Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Accepted manuscripts
    • Issue in progress
    • Latest complete issue
    • Issue archive
    • Archive by article type
    • Special issues
    • Subject collections
    • Sign up for alerts
  • About us
    • About Development
    • About the Node
    • Editors and Board
    • Editor biographies
    • Travelling Fellowships
    • Grants and funding
    • Workshops and Meetings
    • The Company of Biologists
    • Journal news
  • For authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Aims and scope
    • Presubmission enquiries
    • Article types
    • Manuscript preparation
    • Cover suggestions
    • Editorial process
    • Promoting your paper
    • Open Access
    • Biology Open transfer
  • Journal info
    • Journal policies
    • Rights and permissions
    • Media policies
    • Reviewer guide
    • Sign up for alerts
  • Contacts
    • Contacts
    • Subscriptions
    • Feedback
  • COB
    • About The Company of Biologists
    • Development
    • Journal of Cell Science
    • Journal of Experimental Biology
    • Disease Models & Mechanisms
    • Biology Open

User menu

  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Development
  • COB
    • About The Company of Biologists
    • Development
    • Journal of Cell Science
    • Journal of Experimental Biology
    • Disease Models & Mechanisms
    • Biology Open

supporting biologistsinspiring biology

Development

  • Log in
Advanced search

RSS  Twitter  Facebook  YouTube 

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Accepted manuscripts
    • Issue in progress
    • Latest complete issue
    • Issue archive
    • Archive by article type
    • Special issues
    • Subject collections
    • Sign up for alerts
  • About us
    • About Development
    • About the Node
    • Editors and Board
    • Editor biographies
    • Travelling Fellowships
    • Grants and funding
    • Workshops and Meetings
    • The Company of Biologists
    • Journal news
  • For authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Aims and scope
    • Presubmission enquiries
    • Article types
    • Manuscript preparation
    • Cover suggestions
    • Editorial process
    • Promoting your paper
    • Open Access
    • Biology Open transfer
  • Journal info
    • Journal policies
    • Rights and permissions
    • Media policies
    • Reviewer guide
    • Sign up for alerts
  • Contacts
    • Contacts
    • Subscriptions
    • Feedback
Research Article
FGF signaling regulates mesenchymal differentiation and skeletal patterning along the limb bud proximodistal axis
Kai Yu, David M. Ornitz
Development 2008 135: 483-491; doi: 10.1242/dev.013268
Kai Yu
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
David M. Ornitz
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & tables
  • Supp info
  • Info & metrics
  • PDF + SI
  • PDF
Loading

Summary

Fibroblast growth factors (FGFs) are signals from the apical ectodermal ridge (AER) that are essential for limb pattern formation along the proximodistal (PD) axis. However, how patterning along the PD axis is regulated by AER-FGF signals remains controversial. To further explore the molecular mechanism of FGF functions during limb development, we conditionally inactivated fgf receptor 2 (Fgfr2) in the mouse AER to terminate all AER functions; for comparison, we inactivated both Fgfr1 and Fgfr2 in limb mesenchyme to block mesenchymal AER-FGF signaling. We also re-examined published data in which Fgf4 and Fgf8 were inactivated in the AER. We conclude that limb skeletal phenotypes resulting from loss of AER-FGF signals cannot simply be a consequence of excessive mesenchymal cell death, as suggested by previous studies, but also must be a consequence of reduced mesenchymal proliferation and a failure of mesenchymal differentiation, which occur following loss of both Fgf4 and Fgf8. We further conclude that chondrogenic primordia formation, marked by initial Sox9 expression in limb mesenchyme, is an essential component of the PD patterning process and that a key role for AER-FGF signaling is to facilitate SOX9 function and to ensure progressive establishment of chondrogenic primordia along the PD axis.

  • FGF
  • FGF receptor
  • Apical ectodermal ridge (AER)
  • Limb bud development
  • Chondrogenesis

INTRODUCTION

The apical ectodermal ridge (AER) is a specialized ectodermal structure formed at the distal tip of the vertebrate limb bud that is essential for proximodistal (PD) patterning of the limb (Saunders, 1948). Surgical removal of the AER results in skeletal truncation that is limited to more distal segments when the AER is removed at progressively later stages (Rowe and Fallon, 1982; Summerbell, 1974). The AER functions by elaborating signals to the adjacent mesenchyme, and members of the fibroblast growth factor (FGF) family have been identified as key components of AER signaling (Martin, 1998). It has been demonstrated that FGF-soaked beads are sufficient to rescue the skeletal phenotypes that result from AER removal (Fallon et al., 1994; Niswander et al., 1993). Of the four FGFs expressed in the AER, Fgf4 and Fgf8 are necessary for limb skeletal formation and when both genes are disrupted prior to limb bud initiation, the entire limb skeleton fails to form (Boulet et al., 2004; Sun et al., 2002).

