Michael A. Herman (2006) WormBook "Hermaphrodite cell-fate specification."

Michael A. Herman

[WormBook, 2006]

There are two sexes in C. elegans, hermaphrodite and male. While there are many sex-specific differences between males and hermaphrodites that affect most tissues, the basic body plan and many of its structures are identical. However, most structures required for mating or reproduction are sexually dimorphic and are generated by sex-specific cell lineages. Thus to understand cell fate specification in hermaphrodites, one must consider how the body plan, which is specified during embryogenesis, influences the fates individual cells. One possible mechanism may involve the asymmetric distribution of POP-1 /Tcf, the sole C. elegans Tcf homolog, to anterior-posterior sister cells. Another mechanism that functions to specify cell fates along the anterior-posterior body axis in both hermaphrodites and males are the Hox genes. Since most of the cell fate specifications that occur in hermaphrodites also occur in males, the focus of this chapter will be on those that only occur in hermaphrodites. This will include the cell fate decisions that affect the HSN neurons, ventral hypodermal P cells, lateral hypodermal cells V5 , V6 , and T ; as well as the mesodermal M, Z1 , and Z4 cells and the intestinal cells. Both cell lineage-based and cell-signaling mechanisms of cell fate specification will be discussed. Only two direct targets of the sex determination pathway that influence cell fate specification to produce hermaphrodite-specific cell fates have been identified. Thus a major challenge will be to learn additional mechanisms by which the sex determination pathway interacts with signaling pathways and other cell fate specification genes to generate hermaphrodite-specific cell fates.

Anderson P (1995) Methods Cell Biol "Mutagenesis."

Anderson P

[Methods Cell Biol, 1995]

Choosing the right mutagen means selecting the right combination of mutagen efficiency and mutagen specificity. For mutagen efficiency, nothing beats EMS. It is extremely potent, it is easy to use, and its mutational specificity is well documented. If mutations other than G/C-->A/T transitions are desired, mutagens other than EMS must be used. Based on initial observations, ENU appears to be as efficient as EMS. Work with other organisms predicts that ENU will yield a wider variety of transitions and transversions than EMS. If this proves to be true, ENU will become an important mutagen for routine genetic analysis. For investigators wanting large multigene deletions, gamma irradiation, UV irradiation, formaldehyde, and DEO are the mutagens of choice. Gamma irradiation yields the highest frequency of events by far, but may also yield more complex rearrangements. Based on limited information, UV irradiation, formaldehyde, and DEO appear to be effective deletion mutagens. Of the three, UV appears to be the most efficient. For investigators wanting small intragenic deletions, TMP appears most effective. TMP is not very potent, but a large proportion of TMP-induced unc-22 mutations are small deletions. Hopefully this will be true of all genes. For investigators wanting other types of genome rearrangements (e.g., translocations, crossover suppressors), gamma irradiation (or possibly X irradiation) is effective. For transposon insertions, mut-2 (especially strain TR679) provides the highest possible frequency of events. Because mut-2 activates several families of transposons, it yields insertions in genes that are poor targets for Tc1. Manipulating a strain with such high frequencies of spontaneous mutations, however, can be problematical (see above). For Tc1-specific events, mut-6 (strain RW7097) is the best choice. It provides frequencies comparable to those of Bergerac, but its Tc1 copy number is much lower. A reasonable strategy for spontaneous mutagenesis is to use TR679 only if mutants are not obtained in strains with lower levels of activity (e.g., MT3126 or RW7097).