We report here genome sequences and comparative analyses of three closely related parasitoid wasps: Nasonia vitripennis, N. giraulti, and N. longicornis. Parasitoids are important regulators of arthropod populations, including major agricultural pests and disease vectors, and Nasonia is an emerging genetic model, particularly for evolutionary and developmental genetics. Key findings include the identification of a functional DNA methylation tool kit; hymenopteran-specific genes including diverse venoms; lateral gene transfers among Pox viruses, Wolbachia, and Nasonia; and the rapid evolution of genes involved in nuclear-mitochondrial interactions that are implicated in speciation. Newly developed genome resources advance Nasonia for genetic research, accelerate mapping and cloning of quantitative trait loci, and will ultimately provide tools and knowledge for further increasing the utility of parasitoids as pest insect-control agents.

Fundamental to living cells is the capacity to differentiate into subtypes with specialized attributes. Understanding the way cells acquire their fates is a major challenge in developmental biology. How cells adopt a particular fate is usually thought of as being deterministic, and in the large majority of cases it is. That is, cells acquire their fate by virtue of their lineage or their proximity to an inductive signal from another cell. In some cases, however, and in organisms ranging from bacteria to humans, cells choose one or another pathway of differentiation stochastically, without apparent regard to environment or history. Stochasticity has important mechanistic requirements. We speculate on why stochasticity is advantageous-and even critical in some circumstances-to the individual, the colony, or the species.

In the Drosophila optic lobes, the medulla processes visual information coming from inner photoreceptors R7 and R8 and from lamina neurons. It contains ~40,000 neurons belonging to over 70 different types. We describe how precise temporal patterning of neural progenitors generates these different neural types. Five transcription factors--Homothorax, Eyeless, Sloppy-paired, Dichaete and Tailless--are sequentially expressed in a temporal cascade in each of the medulla neuroblasts as they age. Loss of either Eyeless, Sloppy-paired or Dichaete blocks further progression of the temporal sequence. We provide evidence that this temporal sequence in neuroblasts, together with Notch-dependent binary fate choice, controls the diversification of the neuronal progeny. Although a temporal sequence of transcription factors had been identified in Drosophila embryonic neuroblasts, our work illustrates the generality of this strategy, with different sequences of transcription factors being used in different contexts.

Homeo domain-containing proteins mediate many transcriptional processes in eukaryotes. Because nearly all animal homeo proteins are believed to bind to short, highly related DNA sequences, the basis for their high specificity of action is not understood. We show that cooperative dimerization on palindromic DNA sequences can provide increased specificity to one of the three major classes of homeo domains, the Paired/Pax class. The 60-amino-acid homeo domains from this class contain sufficient information to bind cooperatively as homo-and heterodimers to palindromic DNA sequences; that is, the binding of one homeo domain molecule can increase the affinity of a second molecule by up to 300-fold. Different members of the Paired (Prd) class of homeo domains prefer different spacings between half-sites, as determined by the ninth amino acid residue of the recognition helix. In addition, this residue determines the identity of the base pairs at the center of the palindromic sites, as well as the magnitude of the cooperative interaction. The cooperative dimerization of homeo domains in the Prd class distinguishes them from other classes, whereas binding-site configuration and sequence specificity allow for distinctions within this class.

A Drosophila Stat gene (D-Stat) with a zygotic segmental expression pattern was identified. This protein becomes phosphorylated on Tyr-704 when coexpressed in Schneider cells with a Drosophila janus kinase (JAK), Hopscotch (HOP). The phosphorylated protein binds specifically to the consensus sequence TTCCCGGAA. Suppressor mutations of hopTum-I, a dominant hyperactive allele of hop whose phenotype is hematocyte overproduction and tumor formation, were selected. One of these mutants, statHJ, mapped to the same chromosomal region (92E) as does D-Stat, had an incompletely penetrant pair rule phenotype, and exhibited aberrant expression of the pair rule gene even skipped (eve) at the cellular blastoderm stage. Two D-STAT-binding sites were identified within the eve stripe 3 enhancer region. Mutations in either of the STAT-binding sites greatly decreased the stripe 3 expression in transgenic flies. Clearly, the JAK-STAT pathway is connected to Drosophila early development.

