|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
| Home Help Feedback Subscriptions Archive Search Table of Contents | ||||
First published online 28 January 2009
doi: 10.1242/dev.029017
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK.
* Author for correspondence (e-mail: r.mayor{at}ucl.ac.uk)
Accepted 30 December 2008
 |
SUMMARY |
|---|
TOP
SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES |
|---|
Key words: Neural crest induction, Mesoderm, Wnt, BMP, Slug, Sox2
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
TOP
SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES |
|---|
). This population is induced at the neural
plate border by interactions between the neural plate and nearby tissues
(Moury and Jacobson, 1990;
Selleck and Bronner-Fraser,
1995; Mancilla and Mayor,
1996; Mayor et al.,
1997). From studies in chick, amphibian and zebrafish embryos,
some of the signals involved in the induction of the NC have been identified,
including BMPs, Wnts, FGF, Notch and RA (reviewed by
Basch et al., 2004;
Steventon et al., 2005).
Although the role of Wnt as a NC inducer has been clearly demonstrated in
different animal models (reviewed by Wu et
al., 2003; Heeg-Truesdell and
LaBonne, 2006), the participation of BMPs as an inducer has been
more controversial. Experiments in Xenopus and zebrafish show that an
inhibition of BMP is required for NC induction, whereas experiments in chick
indicate that activation of BMP is sufficient to induce NC
(Liem et al., 1995;
Marchant et al., 1998;
Nguyen et al., 1998;
LaBonne and Bronner-Fraser,
1998; Endo et al.,
2002). The multitude of signalling molecules involved in NC
induction has generated the idea that NC induction is a multi-step process,
with the different signals acting at different steps during the inductive
process; however, the precise temporal requirement for these signals has not
yet been determined.
NC induction is thought to occur through the complex movements of
gastrulation and neurulation, and hence the prospective NC is likely to
encounter signals from a variety of sources. Several studies have shown that
mesoderm is able to induce NC (Raven and
Kloos, 1945; Bonstein et al.,
1998; Marchant et al.,
1998; Monsoro-Burq et al.,
2003), but the exact nature of the signals produced by the
mesoderm is unknown. The role of Wnt signalling during NC induction by
mesoderm has been controversial. It has been shown that Wnt signals are
required for NC induction and that some Wnt ligands are expressed in the
mesoderm, but specific inhibition of Wnt signals produced by the mesoderm does
not affect NC induction, suggesting that NC induction by mesoderm is Wnt
independent (Monsoro-Burq et al.,
2003). Moreover, a recent report has clearly shown that FGF acts
in a Wnt-dependent manner during the early stages of NC induction towards the
end of gastrulation (Hong et al.,
2008). It is of importance now to reconcile these results directly
with those of Monsoro-Burq et al.
(Monsoro-Burq et al.,
2003).
To understand better the spatial relation of the mesoderm to the prospective NC, we performed the first fate map of this tissue at gastrula stages. We found that a specific region of the prospective mesoderm (dorsolateral marginal zone, DLMZ) is adjacent to the NC during its induction at the gastrula stage. As gastrulation and neurulation proceed, the DLMZ differentiates into primarily intermediate mesoderm (IM) and moves to become directly underneath the NC at the neurula stage. We show for the first time that induction of NC requires two steps: first, signals from the DLMZ participate in its early induction during gastrulation, and then signals from the IM underlying the NC and adjacent ectodermal tissue are involved in maintenance of the NC identity during neurulation. We demonstrate that Wnt activity is needed for both steps, whereas BMP activity is differentially required between the early and late step of NC induction. The first inductive step requires BMP inhibition, but the second maintenance step requires BMP activation. These results allow us to propose a new two step model for NC induction and to explain the discrepancies in the BMP requirement between chick and Xenopus embryos.
|
|
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
TOP
SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES |
|---|
). Dissections and grafts were performed as described by
Mancilla and Mayor (Mancilla and Mayor,
1996). In situ hybridisation was performed as described by Harland
(Harland, 1991). The genes
analysed were Snail2 (formerly Slug)
(Mayor et al., 1995),
Foxd3 (Sasai et al.,
2001), Wnt8 (Christian
and Moon, 1993), Sox2
(Kishi et al., 2000),
Chordin (Sasai et al.,
1994) and BMP4
(Wardle et al., 1999).
DiI injections and construction of fate map
Injections of DiI (Molecular Probes) were performed at stage 10 as
described by Linker et al. (Linker et al.,
2000). Photos were taken immediately, at stages 11.5, 13, 17, and
at stage 28. Embryos were sectioned at stage 28 and based on their locations
and previous positions, the fate of each label was assigned. Each label was
then mapped onto a representative stage 10 embryo by counting cells from the
blastopore lip.