FGFs elicit their biological functions by binding and activating a family of four high-affinity receptors (FGFRs), a sub-class of receptor tyrosine kinases (Ornitz and Itoh, 2001; Zhang et al., 2006). Two members of the FGFR family, Fgfr1c and Fgfr2c, are expressed in nascent limb bud mesenchyme (Orr-Urtreger et al., 1991). In vitro studies demonstrate that both FGFR1c and FGFR2c are capable of interacting with AER-expressed FGFs (Ornitz et al., 1996; Zhang et al., 2006). After ligand binding, activated FGFRs trigger several downstream intracellular signaling cascades (Eswarakumar et al., 2005). During limb development, the MAP kinase signaling pathway is activated in mesenchymal cells immediately adjacent to the AER, indicating active AER-FGF signaling in distal limb mesenchyme (Corson et al., 2003).

Previous studies indicate that AER-FGF signals are important for maintaining mesenchymal cell survival during limb development (Boulet et al., 2004; Sun et al., 2002). However, although AER-FGF signals are limited to distal mesenchyme, cell death induced by loss of AER-FGFs appears in proximal mesenchyme, far away from the AER. This is inconsistent with current knowledge that FGFs act as paracrine factors due to their interaction with heparan sulfate proteoglycans (HSPGs) in the extracellular matrix (ECM) (Ornitz, 2000). Moreover, when Fgf4 and Fgf8 are disrupted after limb bud initiation, transient AER-FGF signaling allows formation of a severely hypoplastic skeleton (Sun et al., 2002). Notably, despite significant size and number reduction of skeletal elements, all three PD segments are still recognizable. By contrast, AER removal, after limb bud initiation, results in a truncated skeleton owing to loss of all skeletal elements in distal segments. Phenotypic differences between loss of the AER and loss of AER-FGFs suggest that the AER possesses additional functions, which are either not mediated by FGF4 and FGF8 or are redundantly mediated by other AER factors such as FGF9, FGF17, or other signaling molecules including WNTs and BMPs (Barrow et al., 2003; Wang et al., 2004; Yamaguchi et al., 1999). All of these phenotypes, which undoubtedly have mechanistic implications, are not readily explained by the current model(s) of AER-FGF functions during limb development.

To further understand the functions of AER-FGF signals during limb development, we used a genetic analysis in the mouse embryo to compare phenotypes resulting from loss of the AER with phenotypes resulting from loss of AER-FGF signals. We also compared phenotypes resulting from partial loss of AER-FGF signaling with phenotypes resulting from complete loss of both Fgf4 and Fgf8 in the AER. We conclude that AER-FGF signals regulate multiple molecular and cellular processes during limb development and that the skeletal agenesis after complete loss of both Fgf4 and Fgf8 is due to combined mesenchymal defects, including increased cell death, decreased proliferation and failure of chondrogenic differentiation. We present a model to explain how AER-controlled proliferation and FGF-regulated mesenchymal differentiation organize the formation of the skeletal primordia along the PD axis during normal limb development.

    Fig. 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 1.

Limb development phenotypes in Fgfr2Msx2-Cre mouse embryos. (A-F) Comparison of limb phenotypes in wild-type control (WT) and Fgfr2Msx2-Cre mouse embryos. (A,D) Skeletal preparations of E15.5 embryos. (B,E) Skeletal preparations of P0 forelimbs. (C,F) Gross appearance of limb buds at E12.5. Note that the hindlimb bud is never formed and only appears as a small bulge (arrow and dotted line) in Fgfr2Msx2-Cre embryos. (G-J) Histology of the distal hindlimb buds at E10 (G,H) and E10.5 (I,J) showing the failure to form a multi-layered AER (arrow) in Fgfr2Msx2-Cre embryos. (K-N) Histology of the distal forelimb buds at E10 (K,L) and E10.5 (M,N) showing initial formation of an AER (arrow) in Fgfr2Msx2-Cre embryos at E10 and regression to a single-layered epithelium by E10.5. (O-R) Whole-mount in situ hybridization showing Fgf8 expression in the AER at E10.5 (O,P) and E11.5 (Q,R). Note that Fgf8 is never expressed in Fgfr2Msx2-Cre hindlimbs (arrow) and is prematurely lost in Fgfr2Msx2-Cre forelimbs, accompanied by distal deformities (dotted line). Data are representative of at least three embryos. Scale bar: in G for G-N, 20 μm.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Mice

