![]() | ![]() |
Formats:
|
||||||||||||
Copyright © 2001 Samuel et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article: verbatim copying and redistribution of this article are permitted in all media for any purpose, provided this notice is preserved along with the article's original URL. Calcium dynamics during fertilization in C. elegans 1Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA 2Cold Spring Harbor Laboratories, Cold Spring Harbor, New York, USA Corresponding author.Aravinthan DT Samuel: asamuel/at/fas.harvard.edu; Venkatesh N Murthy: vnmurthy/at/fas.harvard.edu; Michael O Hengartner: hengartn/at/cshl.org Received March 29, 2001; Accepted April 26, 2001. Abstract Background Of the animals typically used to study fertilization-induced calcium dynamics, none is as accessible to genetics and molecular biology as the model organism Caenorhabditis elegans. Motivated by the experimental possibilities inherent in using such a well-established model organism, we have characterized fertilization-induced calcium dynamics in C. elegans. Results Owing to the transparency of the nematode, we have been able to study the calcium signal in C. elegans fertilization in vivo by monitoring the fluorescence of calcium indicator dyes that we introduce into the cytosol of oocytes. In C. elegans, fertilization induces a single calcium transient that is initiated soon after oocyte entry into the spermatheca, the compartment that contains sperm. Therefore, it is likely that the calcium transient is initiated by contact with sperm. This calcium elevation spreads throughout the oocyte, and decays monotonically after which the cytosolic calcium concentration returns to that preceding fertilization. Only this single calcium transient is observed. Conclusion Development of a technique to study fertilization induced calcium transients opens several experimental possibilities, e.g., identification of the signaling events intervening sperm binding and calcium elevation, identifying the possible roles of the calcium elevation such as the completion of meiosis, the formation of the eggshell, and the establishing of the embryo's axis of symmetry. Introduction In all animals, fertilization generates a pattern of intracellular calcium dynamics within the oocyte that constitutes an essential trigger for normal development. The spatiotemporal properties of the calcium dynamics differ among animals, e.g., echinoderms, fish, and frogs have single calcium transients whereas ascidians, nemerteans, and mammals have multiple calcium oscillations [1]. Fertilization-induced calcium dynamics are mediated by release of internal calcium stores by inositol 1,4,5-triphosphate (IP3). In echinoderms and ascidians, the signaling pathway between sperm-egg fusion and the production of IP3 requires phospholipase Cγ and a Src family kinase, but little is known about the earliest events in this pathway [2,3,4]. In the C. elegans hermaphrodite, oocytes are formed by budding from a syncytium. Afterwards, they undergo maturation, ovulation, and are fertilized internally in a single-file, assembly-line-like process. An oocyte arrests at diakinesis of prophase I upon reaching the entrance to the spermatheca. The nuclear envelope breaks down ~ 6 min before the mature oocyte enters the spermatheca where its leading edge engulfs a single sperm. Eggshell formation is initiated and meiosis I and II and completed immediately follow fertilization. The newly fertilized egg remains in the spermatheca ~ 3-5 min before it is pushed out of the spermatheca and into the uterus [5,6]. The first cleavage in embryonic development occurs ~ 40 min after fertilization. Figure Figure11
Here, we describe fertilization-induced calcium dynamics in the nematode C. elegans (see [7] for a description of an earlier study of the same). The benefit of continued use of C. elegans to study fertilization-induced calcium dynamics is the existence of powerful genetic tools, e.g., techniques for forward and reverse genetics, and an entirely sequenced genome. Molecular genetic analysis of the signaling pathway mediating fertilization-induced calcium dynamics may be possible using C. elegans. Results and discussion We tracked intracellular [Ca++] in oocytes by monitoring the fluorescence of the indicator dye Calcium Green-1 dextran, 10,000 MW (Molecular Probes). We microinjected the syncytial gonad with a solution of dye (100 μM dissolved in dH2O) using conventional techniques (see Materials and Methods; also [8]). As individual oocytes are formed, they incorporate dye in their cytoplasm (see Fig Fig2).2
We coinjected Calcium Green dextran with rhodamine dextran, also 10,000 MW. As in other oocytes [9], both were about 50% brighter in the nucleus than in cytoplasm. This difference is due to the absence of organelles in the nucleus, compared to the significant excluded volume by the abundant yolk particles in the cytoplasm. Dye distributes uniformly throughout the oocyte following breakdown of the nuclear envelope (see Fig. Fig.33
The unfertilized oocyte enters the spermatheca by squeezing through the constriction at its entrance. Fertilization induces a rise in cytosolic calcium within the oocyte that we detect from the increase in fluorescence of Calcium Green-1 (Fig. (Fig.3).3 Under the conditions described above, we typically measured peak increases in Calcium Green-1 fluorescence of ~ 30%. There is no corresponding change in the fluorescence of tetramethylrhodamine, confirming that the rise in Calcium Green-1 fluorescence is due to an increase in cytosolic [Ca++], and not due, for example, to motion artifacts. Although it is difficult to know the resting intracellular [Ca++] and the fluorescence properties of Calcium Green-1 in cytosol, assuming a resting concentration of 100 nM and the properties of Calcium Green-1 published in the Molecular Probes catalogue, the increase in Calcium Green-1 fluorescence indicates an elevation to ~ 250 nM. Assuming a resting concentration of 50 nM, the elevation would be to ~ 125 nM. The resting concentration is plausibly in the range of 50-100 nM (a range typical of most cell types). Also, although on the low side, the calcium elevation is of the same order of magnitude to other species, e.g., mollusks ~ 250 nM, annelids ~ 500 nm (see [1], for an exhaustive comparative analysis). In any event, the dynamics of the fertilization induced calcium elevation is clearly evident (see Fig Fig33