RNA synthesis in vitro and microinjection of mRNAs or morpholino oligonucleotides
All plasmids were linearised and RNA transcribed as described by Harland
and Weintraub (Harland and Weintraub,
1985). RNA was co-injected with FLDx (Molecular Probes) as
described by Aybar et al. (Aybar et al.,
2003); or with 200-600 pg of nuclear lacZ mRNA (kind gift
from Ali H. Brivanlou). The constructs used were: dd2
(Sokol, 1996); dnTCF3
(Molenaar et al., 1996;
Hamilton et al., 2001);
Wnt8 (Sokol, 1996);
dnWnt8 (Hoppler et al., 1996);
β-catenin-GR (Domingos et al.,
2001); Smad7GR (Wawersik et
al., 2005); and GSK3-pCS2 (Shimizu et al., 2000). A 1 mM mixture
of two different chordin morpholino oligonucleotides
(Oelgeschlager et al., 2003)
was injected into the dorsolateral equatorial region of a two-cell embryo.
Treatment with dexamethasone was performed as described previously
(Tribulo et al., 2003).
Protein and chemical inhibitor treatment
For proteins, heparin acrylic beads (Sigma) were soaked overnight in 40
µg/ml Dkk1 (Calbiochem), 50 µg/ml Noggin (R&D Systems) or 20
µg/ml BMP4 (R&D Systems) all suspended in 0.1% BSA. Beads were grafted
into explants/whole embryos for entire culture period prior to fixation.
Luciferase assay
Embryos were injected four times at the two-cell stage with 25 pg TOPflash
or Vent1-luciferase DNA. Explants or whole embryos were then taken and
homogenised as described below. Whole embryo readings were taken with each
explant experiment as a further positive control. For each sample, 15-20
explants were taken and homogenised immediately in 25 µl 50 mM Tris-HCl (pH
7.5), centrifuged and a further 25 µl Tris was added to the supernatant.
The volume was brought up to 250 µl with the reporter lysis buffer provided
with a luciferase assay kit (Promega). The samples were then freeze-thawed and
the luciferase activity measured as per manufacturers instructions on a
single-tube luminometer (Turner BioSystems). Each reading was standardised by
protein concentration as determined by absorbance at 280 nm. Readings were
further normalised to control injections of FOPflash that contains a mutated
version of the Wnt responsive promoter.
|
RESULTS |
|---|
|
TOP
SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
; Marchant et al.,
1998; Monsoro-Burq et al.,
2003), we include here the DLMZ assay to compare it with the
induction by IM. The entire marginal zone of stage 10.25 embryos was dissected
and divided into dorsal (DMZ, the region above the blastopore lip),
dorsolateral (DLMZ, the region next to the blastopore lip) and lateral (LMZ,
the next region that is not adjacent to the blastopore lip); these explants
were conjugated with stage 9 animal caps, and the expression of the NC markers
Snail2 and FoxD3 was analysed at the equivalent of stage 15
(Fig. 2A). Both genes are
expressed in a similar manner; thus, for simplicity, only the expression of
Snail2 is shown. Only DLMZ, but not DMZ or LMZ, was able to induce NC
markers (Fig. 2A, parts a-c;
Snail2: 85%, n=69; FoxD3: 80%, n=44).
These results show that DLMZ is involved in NC induction at the gastrula
stage, confirming previous reports
(Bonstein et al., 1998;
Marchant et al., 1998;
Monsoro-Burq et al.,
2003). The role of IM was tested in two different assays. First, explants of different regions of underlying mesoderm were taken from a stage 16 neurula and grafted into the blastocoels cavity of stage 10 embryos (Fig. 2B). Region 1 represents the axial most mesoderm, the notochord. Regions 2, 3 and 4 correspond to predominantly paraxial, intermediate and lateral mesoderm, respectively. Embryos were fixed at stage 16 and analysed for the expression of NC (Snail2) and neural plate markers (Sox3), and for the lineage tracer (FDX) to identify the grafted tissue. Mesodermal explants do not express neural plate or NC markers (Fig. 2B, parts a-h, n=7-10 with 0% expressing markers in all cases). Regions 1, 2 and 3 were able to induce NC markers in ventral epidermis (Fig. 2B, parts i-k), whereas region 4 was not inductive (Fig. 2Bl, parts p, t, x). However, regions 1 and 2 induced NC at a distance (Fig. 2B, parts m, n, q, r), whereas region 3 induced Snail2 in the adjacent cells (Fig. 2B, parts o, s), suggesting that IM was a direct NC inducer. This idea was supported by the observation that whereas the two most axial regions (1 and 2) of mesoderm induced NC and neural plate markers (Fig. 2B, parts u, v), region 3 induced NC without neural plate (Fig. 2B, part w). This is the region of mesoderm that underlies the NC, is the main derivative of the DLMZ (Fig. 1F,G) and corresponds to the intermediate mesoderm (IM), as judged in sections (Fig. 1E). Although this experiment indicates that the IM has the ability to induce NC directly in gastrula ectoderm, it does not prove that it plays a similar inductive role in normal development. To test the requirement of IM in NC specification, NC from 16 neurula embryos were dissected and cultured in isolation, in the presence or absence of IM (Fig. 2C). NC isolated at stage 16 and fixed immediately express the NC markers Snail2 and Foxd3 (Fig. 2C, part a; Snail2: 100%, n=20; Foxd3: 100%, n=15), indicating that NC induction has already taken place. However, if the NC is cultured in isolation until the equivalent of stage 23, the expression of the NC markers is completely lost (Fig. 2C, part b, 2% of Snail2 expression, n=20; 0% of Foxd3 expression, n=10), suggesting that some additional signals are still required to maintain the induced NC. Interestingly, if an equivalent culture of NC is performed but now with the adjacent IM, the expression of the NC markers Snail2 and Foxd3 is maintained (Fig. 2Cc; 65%, n=19 for Snail2; 68%, n=12 for Foxd3).
