Skip to main content
. 2009 Mar 2;4(3):e4669. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0004669

Figure 4. Sites of miRNA action in the ovary.

Figure 4

Panels A–C show the distribution of MCP::GFP in nurse cells of live stage 10A egg chambers, with higher magnification images of cytoplasmic regions in A'–C'. Scale bars are 10 µm in A–C and 5 µm in A'–C'. A–C differ with respect to which reporter mRNAs with MS2 binding sites are present: A, no reporter mRNAs; B, reporter mRNAs lacking miR-312 binding sites; and C, reporter mRNAs with miR-312 binding sites. The cytoplasmic MCP::GFP distributions were the same at earlier stages of oogenesis. Note that the size of the particles is similar to those marked with the AGO::GFP fusion proteins in Fig. 3, but the number of particles seen in each field is lower. The insets in A'–C' are a higher resolution image of the regions in A'–C' indicated by arrows, with Union Jack LUTs as described in the legend to Fig. 3. MS2::GFP in the presence of the osk reporter mRNAs, with or without miR-312 binding sites, is cosncentrated in puncta (appearing white and red in the insets in B',C') that are not observed with MS2::GFP alone (inset in A'). Panels D and E show the distribution of MCP::GFP (green in D and E) tethered to the osk-312 reporter transcripts, and either sponge bodies (revealed by anti-Bru; red in D) or AGO1 puncta (red in E). The sponge bodies and AGO1 puncta (arrows in D and E) do not colocalize with the tethered reporter transcripts (arrowheads in D and E). Scale bars are 5 µm in D and E.