Luminous fungi have long attracted public attention in Japan, from old folklore and fiction to current tourism, children’s toys, games and picture books. At present, 25 species of luminous fungi have been discovered in Japan, which correspond to approximately one-fourth of the globally recognized species. This species richness is arguably thanks to the abundant presence of mycophiles looking to find new mushroom species and the tradition of night-time activities, such as firefly watching, in Japan. Bioluminescence, a field of bioscience focused on luminous organisms, has long been studied by many Japanese researchers, including the biochemistry and chemistry of luminous fungi. A Japanese Nobel Prize winner, Osamu Shimomura (1928-2018), has primarily focused on the bioluminescence system of luminous fungi in the latter part of his life, and the total elucidation of the mechanism was finally accomplished by an international research team with representatives from Russia, Brazil, and Japan in 2018. In this review, we focused on multiple aspects related to luminous fungi of Japan, including myth, taxonomy, and modern sciences.

Bioluminescence – i.e., the emission of visible light by living organisms - is defined as a biochemical reaction involving, at least, a luciferin substrate, an oxygen derivative, and a specialised luciferase enzyme. In some cases, the enzyme and the substrate are durably associated and form a photoprotein. While this terminology is educatively useful to explain bioluminescence, it gives a false idea that all luminous organisms are using identical or homologous molecular tools to achieve light emission. As usually observed in biology, reality is more complex. To date, 11 different luciferins have indeed been discovered, and several non-homologous luciferases lato sensu have been identified which, all together, confirms that bioluminescence emerged independently multiple times during the evolution of living organisms. While some phylogenetically related organisms may use non-homologous luciferases (e.g., at least four convergent luciferases are found in Pancrustacea), it has also been observed that phylogenetically distant organisms may use homologous luciferases (e.g., parallel evolution observed in some cnidarians, tunicates and echinoderms that are sharing a homologous luciferase-based system). The evolution of luciferases then appears puzzling. The present review takes stock of the diversity of known “bioluminescent proteins”, their evolution and potential evolutionary origins. A total of 134 luciferase and photoprotein sequences have been investigated (from 75 species and 11 phyla), and our analyses identified 12 distinct types – defined as a group of homologous bioluminescent proteins. The literature review indicated that genes coding for luciferases and photoproteins have potentially emerged as new genes or have been co-opted from ancestral non-luciferase/photoprotein genes. In this latter case, the homologous gene’s co-options may occur independently in phylogenetically distant organisms.

The mystery phenomenon of fungal bioluminescence has always captivated human curiosity, although more attempts need to be made, particularly to bring the new species to the surface. In this study, we devoted considerable space to the taxonomy of these fungi while discussing their biogeography, evolution, bioluminescence mechanism, and potential ecological roles. We provide a detailed explanation of how these fungi produce light, including the role of the enzyme luciferase and luciferin. We also discussed their applications. Here, we presented an updated list of 122 bioluminescent fungi identified from five distinct evolutionary lineages viz. Armillaria, Eoscyphella, Lucentipes, Mycenoid, and Omphalotus worldwide, mainly in tropical and subtropical areas. The bioluminescent fungi descended from the last common ancestor of the mycenoid and the marasmioid clades of Agaricales, which have been maintained for at least 160 million years of evolution. We highlighted the need for further research to understand the ecological role of bioluminescent fungi. Applying bioluminescent fungi in various areas (e.g., environmental and medicinal) demonstrates their validity.

Evolutionary convergence provides natural opportunities to investigate how, when, and why novel traits evolve. Many convergent traits are complex, highlighting the importance of explicitly considering convergence at different levels of biological organization, or ‘multi‐level convergent evolution’. To investigate multi‐level convergent evolution, we propose a holistic and hierarchical framework that emphasizes breaking down traits into several functional modules. We begin by identifying long‐standing questions on the origins of complexity and the diverse evolutionary processes underlying phenotypic convergence to discuss how they can be addressed by examining convergent systems. We argue that bioluminescence, a complex trait that evolved dozens of times through either novel mechanisms or conserved toolkits, is particularly well suited for these studies. We present an updated estimate of at least 94 independent origins of bioluminescence across the tree of life, which we calculated by reviewing and summarizing all estimates of independent origins. Then, we use our framework to review the biology, chemistry, and evolution of bioluminescence, and for each biological level identify questions that arise from our systematic review. We focus on luminous organisms that use the shared luciferin substrates coelenterazine or vargulin to produce light because these organisms convergently evolved bioluminescent proteins that use the same luciferins to produce bioluminescence. Evolutionary convergence does not necessarily extend across biological levels, as exemplified by cases of conservation and disparity in biological functions, organs, cells, and molecules associated with bioluminescence systems. Investigating differences across bioluminescent organisms will address fundamental questions on predictability and contingency in convergent evolution. Lastly, we highlight unexplored areas of bioluminescence research and advances in sequencing and chemical techniques useful for developing bioluminescence as a model system for studying multi‐level convergent evolution.