|
Activation of Wnt and inhibition of BMP are required for NC induction by the DLMZ
To test whether the DLMZ uses Wnt signals to induce the NC, we first
blocked this pathway in the ectoderm in a cell-autonomous manner
(Fig. 3A). Animal caps were
injected with the specific Dishevelled (Dsh) mutant (dd2)
(Sokol, 1996), or the
dominant-negative form of the TCF3 protein
(Hamilton et al., 2001), both
potent intracellular Wnt inhibitors. No Snail2 expression was
observed in either control animal caps or animal caps injected with either of
these constructs. Control conjugates of animal caps and DLMZ presented a
strong induction of NC markers (Fig.
3B,F), which was almost completely inhibited by injection of dd2
or dnTCF3 mRNAs in the animal cap (Fig.
3C,D,F). These results suggest that activation of the canonical
Wnt pathway in the ectoderm is necessary for NC induction by DLMZ.
To test whether Wnt and anti-BMP signals are produced by the DLMZ for
induction of NC cells, a specific inhibition in the mesoderm was performed
(Fig. 3G). Conjugates of normal
animal caps with DLMZ taken from embryos previously injected with a
dominant-negative form of Wnt8 (dnWnt8) or a mixture of morpholinos against
the BMP inhibitor chordin (cho MO)
(Oelgeschlager et al., 2003)
were performed. Snail2 expression in control conjugates
(Fig. 3H,L) was almost
completely abolished by the injection of dnWnt8 or cho MO in the DLMZ
(Fig. 3I,J,L). As expected, an
inhibition of chordin, but not of Wnt, signalling resulted in an inhibition of
the neural plate marker Sox2 (Fig.
3E,K).
Are these molecules expressed in the DLMZ at the early gastrula stages? In situ hybridisation against Wnt8 and chordin in whole embryos or in dissected DLMZ shows a clear co-expression in the DLMZ (Fig. 3M-P). Taken together, these results indicate that Wnt signalling and anti-BMP molecules, such as chordin, are required for NC induction by DLMZ.
|
).
In order to understand this apparent discrepancy, we proceeded to repeat some
of these experiments and compare them with our experiments. It is known that
inhibition of Wnt signalling can anteriorise the neural plate and later
increase cement gland formation (Deardorff
et al., 1998; Kiecker and
Niehrs, 2001). In the Monsoro-Burq study
(Monsoro-Burq et al., 2003),
the expansion of the cement gland was used as a positive control to check the
Wnt inhibitor treatments without a direct analysis of the effect on NC markers
in whole embryos. This leaves open the possibility that expansion of cement
gland and inhibition of NC have different sensitivities to the Wnt inhibitor
treatments and could explain the differences in these results. To test this
possibility, we compared the capacity of the Wnt inhibitor GSK3 (used by
Monsoro-Burq et al.), to expand cement gland and to inhibit Snail2.
We observed that injection of 0.5 ng of GSK3 mRNA produced a strong expansion
in cement gland (Fig.
4F,F'; black bar in Fig.
4H) but did not inhibit Snail2 expression
(Fig. 4D,H); only extremely
high concentrations of GSK3 mRNA, higher than those used by Monsoro-Burq et
al., were able to block NC induction efficiently
(Fig. 4E,H) and expand the
cement gland (Fig.
4G,G',H). These results show that expansion of cement gland
occurs under a mild Wnt inhibition, whereas a more complete inhibition of Wnt
signaling is require to abrogate induction of NC. We next showed that the Wnt
inhibitors dd2 and dnTCF3 are able to inhibit NC markers in whole embryo under
the conditions used in our conjugates experiments
(Fig. 4A-C,H). These results
indicate that the conditions used by Monsoro-Burq et al.
(Monsoro-Burq et al., 2003)
were not sufficient to inhibit NC induction.
Activation of Wnt and BMP signalling is required for NC maintenance
We then examined the signals involved in the NC maintenance step
(Fig. 2C). Explants of NC and
underlying mesoderm (NC/M) dissected at stage 16, were cultured in the
presence of Wnt and BMP inhibitors until the equivalent of stage 23
(Fig. 5A). Inhibitors were
immobilised into beads that are embedded into the explant. The beads are about
one-third of the size of the explant, and thus we assume that most, if not
all, of the cells receive the signal. Control conjugates express the NC marker
Snail2 (Fig. 5B),
whereas its expression was blocked by treatment with the Wnt inhibitor dkk1
(Fig. 5C), suggesting Wnt
signaling is also required for NC maintenance. Further support for this
possibility comes from the finding that β-catenin activation in isolated
NC explants is able to maintain Snail2 expression
(Fig. 5H), which is otherwise
lost (Fig. 5F,G). Treatment
with Noggin, an endogenous BMP inhibitor, resulted in an inhibition of
Snail2 expression (Fig.