Sources: Fgfr1flox/+ and Fgfr1Δ/+ (Trokovic et al., 2003); Fgfr2flox/flox and Fgfr2Δ/+ (Yu et al., 2003); Msx2-Cre (Sun et al., 2000); Prx1-Cre (Logan et al., 2002). Fgfr2Msx2-Cre mice were generated by mating Fgfr2+/Δ; Msx2Cre/+ mice with Fgfr2flox/flox mice. Fgfr1Prx1-Cre, Fgfr2Prx1-Cre and Fgfr1/2Prx1-Cre mice were generated by mating Fgfr1+/Δ; Fgfr2+/Δ; Prx1Cre/+ compound heterozygous mice with Fgfr1flox/flox; Fgfr2flox/flox double homozygous mice. In all matings, Fgfr1Δ and Fgfr2Δ alleles were incorporated to increase the efficiency of Cre-mediated recombination. Mouse embryonic skeletons were prepared as described previously (Yu et al., 2003).

Staining, immunohistochemistry and in situ hybridization

Embryos or tissues were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde in PBS and embedded in paraffin. Sections were stained with Hematoxylin and Eosin (H&E). Forβ -galactosidase histochemistry, embryos were fixed in 0.2% glutaraldehyde in PBS for 60 minutes, washed in PBS and stained in β-gal staining buffer [5 mM K3Fe (CN)6,5 mM K4FE (CN)6*3H2O, 1 mM MgCl2, 0.01% sodium desoxycholate, 0.009% NP40, 0.002% X-Gal] for 8 hours at 4°C. After post-fixing in 4% paraformaldehyde, embryos were embedded in paraffin and sections counterstained with nuclear fast red.

Immunohistochemistry was carried out using LAB-SA Detection System (Zymed) according to the manufacturer's instructions. Primary antibodies are anti-cleaved caspase 3 (Cell Signaling) and anti-phosphohistone H3 (pHH3) (Sigma). TUNEL assay was carried out using the In Situ Cell Death Detection Kit (Roche) according to the manufacturer's instructions. Distal mesenchymal proliferation was analyzed on transverse sections of limb buds and pHH3-labeled mesenchymal cells were counted in a 1.5×104μ m2 area immediately adjacent (within 100 μm) to the AER.

Fgf8 whole-mount in situ hybridization was performed as described previously (Sun et al., 2000).

RESULTS

AER ablation by conditional removal of Fgfr2 in limb ectoderm

To understand functional differences between the AER and AER-FGFs, we ablated the AER in mouse limb buds, which allowed us to directly compare phenotypes with those resulting from inactivation of Fgf4 and Fgf8 in the AER. Because Fgfr2b is essential for the survival of AER epithelial cells (Revest et al., 2001), conditional inactivation of Fgfr2, using the limb ectoderm-specific Msx2-Cre transgene (Sun et al., 2000), could be used to terminate AER functions during limb development. Msx2-Cre/+; Fgfr2flox/Δ (Fgfr2Msx2-Cre) mice appeared normal except for the absence of hindlimbs and severely truncated forelimbs (Fig. 1A-F), consistent with expression of Msx2-Cre before hindlimb bud initiation and after forelimb bud initiation (Lewandoski et al., 2000). Fgfr2Msx2-Cre forelimbs formed a normal stylopod (humerus) and zeugopod (radius and ulna), but completely lacked an autopod (Fig. 1D,E). The mutant forelimb skeleton was very similar to the truncated chicken wing skeleton that results from AER removal at around stage 23 (Summerbell, 1974), indicating that genetic methods can mimic the effects of surgical means to completely ablate the AER during limb development.

In Fgfr2Msx2-Cre mice, forelimb buds were initiated normally, but showed reduced distal outgrowth after embryonic day 10.5 (E10.5). By E11.5, mutant forelimb buds were only comparable in size to control limb buds at E10.5 and showed distal morphological deformities (Fig. 1R, dotted line). By E12.5, mutant forelimbs appeared truncated, lacking any autopod primordial structures (Fig. 1C,F). By contrast, mutant hindlimbs only developed a small bulge protruding from the body wall and never demonstrated further outgrowth (Fig. 1F, arrow and dotted line).

Examination of histological sections indicated that a stratified AER was never formed in Fgfr2Msx2-Cre hindlimb buds (Fig. 1G-J). Consistent with agenesis of the AER in mutant hindlimbs, Fgf8 was not detected at any stage examined (Fig. 1O,P and data not shown). In mutant forelimbs, transient epithelial thickening was observed in the prospective AER region at E10, which rapidly regressed to a single layer of epithelial cells by E10.5 (Fig. 1K-N). Fgf8 expression was detected in the AER at E10.5, but was prematurely lost by E11.5 (Fig. 1O-R).