Drosophila colour vision is achieved by R7 and R8 photoreceptor cells present in every ommatidium. The fly retina contains two types of ommatidia, called 'pale' and 'yellow', defined by different rhodopsin pairs expressed in R7 and R8 cells. Similar to the human cone photoreceptors, these ommatidial subtypes are distributed stochastically in the retina. The choice between pale versus yellow ommatidia is made in R7 cells, which then impose their fate onto R8. Here we report that the Drosophila dioxin receptor Spineless is both necessary and sufficient for the formation of the ommatidial mosaic. A short burst of spineless expression at mid-pupation in a large subset of R7 cells precedes rhodopsin expression. In spineless mutants, all R7 and most R8 cells adopt the pale fate, whereas overexpression of spineless is sufficient to induce the yellow R7 fate. Therefore, this study suggests that the entire retinal mosaic required for colour vision is defined by the stochastic expression of a single transcription factor, Spineless.The ability to discriminate between colours has evolved independently in vertebrates and invertebrates 1,2 . However, despite the obvious differences in eye development and design, both flies and humans have developed retinal mosaics where classes of photoreceptor cells (PRs) with different spectral sensitivity are randomly distributed 3,4 . The compound eye of Drosophila consists of ,800 optical units (ommatidia), each containing eight PRs in addition to accessory cells 5 . In each ommatidium, the six 'outer PRs' (R1-R6) function like the vertebrate rod cells, as they are required for motion detection in dim light 6,7 . These cells express the broad-spectrum rhodopsin, Rh1 (ref. 8). The 'inner PRs' (R7 and R8) may be viewed as the equivalent of the colour-sensitive vertebrate cone cells, which express a range of different rhodopsin molecules 9-13 .Ommatidial subset specification in Drosophila The general rule of sensory receptor exclusion also applies to Drosophila ommatidia, where only one rhodopsin gene is expressed by a given PR 14 . The expression of inner PR rhodopsins can be used to distinguish three ommatidial subtypes 15,16 ( Supplementary Fig. 1a, b). Two of the subtypes are distributed randomly throughout the retina: ,30% of ommatidia express ultraviolet-sensitive Rh3 in R7 cells and blue-sensitive Rh5 in R8 cells, and therefore are specialized in the detection of short wavelengths ('pale' ommatidia, p; Fig. 1a, blue). The remaining ,70% express another ultraviolet-sensitive opsin (Rh4) in R7 and green-sensitive Rh6 in R8, making them more responsive to longer wavelengths ('yellow' ommatidia, y; Fig. 1a, yellow). The coupled expression of Rh3/Rh5 or Rh4/Rh6 within the same ommatidium results from communication between R7 and R8 ( Supplementary Fig. 1b, c). In the dorsal rim area (DRA) (Fig. 1a, pink), a third type of ommatidia exists 17 in which both R7 and R8 express ultraviolet-sensitive Rh3 (refs 18, 19). These ommatidia are used to detect the e-vector of polarized sunlight for or...

The algorithms and neural circuits that process spatiotemporal changes in luminance to extract visual motion cues have been the focus of intense research. An influential model, the Hassenstein-Reichardt correlator1 (HRC), relies on differential temporal filtering of two spatially separated input channels, delaying one input signal with respect to the other. Motion in a particular direction causes these delayed and non-delayed luminance signals to arrive simultaneously at a subsequent processing step in the brain; these signals are then nonlinearly amplified to produce a direction-selective response (Figure 1A). Recent work in Drosophila has identified two parallel pathways that selectively respond to either moving light or dark edges2,3. Each of these pathways requires two critical processing steps to be applied to incoming signals: differential delay between the spatial input channels, and distinct processing of brightness increment and decrement signals. Using in vivo patch-clamp recordings, we demonstrate that four medulla neurons implement these two processing steps. The neurons Mi1 and Tm3 respond selectively to brightness increments, with the response of Mi1 delayed relative to Tm3. Conversely, Tm1 and Tm2 respond selectively to brightness decrements, with the response of Tm1 delayed compared to Tm2. Remarkably, constraining HRC models using these measurements produces outputs consistent with previously measured properties of motion detectors, including temporal frequency tuning and specificity for light vs. dark edges. We propose that Mi1 and Tm3 perform critical processing of the delayed and non-delayed input channels of the correlator responsible for the detection of light edges, while Tm1 and Tm2 play analogous roles in the detection of moving dark edges. Our data shows that specific medulla neurons possess response properties that allow them to implement the algorithmic steps that precede the correlative operation in the HRC, revealing elements of the long-sought neural substrates of motion detection in the fly.

No abstract