5D), suggesting that BMP is required for NC maintenance.
Accordingly, culturing the NC/M explants in the presence of BMP4 did not
inhibit Snail2 expression (Fig.
5E). In addition, isolated NC explants cultured
(Fig. 5F) in the presence of
BMP4 resulted in maintenance of Snail2 expression
(Fig. 5I). Overall, these
results show that during the maintenance step at the neurula stage activation
of both Wnt and BMP signals is required. Subsequently, we found that at the
neurula stage Wnt8 and BMP4 are expressed in tissues surrounding the NC
(Fig. 5L-N). Specifically, we
found that IM express Wnt8, whereas BMP4 is expressed in the
ectoderm adjacent and in the NC (Fig.
5O-Q). That the IM expresses Wnt8 but not BMP4
was further confirmed by direct analysis of these genes in isolated mesoderm
(Fig. 5J,K).
We tested the observed change in BMP necessity in whole embryos by
analysing the expression of NC markers after performing the same activation or
inhibition of BMP activity at the gastrula or neurula stage
(Fig. 6A,B). In order to
inhibit BMP signal in the whole embryo, we injected an inducible Smad7
construct (Wawersik et al.,
2005) into blastomeres fated to differentiate as ventral
epidermis. Inhibition of BMP signaling in the ventral epidermis can induce
Snail2 expression during gastrulation
(Fig. 6C,E) but not thereafter
(Fig. 6D,E). No induction was
observed in the absence of dexamethosone
(Fig. 6E). The amount of Smad7
used in this experiment was able to induce specifically NC with little or no
neural plate induction (Fig.
6L). It is known that the epidermis loses competence for NC
induction from stage 13 onwards (Mancilla
and Mayor, 1996), and hence the observed changes in response to
Smad7GR might be due to a change in competence. We next performed the opposite
experiment by adding BMP4 to the embryos. Animal cap cells that had been
previously injected with high levels of BMP4 mRNA were grafted adjacent to the
NC and the expression of NC markers was analysed. As a control to ensure that
the injected animal cap cells are expressing BMP4 at high levels, they were
conjugated with explants of DLMZ and animal cap
(Fig. 6I-K). When conjugated
with cells injected with FDX only, an induction of Snail2 is observed
(Fig. 6J), whereas when
conjugated with cells injected with FDX/BMP4, an inhibition of Snail2
induction is observed (Fig.
6K), indicating that the injected cells produce enough BMP4 to
inhibit NC induction. BMP4-expressing cells grafted into gastrula embryos
inhibit Snail2 expression (Fig.
6F,H). However, Snail2 expression is not affected if the
same graft is performed at neurula stages during the maintenance step
(Fig. 6G,H). Graft of control
cells did not affect the NC at the gastrula or neural stages
(Fig. 6H). Together, these
results confirm our previous results obtained in explants and show that a
change in BMP activity is required between the induction and the maintenance
steps.
|
|
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
TOP
SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES |
|---|
The different requirements for BMP signals at the gastrula or neurula steps
resolves a controversy about apparently discrepant results between experiments
performed in chick and frog. In chick embryos, only high levels of BMP
signalling were reported to be important for NC induction
(Liem et al., 1995;
Endo et al., 2002), whereas in
Xenopus and zebrafish embryos an inhibition of BMP has been reported
as a condition for NC induction (LaBonne
and Bronner-Fraser, 1998;
Marchant et al., 1998;
Nguyen et al., 1998;
Glavic et al., 2004;
Villaneuva et al., 2002). However, the chick experiments were performed at
neurula stages, much later than the gastrula stages used for the
Xenopus and zebrafish experiments. Moreover in chick and
Xenopus embryos the levels of phosphorylated Smad1, a read-out of BMP
activity, rises in the neural fold only at neurula stages, being lower in the
prospective NC region earlier in development
(Faure et al., 2002;
Schohl and Fagotto, 2002). We
propose that the chick experiments were performed at the maintenance phase of
NC induction and thus are consistent with our findings in the frog, that show
a necessity of high BMP level at this step. Interestingly, a recent paper
demonstrated that NC induction also initiates during gastrulation in chicks
(Basch et al., 2006) and it is
possible that this early phase requires an inhibition of BMP signalling. Thus,
our detailed findings in Xenopus are likely to reflect pathways and
phases that are common to all vertebrates.
|
|
;
Mayor et al., 1995;
Bonstein et al., 1998;
Marchant et al., 1998;
Monsoro-Burq et al., 2003)
(this work). We show here that the DLMZ, which becomes intermediate mesoderm
(IM), moves during gastrulation to underlie the NC cells. This mesoderm has
the ability to induce NC markers directly, without neural induction, and is
essential for NC maintenance.