A surprising insight from the advent of genomic sequencing was that many genes are deeply conserved during evolution. With a particular focus on genes that interact with light in animals, I explore the metaphor of genetic toolkits, which can be operationalized as lists of genes involved in a trait of interest. A fascinating observation is that genes of a toolkit are often used again and again during convergent evolution, sometimes across vast phylogenetic distances. Such a pattern in the evolution of toolkits requires three different stages: origin, maintenance, and redeployment of the genes. The functional origins of toolkit genes might often be rooted in interactions with external environments. The origins of light interacting genes in particular may be tied to ancient responses to photo-oxidative stress, inspiring questions about the extent to which the evolution of other toolkits were also impacted by stress. Maintenance of genetic toolkits over long evolutionary timescales requires gene multifunctionality to prevent gene loss when a trait of interest is absent. Finally, the deployment of toolkit genes in convergently evolved traits like eyes sometimes involves the repeated use of similar, ancient genes but other times involves different genes specific to each convergent origin. How often a particular gene family is used time and again for the same function may depend on how many possible biological solutions are available. When few solutions exist and are maintained, evolution is constrained to use the same genes over and over. However, when many different solutions are possible, the innovative possibilities of evolution are often on display. Therefore, a focus on genetic toolkits highlights the combination of legacy plus innovation that drives the evolution of biological diversity.

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) has limited treatment options and poor prognosis. Frequent inactivation of the tumour suppressors BAP1, NF2 and P16 may differentially sensitise tumours to treatments. We have established chick chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) xenograft models of low-passage MPM cell lines and protocols for evaluating drug responses. Ten cell lines, representing the spectrum of histological subtypes and tumour suppressor status, were dual labelled for fluorescence/bioluminescence imaging and implanted on the CAM at E7. Bioluminescence was used to assess viability of primary tumours, which were excised at E14 for immunohistological staining or real-time PCR. All MPM cell lines engrafted efficiently forming vascularised nodules, however their size, morphology and interaction with chick cells varied. MPM phenotypes including local invasion, fibroblast recruitment, tumour angiogenesis and vascular remodelling were evident. Bioluminescence imaging could be used to reliably estimate tumour burden pre- and post-treatment, correlating with tumour weight and Ki-67 staining. In conclusion, MPM-CAM models recapitulate important features of the disease and are suitable to assess therapies using a broad range of MPM cell lines that allow histological or genetic stratification. They are amenable to multi-modal imaging, offering a time and cost-efficient, 3Rs-compliant alternative to rodent xenograft models to prioritise candidate compounds from in vitro studies.

Preclinical cell tracking is enhanced with a multimodal imaging approach. Bioluminescence imaging (BLI) is a highly sensitive optical modality which relies on engineering cells to constitutively express a luciferase gene. Magnetic particle imaging (MPI) is a newer imaging modality which directly detects superparamagnetic iron oxide (SPIO) particles used to label cells. Here, we compare BLI and MPI for imaging cells in vitro and in vivo. Mouse 4T1 breast carcinoma cells were transduced to express firefly luciferase, labeled with SPIO (ProMag) and imaged as cell samples and after subcutaneous injection into mice. For cell samples, the BLI and MPI signals were strongly correlated with cell number. Both modalities presented limitations for imaging cells in vivo. For BLI, weak signal penetration, signal attenuation and scattering prevented detection of cells for mice with hair and for cells far from the tissue surface. For MPI, background signals obscured the detection of low cell numbers due to the limited dynamic range and cell number could not be accurately quantified from in vivo images. It is important to understand the shortcomings of these imaging modalities to develop strategies to improve cellular detection sensitivity.

Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most aggressive brain cancer. To model GBM in research, orthotopic brain tumor models, including syngeneic models like GL261 and genetically engineered mouse models like TRP, are used. In longitudinal studies, tumor growth and treatment response are typ-ically tracked with in vivo imaging, including bioluminescence imaging (BLI), which is quick, cost-effective, and easily quantifiable. However, BLI requires luciferase-tagged cells, and recent studies indicate that the luciferase gene can elicit an immune response, leading to tumor rejection and experimental variation. We sought to optimize the engraftment of two luciferase-expressing GBM models, GL261 Red-FLuc and TRP-mCherry-FLuc, showing differences in tumor take, with GL261 Red-FLuc cells requiring immunocompromised mice for 100% engraftment. Immuno-histochemistry and MRI revealed distinct tumor characteristics: GL261 Red-FLuc tumors were well-demarcated with densely packed cells, high mitotic activity, and vascularization. In con-trast, TRP-mCherry-FLuc tumors were large, invasive, and necrotic, with perivascular invasion. Quantifying tumor volume using the HALO® AI analysis platform yielded results comparable to manual measurements, providing a standardized and efficient approach for reliable high-throughput analysis of luciferase-expressing tumors. Our study highlights the importance of considering tumor engraftment when using luciferase-expressing GBM models, providing in-sights for preclinical research design.

Tumor vasculature proliferates rapidly, generally lacks pericyte coverage, and is uniquely frag-ile making it an attractive therapeutic target. A subset of small-molecule tubulin binding agents cause disaggregation of the endothelial cytoskeleton leading to enhanced vascular permeability generating increased interstitial pressure. The resulting vascular collapse and ischemia cause downstream hypoxia, ultimately leading to cell death and necrosis. Thus, local damage gener-ates massive amplification and tumor destruction. The tumor vasculature is readily accessed and potentially a common target irrespective of disease site in the body. Development of a therapeutic approach and particularly next generation agents benefits from effective non-invasive assays. Imaging technologies offer varying degrees of sophistication and ease of implementation. This review considers technological strengths and weaknesses with examples from our own laboratory. Methods reveal vascular extent and patency, as well as insights into tissue viability, proliferation and necrosis. Spatiotemporal resolution ranges from cellular mi-croscopy to single slice tomography and full three-dimensional views of whole tumors and measurements can be sufficiently rapid to reveal acute changes or long-term outcomes. Since imaging is non-invasive, each tumor may serve as its own control making investigations par-ticularly efficient and rigorous. The concept of tumor vascular disruption was proposed over 30 years ago and it remains an active area of research.