Skip to main content
. 2018 Mar 16;7:e33680. doi: 10.7554/eLife.33680

Figure 4. Non-regenerative eyes and regenerative eyes compete for progenitor acquisition.

(A) FISH to detect ovo+ progenitor cells located in the anterior animal region (middle panel, arrows) of control and notum(RNAi) animals. Left plots, ovo+ progenitor cell numbers were not significantly altered in 4-eyed notum(RNAi) animals. Right plots, histograms quantifying distribution of ovo+ eye cells showing regions anterior to the pharynx, with position normalized to the locations of the head tip and the pharynx. notum inhibition produced a slight anterior shift to the distribution of ovo+ cells, but they are present in a region that includes the posterior non-regenerative eyes. (B) FISH with opsin and tyrosinase riboprobes to detect numbers of eye cells from 4-eyed notum(RNAi) animals and 2-eyed control animals (bars, 25 microns). Hoechst counterstaining was used to count numbers of eye cells plotted below as total eye cell numbers per animal and cells per eye. notum RNAi did not significantly change total eye cell numbers, and reduced the number of cells per eye. Significance determined by 2-tailed t-test, ***p<0.001. (C) Four-eyed notum(RNAi) animals were generated by dsRNA feeding over 40 days prior to removal of either a posterior (top) or anterior (bottom) eye on one side of the animal (R,right), leaving both eyes on the left side (L) unaffected. After 16 days of recovery, animals were fixed and stained with a combination of riboprobes for opsin and tyrosinase (green), and eye cells were quantified by counting Hoechst-positive nuclei from opsin/tyrosinase +cells throughout the D/V eye axis. Right, quantifications of left and right eyes from several individuals are shown and connected by dotted lines. Top, removal of a posterior eye caused the ipsilateral anterior eye (orange) to become enlarged compared to the contralateral anterior eye (green). Bottom, removal of an anterior eye caused the ipsilateral posterior eye (orange) to become enlarged compared to the contralateral posterior eye (green). Significance was measured by 2-tailed paired sample t-tests.

Figure 4.

Figure 4—figure supplement 1. Effect of nearby tissue removal on posterior eye regeneration ability in notum(RNAi) animals.

Figure 4—figure supplement 1.

Four-eyed notum(RNAi) regenerating head fragments obtained 28 days after decapitation were subjected to posterior eye resection with (bottom) or without (top) removal of a wedge of tissue posterior to the eyes. In all cases, animals did not regenerate the resected posterior eye by 14 days after surgery.

Figure 4—figure supplement 2. Measurement of ovo+ cell numbers after injury in control and notum(RNAi) animals.

Figure 4—figure supplement 2.

Top, images of animals stained for ovo expression by FISH fixed 4 days after eye removal from control and notum(RNAi) animals as shown in cartoons. The anterior half of each animal was imaged and ovo+ cells manually scored from maximum projection images, scoring eye progenitors as ovo+ cells not residing within the mature eyes. Bottom left, quantification of overall numbers of ovo+ cells animals after each treatment. notum RNAi and either anterior or posterior eye removal did not substantially later numbers of ovo+ cells (p>0.05, 2-tailed t-tests). Bottom right, quantification of ovo+ cells based on localization on the uninjured (left) or injured (right) side of each animal. There was not a difference in number of ovo+ cells between uninjured and injured sides across all treatments (2-tailed paired t-tests).