The expression of Wnt and BMP signal components fit with our model. During
gastrulation, Wnt8 is expressed in the lateral and ventral mesoderm, while
chordin is expressed in dorsal mesoderm. It is interesting to note that the
only tissue co-expressing Wnt8 and chordin is the DLMZ, which is the only
mesodermal tissue able to induce NC. At the neurula stage the IM continues to
produce the NC inductive signal Wnt, but no longer expresses chordin
(or any other BMP antagonist) (Sasai et
al., 1994; Smith and Harland,
1992; Hemmati-Brivanlou et
al., 1994). The absence of BMP antagonist in the IM and the rise
in BMP4 expression in the neural fold lead to the increase in BMP activity
necessary for the NC maintenance step.
Wnt signalling in NC induction by mesoderm
There is compelling evidence indicating that Wnt signalling participates in
NC induction in several species (reviewed by
Wu et al., 2003;
Yanfeng et al., 2003).
However, the role of Wnt signals from the DLMZ has been challenged
(Monsoro-Burq et al., 2003).
No inhibition of NC by the intracellular Wnt inhibitors such as GSK3 or
dominant-negative TCF3 was found
(Monsoro-Burq et al., 2003).
However, as the activity of these antagonists was tested only on cement gland
expansion, it remains possible that these two intracellular components of the
Wnt pathway did not fully block Wnt function. Indeed, we show here that
similar conditions to those published
(Monsoro-Burq et al., 2003)
expand cement gland, without affecting NC. Higher levels of Wnt inhibition are
required to impair NC formation. This observation solves a long-standing
controversy about the role of Wnt signals on NC induction by mesoderm (see
Huang and Saint-Jeannet, 2004)
and it is consistent with a recent publication that places Wnt8 as downstream
target of FGF8 and rules out FGF8 as a NC inductive signal produced by the
mesoderm (Hong et al.,
2008).
|
; Molven et al.,
1991; Roelink and Nusse,
1991; Wolda et al.,
1993; Landesman and Sokol,
1997), and not in the DLMZ, they cannot be involved in the
DLMZ-inducing activities, but they could be involved in the later maintenance
step. Wnt7b is present from the blastula stage, but its pattern of gene
expression is too ubiquitous to be a specific inducer of NC cells
(Chang and Hemmati-Brivanlou,
1998). Wnt6 is expressed in the non-neural ectoderm of
chick embryos at the time of NC maintenance and is therefore a good candidate
to mediate this late step of induction
(Garcia-Castro et al., 2002;
Schubert et al., 2002). This
leaves Wnt8 as the only Wnt candidate described to date that it is expressed
in the DLMZ and the IM (this work)
(Christian and Moon, 1993). In
zebrafish, Wnt8 morpholinos prevent the expression of early NC markers
(Lewis et al., 2004) and
overexpression of Wnt8 in Xenopus embryos leads to an
expansion of NC cells (LaBonne and
Bronner-Fraser, 1998). Furthermore, expression of Wnt8 in
neuralised animal caps is able to induce strong expression of NC markers
(LaBonne and Bronner-Fraser,
1998). A recent paper also proposes the notion that Wnt8 is the NC
inducer in Xenopus embryos (Hong
et al., 2008), which is consistent with the results reported
here.
The observation that activating β-catenin within NC explants is alone
sufficient for the maintenance of the NC at first appears to contradict the
requirement for BMP in this process. It is widely accepted that the
loss-of-function experiments are more informative that the gain-of function
experiments as adding an excess of a molecule, in our case an inductive
signal, could activate other pathways that are not normally involved in the
natural event. The activation of β-catenin in this experiment is likely
to be at much higher levels than that received by the NC during development.
Activation of Wnt at this level might thus be sufficient for maintenance,
whereas both pathways are required during normal development. The same could
be argued for the apparent sufficiency of BMP4 in this process. These
observations emphasise the importance of analysing both sufficiency and
requirement for signalling pathways in an inductive event. In addition, it is
well known that the activation of Wnt signalling in animal caps, along with an
inhibition of BMP signalling or in the presence of neural tissue, is capable
of inducing a robust expression of NC markers
(Saint-Jeannet et al., 1997;
LaBonne and Bronner-Fraser,
1998; Lekven et al.,
2001; Deardorff et al., 2001;
Garcia-Castro et al., 2002;
Tribulo et al., 2003;
Lewis et al., 2004;
Bastidas et al., 2004;
Carmona-Fontaine et al., 2007).
Presumably in this context, after the initial induction of NC, the level of
Wnt signalling is high enough to compensate for the lower level of BMP
signalling in the subsequent maintenance of induction. Alternatively,
activated Wnt signalling could interact with the endogenous BMP4 present in
the neural fold or in the animal cap, leading to NC maintenance.
In addition to the requirement of BMP and Wnt, it has recently been shown
that endothelin 1 plays an important role in the maintenance of the NC
(Bonano et al., 2008). It is
possible that all three pathways are acting in parallel to maintain the NC,
alternatively BMP and Wnt signals might act to maintain the NC by upregulating
the endothelin receptor Ednra, although this requires further attention.