The elevation spreads rapidly throughout the oocyte as it completes entry into the spermatheca. The process of oocyte entry and calcium elevation spread takes 2-4 seconds. After fertilization, the calcium elevation drops monotonically to the level prior to fertilization. The time constant for the decay of the calcium elevation τ = 6 +/- 2 min in the three oocytes that we studied until the first cell division (measured by fitting an exponential exp(-t/τ) to the decay; one such experiment is in Fig. Fig.4).4 In most animal eggs, the fertilization induced calcium elevation is due to the release of calcium from internal stores by an IP3. C. elegans has one gene encoding an IP3 receptor, itr-1. Worms homozygous for the null allele of the IP3 receptor, itr-1 (n2559) are sterile [11]. This sterility may be a direct result of the disruption of fertilization induced calcium signaling in the oocyte. It should now be possible to utilize the genetic tools available in C. elegans to study fertilization induced calcium signaling, and in particular to elucidate the signaling pathway intervening the fusion of sperm with oocyte and the rise in intracellular [Ca++]. Conclusion This technique for measuring fertilization induced calcium transients provides a new experimental method in the study of C. elegans. A large number of existing mutants with fertilization defects can now be assayed for possible defects in the calcium transient [12]. Forward genetic (gene knockout and RNAi) methods available in C. elegans should permit testing proteins hypothesized to be involved in this critical step in embryogenesis. Materials and Methods Nematode strains & culture conditions Methods for C. elegans culture and manipulation were as described in [13]. Worms were grown in the same room as the one used for imaging (20-23°C) since they seem to resist fertilizing and laying eggs at other than their growth temperature. The strain used was CB4845 unc-119(e2498) [14]. We used the unc-119(e2498) mutant since its near immobility facilitates extended observation. Microinjection techniques were adapted from [8]. We inserted a needle (produced by pulling 1 mm OD glass capillary and filled with fluorescent dyes at a concentration of 100 μM in dH2O) into one of the 2 gonad arms of a young adult worm immobilized on an injection pad (pads are produced by drying a flattened drop of 2% agarose solution on a clean cover slip). Fluid is expelled into the gonad by moderately pressurizing the needle (we used an Eppendorf Transjector). Fluid can easily be observed entering and filling the gonad during needle pressurization. We aimed to 1/2 fill the gonad with fluid, and thus we presume the final dye concentration in the gonad (and the oocytes that are formed by budding from the gonad) to be ~ 10-50 μM. Worms were allowed to recover for ~ 2 hr after injection before imaging. This procedure did not kill the worm, or seem to damage the reproductive tissue. In every instance (dozens of individual experiments and many dozens of injected worms), viable dye-filled oocytes were produced. The dye-filled oocytes produced by this procedure eventually hatch into dye-filled larvae. To image fertilization, the worms were then mounted in drops of M9 supplemented with 10 mg/mL serotonin on pads of 2% agarose. Serotonin promotes egg laying and seems to promote fertilization [15]. Sometimes, sloppy injections result in dye leaked into compartments outside the oocytes and syncytium. As previously noted with other injected dyes, dye that leaks outside the reproductive tissue accumulates in the coelomocytes [16]. We disposed of poorly injected worms. Finally, a coverslip was placed on the slide and sealed using nail polish. Microscopy Confocal microscopy (Figs. (Figs.22 We observed calcium transients in 8/12 fertilized oocytes. We limited observation prior to fertilization to about 20 min. We found that it is critical to limit the animal's exposure to light and heat. Carelessness in this regard seemed to damage animals and oocytes, arresting fertilization and egg-laying. We routinely used an IR filter to block heat from the tungsten illumination. With video microscopy we used 1 % transmission neutral density filters to block most of the excitation light from the mercury arc source. Since the confocal microscope was used to assess the slow decline of the calcium transient, we typically scanned at a rate of 1 scan cycle per minute, and attenuated the laser to the lowest usable settings. The efforts taken to reduce light exposure also eliminated problems of photobleaching. Acknowledgements We began these experiments during the 1999 CSHL C. elegans course. We thank Karel Svoboda for providing access and support with imaging equipment. ADTS warmly thanks Mark Terasaki and Rindy Jaffe for teaching him about calcium imaging and fertilization; this paper would not exist without their coaching. Some strains were obtained from the C. elegans Genetic Stock Center, which is funded by a grant from the NIH National Center for Research Support. ADTS is an Amgen Fellow of the Life Sciences Research Foundation. References
|
PubMed related articles
Your browsing activity is empty. Activity recording is turned off. |
|||||||||||
Dev Biol. 1999 Jul 15; 211(2):157-76.
[Dev Biol. 1999]Dev Biol. 1999 Feb 15; 206(2):232-47.
[Dev Biol. 1999]J Cell Biol. 1997 Sep 22; 138(6):1303-11.
[J Cell Biol. 1997]J Biol Chem. 1999 Oct 8; 274(41):29318-22.
[J Biol Chem. 1999]Dev Biol. 1999 Jan 1; 205(1):111-28.
[Dev Biol. 1999]J Cell Sci. 1994 Jul; 107 ( Pt 7)():1797-805.
[J Cell Sci. 1994]Development. 1996 May; 122(5):1467-74.
[Development. 1996]Dev Biol. 1999 Jul 15; 211(2):157-76.
[Dev Biol. 1999]Dev Biol. 1999 Jul 15; 211(2):157-76.
[Dev Biol. 1999]Cell. 1999 Sep 17; 98(6):757-67.
[Cell. 1999]Dev Biol. 2001 Feb 15; 230(2):101-9.
[Dev Biol. 2001]Genetics. 1995 Nov; 141(3):977-88.
[Genetics. 1995]Science. 1982 May 28; 216(4549):1012-4.
[Science. 1982]