    Fig. 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 2.

Reduced mesenchymal proliferation and increased cell death after loss of the AER in Fgfr2Msx2-Cre mouse embryos. Phosphohistone H3 (pHH3) immunohistochemistry was used to assess mesenchymal proliferation. Caspase 3 immunohistochemistry and TUNEL assay were used to assess cell death. Hindlimb (A-H) and forelimb (I-T) sections are shown at the developmental times indicated. Insets in G and H show TUNEL labeling on adjacent sections. Insets in S and T show the overall size of the limb buds at E11.5. Data are representative of at least three embryos. Scale bar: 50μ m.

In a previous study, conditional disruption of β-catenin (Ctnnb1 - Mouse Genome Informatics) in the AER with Msx2-Cre (β-cateninMsx2-Cre) resulted in hindlimb skeletal agenesis that was indistinguishable from the hindlimb phenotypes of Fgfr2Msx2-Cre mice. However,β -cateninMsx2-Cre mice showed significantly more severe forelimb phenotypes than Fgfr2Msx2-Cre mice, with skeletal truncation occurring at the elbow joint level rather than at the wrist level (Barrow et al., 2003). As the truncation level correlates with the timing of AER removal in chick experiments, these results indicate that AER functions are lost at a later stage in Fgfr2Msx2-Cre forelimbs than inβ -cateninMsx2-Cre forelimbs. Since the same Msx2-Cre transgene was used in both studies, it suggests that AER ablation in the forelimbs is not determined by the time of gene targeting but more likely by the time of protein inactivation.

The AER is essential for proliferation of adjacent limb mesenchyme

Previous studies indicated that AER extirpation results in reduced proliferation and/or increased cell death in distal mesenchyme (Dudley et al., 2002; Niswander and Martin, 1993; Rowe et al., 1982; Sun et al., 2002). Mesenchymal proliferation and cell death were examined in Fgfr2Msx2-Cre limb buds using anti-phosphohistone H3 (pHH3) and anti-caspase 3 immunohistochemistry (IHC), respectively. Consistent with the complete absence of AER functions, mutant hindlimb buds showed decreased mesenchymal proliferation beginning at the limb bud initiation stage (E10) (Fig. 2A,B; Table 1). By E10.5, mesenchymal proliferation was further decreased in mutant limb mesenchyme, and few pHH3-positive cells were found throughout the whole hindlimb field (Fig. 2E,F; Table 1). In contrast to the reduced proliferation observed at early stages, mesenchymal cell death did not appear in the hindlimb buds until E10.5, when massive cell death was detected throughout the entire limb mesenchyme, adjacent to the prospective AER (Fig. 2C,D,G,H; Table 1). Mutant forelimbs showed normal mesenchymal proliferation at E10 (Fig. 2I,J; Table 1). However, by E10.5, reduced proliferation was evident in distal mesenchyme (Fig. 2M,N; Table 1). At E11.5, mutant forelimb buds lacked highly proliferative distal mesenchyme (Fig. 2Q,R). No abnormal mesenchymal cell death was found in mutant forelimbs at E10 (Fig. 2K,L). At E10.5, mutant forelimbs showed a slight increase in cell death in distal mesenchyme (Fig. 2O,P; Table 1). At E11.5, apoptotic cells were no longer detected in distal mesenchyme (Fig. 2S,T). This is consistent with the reduced or absent cell death observed after AER extirpation at later stages of chick limb development (Dudley et al., 2002; Rowe et al., 1982), further indicating that loss of AER functions occurs at a later developmental stage in Fgfr2Msx2-Cre forelimbs.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Limb bud mesenchymal proliferation and cell death