This work highlights the importance of looking the spatial relationship of tissues during time. It is likely that all tissues are releasing different signals during development but not all of them are close enough to produce an effective signal. In processes as dynamic as gastrulation and neurulation, this should not be neglected. By taking into account these parameters, we have been able to solve two controversies in NC induction.
|
Footnotes |
|---|
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
TOP
SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES |
|---|
Aybar, M. J., Nieto, M. A. and Mayor, R.
(2003). Snail precedes slug in the genetic cascade required for
the specification and migration of the Xenopus neural crest.
Development 130,483
-494.
Basch, M. L., Garcia-Castro, M. I. and Bronner-Fraser, M.
(2004). Molecular mechanisms of neural crest induction.
Birth Defects Res. Part C Embryo Today
72,109
-123.[CrossRef][Medline]
Basch, M. L., Bronner-Fraser, M. and Garcia-Castro, M.
(2006). Specification of the NC occurs during gastrulation and
requires Pax7. Nature
441, 218.[CrossRef][Medline]
Bastidas, F., De Calisto, J. and Mayor, R.
(2004). Identification of neural crest competence territory: role
of Wnt signaling. Dev. Dyn.
229,109
-117.[CrossRef][Medline]
Bonano, M., Tríbulo, C., De Calisto, J., Marchant, L.,
Sánchez, S. S., Mayor, R. and Aybar, M. J. (2008). A
new role for the Endothelin-1/Endothelin-A receptor signaling during early
neural crest specification. Dev. Biol.
323,114
-129.[CrossRef][Medline]
Bonstein, L., Elias, S. and Frank, D. (1998).
Paraxial-fated mesoderm is required for neural crest induction in Xenopus
embryos. Dev. Biol. 193,156
-168.[CrossRef][Medline]
Carmona-Fontaine, C., Acuna, G., Ellwanger, K., Niehrs, C. and
Mayor, R. (2007). Neural crests are actively precluded from
the anterior neural fold by a novel inhibitory mechanism dependent on
Dickkopf1 secreted by the prechordal mesoderm. Dev.
Biol. 309,208
.[CrossRef][Medline]
Chang, C. and Hemmati-Brivanlou, A. (1998).
Neural crest induction by Xwnt7B in Xenopus. Dev.
Biol. 194,129
-134.[CrossRef][Medline]
Christian, J. L. and Moon, R. T. (1993).
Interactions between Xwnt-8 and Spemann organizer signaling pathways generate
dorsoventral pattern in the embryonic mesoderm of Xenopus. Genes
Dev. 7,13
-28.
Deardorff, M. A., Tan, C., Conrad, L. J. and Klein, P. S.
(1998). Frizzled-8 is expressed in the Spemann organizer and
plays a role in early morphogenesis. Development
125,2687
-2700.[Abstract]
Deardoff, M. A., Tan, C., Saint-Jeannet, J. P. and Klein, P.
S. (2001). A role for frizzled 3 in the neural crest
development. Development
128,3655
-3663.
Domingos, P. M., Itasaki, N., Jones, C. M., Mercurio, S.,
Sargent, M. G., Smith, J. C. and Krumlauf, R. (2001). The
Wnt/β-catenin pathway posteriorizes neural tissue in Xenopus by an
indirect mechanism requiring FGF signalling. Dev.
Biol. 239,148
.[CrossRef][Medline]
Endo, Y., Osumi, N. and Wakamatsu, Y. (2002).
Bimodal functions of Notch-mediated signaling are involved in neural crest
formation during avian ectoderm development.
Development 129,863
-873.[Medline]
Faure, S., de Santa Barbara, P., Roberts, D. J. and Whitman,
M. (2002). Endogenous patterns of BMP signaling during early
chick development. Dev. Biol.
244, 44.[CrossRef][Medline]
Garcia-Castro, M. I., Marcelle, C. and Bronner-Fraser, M.
(2002). Ectodermal Wnt functions a neural crest inducer.
Science 297,848
-851.
Glavic, A., Silva, F., Aybar, M. J., Bastidas, F. and Mayor,
R. (2004). Interplay between Notch signaling and the
homeoprotein Xiro1 is required for neural crest induction in Xenopus embryos.
Development 131,347
-359.
Hamilton, F. S., Wheeler, G. N. and Hoppler, S.
(2001). Difference in XTcf-3 dependency accounts for change in
response to beta-catenin-mediated Wnt signalling in Xenopus blastula.
Development 128,2063
-2073.
Harland, R. M. (1991). In situ hybridization:
An improved whole-mount method for Xenopus embryos. Methods Cell
Biol. 36,685
-695.[Medline]
Harland, R. and Weintraub, H. (1985).
Translation of mRNA injected into Xenopus oocytes is specifically
inhibited by antisense RNA. J. Cell Biol.
101,1094
-1099.
Heeg-Truesdell, E. and LaBonne, C. (2006).
Neural induction in Xenopus requires inhibition of Wnt-β-catenin
signaling. Dev. Biol.
298, 71.[CrossRef][Medline]
Hemmati-Brivanlou, A., Kelly, O. G. and Melton, D. A.
(1994). Follistatin, an antagonist of activin, is expressed in
the Spemann organizer and displays direct neuralizing activity.
