changed to “increases just before LCD onset”.Results:“dictate cell death initiation” changed to “dictate cell death onset”.“in which organelle changes accompanying cell death initiation are evident” changed to
“in which organelle changes accompanying cell death are evident”.“the parallel pathways controlling LCD initiation” changed to “the parallel pathways
controlling LCD onset”.“let-70 likely acts in the execution of LCD” changed to
“let70 likely acts in promoting LCD”.Discussion:“the molecular identification of a LCD execution machinery” changed to “the molecular
identification of LCD components and their interactions”.“may lead to a block in cell death execution” changed to “may lead to a block in cell
death”.4) In the Introduction, the authors claimed that "our studies reveal
intriguing design similarities between LCD and apoptosis" This is overstated.
How similar are these two pathways? Depending on transcriptional factors and protein
degradation? The hsf-1/transcriptional evidence is weak and the involvement of
protein degradation relies on the implication of components of the proteasome pathway
but those can play roles in protein-degradation independent processes. While it is
interesting to speculate on difference, the conclusions need to be significantly
toned down.We agree with the reviewer that we may have been too exuberant about the similarities in
our use of language. Nonetheless, the similarities we point out are apparent, and worth
noting, in our opinion. We have made the following changes in the text to tone down the
conclusions:Introduction: “Our studies reveal intriguing design similarities” changed to “Our
studies reveal design similarities”.Discussion: “The logic of the LCD pathway is strikingly similar” changed to “The logic
of the LCD pathway may be similar”.
Authors: T Lindsten; A J Ross; A King; W X Zong; J C Rathmell; H A Shiels; E Ulrich; K G Waymire; P Mahar; K Frauwirth; Y Chen; M Wei; V M Eng; D M Adelman; M C Simon; A Ma; J A Golden; G Evan; S J Korsmeyer; G R MacGregor; C B Thompson Journal: Mol Cell Date: 2000-12 Impact factor: 17.970
Authors: Joshua A Arribere; Ryan T Bell; Becky X H Fu; Karen L Artiles; Phil S Hartman; Andrew Z Fire Journal: Genetics Date: 2014-08-26 Impact factor: 4.562
Authors: Marc L Mendillo; Sandro Santagata; Martina Koeva; George W Bell; Rong Hu; Rulla M Tamimi; Ernest Fraenkel; Tan A Ince; Luke Whitesell; Susan Lindquist Journal: Cell Date: 2012-08-03 Impact factor: 41.582