Cell 77,283
.[CrossRef][Medline]
Hollyday, M., McMahon, J. A. and McMahon, A. P.
(1995). Wnt expression patterns in chick embryo nervous system.
Mech. Dev. 52,9
-25.[CrossRef][Medline]
Hong, C. S., Park, B. Y. and Saint-Jeannet, J. P.
(2008). Fgf8a induces neural crest indirectly through the
activation of Wnt8 in the paraxial mesoderm.
Development 135,3903
-3910.
Hoppler, S., Brown, J. D. and Moon, R. T.
(1996). Expression of a dominant-negative Wnt blocks induction of
MyoD in Xenopus embryos. Genes Dev.
10,2805
-2817.
Huang, X. and Saint-Jeannet, J.-P. (2004).
Induction of the neural crest and the opportunities of life on the edge.
Dev. Biol. 275,1
.[CrossRef][Medline]
Kiecker, C. and Niehrs, C. (2001). A morphogen
gradient of Wnt/{beta}-catenin signalling regulates anteroposterior neural
patterning in Xenopus. Development
128,4189
-4201.
Kintner, C. R. and Brockes, J. P. (1984).
Monoclonal antibodies identify blastemal cells derived from dedifferentiating
muscle in newt limb regeneration. Nature
308, 67-69.[CrossRef][Medline]
Kishi, M., Mizuseki, K., Sasai, N., Yamazaki, H., Shiota, K.,
Nakanishi, S. and Sasai, Y. (2000). Requirement of
Sox2-mediated signaling for differentiation of early Xenopus neuroectoderm.
Development 127,791
-800.[Abstract]
LaBonne, C. and Bronner-Fraser, M. (1998).
Neural crest induction in Xenopus: evidence for a two signal model.
Development 125,2403
-2414.[Abstract]
Landesman, Y. and Sokol, S. Y. (1997). Xwnt-2b
is a novel axis-inducing Xenopus Wnt, which is expressed in embryonic brain.
Mech. Dev. 63,199
.[CrossRef][Medline]
LeDouarin, N. M. and Kalcheim, C. (1999).
The Neural Crest, 2nd edn. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press.
Lekven, A. C., Thorpe, C. J., Waxman, J. S. and Moon, R. T.
(2001). Zebrafish Wnt8 encodes two Wnt8 proteins on a bicistronic
transcript and is required for mesoderm and neuroectoderm patterning.
Dev. Cell 1,103
-114.[CrossRef][Medline]
Lewis, J. L., Bonner, J., Modrell, M., Ragland, J. W., Moon, R.
T., Dorsky, R. I. and Raible, D. W. (2004). Reiterated Wnt
signaling during zebrafish neural crest development.
Development 131,12299
-12308.
Liem, K. F., Jr, Tremml, G., Roelink, H. and Jessell, T. M.
(1995). Dorsal differentiation of neural plate cells by
BMP-mediated signals from epidermal ectoderm. Cell
82,969
-979.[CrossRef][Medline]
Linker, C., Bronner-Fraser, M. and Mayor, R.
(2000). Relationship between gene expression domains of Xsnail,
Xslug, and Xtwist and cell movement in the prospective neural crest of
Xenopus. Dev. Biol. 224,215
.[CrossRef][Medline]
Mancilla, A. and Mayor, R. (1996). Neural crest
formation in Xenopus laevis: mechanism of Xslug induction.
Dev. Biol. 177,580
-589.[CrossRef][Medline]
Marchant, L., Linker, C., Ruiz, P., Guerrero, N. and Mayor,
R. (1998). The inductive properties of mesoderm suggest that
the neural crest are specified by a BMP gradient. Dev.
Biol. 198,319
-329.[Medline]
Mayor, R., Morgan, R. and Sargent, M. G.
(1995). Induction of the prospective neural crest of Xenopus.
Development 121,767
-777.[Abstract]
Mayor, R., Guerrero, N. and Martinez, C.
(1997). Role of FGF and noggin in the neural crest induction.
Dev. Biol. 189,1
-12.[CrossRef][Medline]
Molenaar, M., van de Wetering, M., Oosterwegel, M.,
Peterson-Maduro, J., Godsave, S., Korinek, V., Roose, J., Destree, O. and
Clevers, H. (1996). XTcf-3 transcription factor mediates
beta-catenin-induced axis formation in Xenopus embryos.
Cell 86,391
-399.[CrossRef][Medline]
Molven, A., Njolstad, P. R. and Fjose, A.
(1991). Genomic structure and restricted neural expression of the
zebrafish wnt-1 (int-1) gene. EMBO J.
10,799
-807.[Medline]
Monsoro-Burq, A. H., Fletcher, R. B. and Harland, R. M.
(2003). Neural crest induction by paraxial mesoderm requires FGF
signals. Development
130,3111
-3124.
Moury, J. D. and Jacobson, A. G. (1990). The
origins of neural crest cells in the axolotl. Dev.
Biol. 141,243
-253.[CrossRef][Medline]
Nguyen, V. H., Schimd, B., Trout, J., Connors, S. A., Ekker, M.
and Mullins, M. (1998). Ventral and lateral regions of the
zebrafish gastrula, including the neural crest progenitors, are established by
a bmp2/swirl pathway genes. Dev. Biol.
199,93
-110.[CrossRef][Medline]
Nieuwkoop, P. D. and Faber, J. (1967).
Normal Table of Xenopus laevis, Daudin, 2nd edn.
Amsterdam: North Holland.
Oelgeschlager, M., Kuroda, H., Reversade, B. and De Robertis, E.
M. (2003). Chordin is required for the Spemann organizer
transplantation phenomenon in Xenopus embryos. Dev.
Cell 4,219
-230.[CrossRef][Medline]
Raven, C. P. and Kloos, J. (1945). Induction by
medial and lateral pieces of archenteron roof, with special reference to the
determination of the neural crest. Acta Neerl. Norm.
Pathol. 55,348
-362.
Roelink, H. and Nusse, R. (1991). Expression of
two members of the Wnt family during mouse development-restricted temporal and
spatial patterns in the developing neural tube. Genes
Dev. 5,5381
-5388.
Saint-Jeannet, J. P., He, X., Varmus, H. E. and Dawid, I. B.
(1997). Regulation of dorsal fate in the neuraxis by Wnt-1 and
Wnt-3a. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
94,13713
-13718.
Sasai, N., Mizuseki, K. and Sasai, Y. (2001).
Requirement of FoxD3-class signaling for neural crest determination in
Xenopus. Development
128,2525
-2536.
Sasai, Y., Lu, B., Steinbeisser, H., Geissert, D., Gont, L. K.
and De Robertis, E. M. (1994). Xenopus chordin: A novel
dorsalizing factor activated by organizer-specific homeobox genes.
Cell 79,779
.[CrossRef][Medline]
Schohl, A. and Fagotto, F. (2002).
β-catenin, MAPK and Smad signaling during early Xenopus development.
Development 129,37
-52.
Schubert, F. R., Mootoosamy, R. C., Walters, E. H., Graham, A.,
Tumiotto, L., Munsterberg, A. E., Lumsden, A. and Dietrich, S.
(2002). Wnt6 marks sites of epithelial transformations in the
chick embryo. Mech. Dev.
114,143
-148.[CrossRef][Medline]
Selleck, M. A. and Bronner-Fraser, M. (1995).
Origins of neural crest: the role of neural plate-epidermal interactions.
Development 121,525
-538.[Abstract]
Smith, W. C. and Harland, R. M. (1992).
Expression cloning of noggin, a new dorsalizing factor localized to the
Spemann organizer in Xenopus embryos. Cell
70, 829.[CrossRef][Medline]
Sokol, S. Y. (1996). Analysis of Dishevelled
signalling pathways during Xenopus development. Curr.
Biol. 6,1456
-1467.[CrossRef][Medline]
Steventon, B., Carmona-Fontaine, C. and Mayor, R.
(2005). Genetic network during neural crest induction: from cell
specification to cell survival. Semin. Cell Dev. Biol.
16, 647.[CrossRef][Medline]
Tribulo, C., Aybar, M. J., Nguyen, V. H., Mullins, M. C. and
Mayor, R. (2003). Regulation of Msx genes by a Bmp gradient
is essential for neural crest specification.
Development 130,6441
-6452.
Villanueva, S., Glavic, A., Ruiz, P. and Mayor, R.
(2002). Posteriorization by FGF, Wnt and retinoic acid is
required for neural crest induction. Dev. Biol.
241,289
-301.[CrossRef][Medline]
Wardle, F. C., Welch, J. V. and Dale, L.
(1999). Bone morphogenetic protein 1 regulates dorsal-ventral
patterning in early Xenopus embryos by degrading chordin, a BMP4 antagonist.
Mech. Dev. 86,75
.[CrossRef][Medline]
Wawersik, S., Evola, C. and Whitman, M. (2005).
Conditional BMP inhibition in Xenopus reveals stage-specific roles for BMPs in
neural and neural crest induction. Dev. Biol.
277, 425.[CrossRef][Medline]
Wolda, S. L., Moody, C. J. and Moon, R. T.
(1993). Overlapping expression of Xwnt-3A and Xwnt-1 in neural
tissue of Xenopus laevis embryos. Dev. Biol.
155, 46-57.[CrossRef][Medline]
Wu, J., Saint-Jeannet, J. P. and Klein, P. S.
(2003). Wnt-frizzled signaling in neural crest formation.
Trends Neurosci. 26,40
-45.[CrossRef][Medline]
Yanfeng, W., Saint-Jeannet, J. P. and Klein, P. S.
(2003). Wnt-frizzled signaling in the induction and
differentiation of the neural crest. BioEssays
25,317
-325.[CrossRef][Medline]
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati 
Twitter What's this?
Related articles in Development:
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  B. Li, S. Kuriyama, M. Moreno, and R. Mayor The posteriorizing gene Gbx2 is a direct target of Wnt signalling and the earliest factor in neural crest induction Development, October 1, 2009; 136(19): 3267 - 3278. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