Comparison of Msx2-Cre, Fgf4/8 double conditional knockout (Fgf4/8Msx2-Cre) mice (Sun et al., 2002), which do not show reduced distal mesenchymal proliferation at early stages, with Fgfr2Msx2-Cre mice, revealed that either the AER contributes to mesenchymal proliferation independently of FGF4 and FGF8, or that mesenchymal proliferation is redundantly regulated by these FGFs and other AER signals. As pointed out in previous studies (Sun et al., 2002), it is puzzling that in Fgf4/8Msx2-Cre limb buds, the cell-death zone is located in proximal mesenchyme, whereas AER removal leads to cell death in distal mesenchyme. However, what was not rigorously considered during such a comparison was whether loss of all AER functions versus loss of AER-FGFs happens at the same developmental stages. As demonstrated in previous studies, removal of the AER at different times can lead to different mesenchymal defects and skeletal phenotypes (Dudley et al., 2002). Thus, to understand functional differences between the AER and AER-FGFs, it is necessary to choose and compare phenotypes that occur at the same stages of development. Hindlimb phenotypes of Fgfr2Msx2-Cre mice and Fgf4/8Msx2-Cre mice allow such a comparison. Fgf8, which is expressed before limb bud initiation, mediates AER-like functions before formation of a morphologically identifiable AER. In Fgfr2Msx2-Cre hindlimbs, Fgf8 was never expressed, similar to the situation for Fgf4/8Msx2-Cre hindlimbs, but, additionally, the AER was never formed. By contrast, a morphologically normal AER is present in Fgf4/8Msx2-Cre hindlimbs at early stages (Sun et al., 2002). Thus, it is conceivable that before or during limb bud initiation, all AER functions are lost in Fgfr2Msx2-Cre hindlimbs, whereas only FGF signals are lost in Fgf4/8Msx2-Cre hindlimbs. However, despite the loss of all AER-derived signals, mesenchymal cell death in Fgfr2Msx2-Cre hindlimbs occurs at the same time as that of Fgf4/8Msx2-Cre hindlimbs (35 somites, E10.5), strongly suggesting that the survival function of the AER is solely mediated by FGF signals. Phenotypic comparison of Fgf4/8Msx2-Cre and Fgfr2Msx2-Cre hindlimbs also suggests that the proximal location of the cell-death domain, after loss of AER-FGF signals, is likely to be due to continued proliferation of distal mesenchyme, which is not affected by loss of AER-FGF signals at early stages (Sun et al., 2002). As apoptosis is delayed, continual proliferation gradually separates dying mesenchymal cells from the AER. Without distal mesenchymal proliferation, the same cell-death domain will remain adjacent to the ectoderm/AER, as shown in Fgfr2Msx2-Cre hindlimbs (Fig. 2H).

FGFR1 and FGFR2 mediate AER-FGF signaling during early limb development

To further understand the mechanism of AER-FGF functions, we disrupted FGF signal transduction in limb mesenchyme by targeting mesenchymal FGFRs. To overcome potential functional redundancy between Fgfr1c and Fgfr2c, we inactivated both Fgfr1 and Fgfr2 in limb mesenchyme with a Prx1-Cre transgene (Prx1 is also known as Prrx1 - Mouse Genome Informatics) (Logan et al., 2002). Prx1-Cre is expressed in both forelimb and hindlimb mesenchyme, but is activated in the prospective forelimb region prior to limb bud initiation and targets forelimb mesenchyme exclusively at initiation stages of limb bud development (Fig. 3A). Double conditional knockout mice with the genotype Prx1-Cre/+; Fgfr1flox/Δ; Fgfr2flox/Δ (Fgfr1/2Prx1-Cre) were born alive along with compound single conditional knockout littermates, Fgfr1Prx1-Cre (Prx1-Cre/+; Fgfr1flox/Δ; Fgfr2flox/+) and Fgfr2Prx1-Cre (Prx1-Cre/+; Fgfr1flox/+; Fgfr2flox/Δ). Fgfr1Prx1-Cre mice showed mild limb-skeletal defects (Fig. 3B,C and see Fig. S1 in the supplementary material) and Fgfr2Prx1-Cre skeletons were indistinguishable from wild-type skeletons at post-natal day 0 (P0) (data not shown), consistent with previous findings (Eswarakumar et al., 2002; Li et al., 2005; Verheyden et al., 2005; Yu et al., 2003). In contrast to the single-gene knockouts, Fgfr1/2Prx1-Cre mice showed severe skeletal hypoplasia in both forelimbs and hindlimbs (Fig. 3B,D and see Fig. S1 in the supplementary material). All three segments of the forelimb skeleton were severely affected and bony fusion was found at the elbow joint and between skeletal elements in the autopod. These results suggest that the functions of Fgfr1 and Fgfr2 are partially redundant during limb skeletal development and that FGFR1 has unique functions in distal limb skeletal formation.

When examined at initiation stages (E9.5), Fgfr1/2Prx1-Cre forelimb buds appeared normal. However, by E10, Fgfr1/2Prx1-Cre forelimb buds were significantly smaller (72%, P<0.03) than control limb buds along the PD axis (Fig. 3E,H,I,L; Table 2), a phenotype not found in either Fgfr1Prx1-Cre or Fgfr2Prx1-Cre littermates (Fig. 3E-G,I-K; Table 2). Smaller limb bud size in Fgfr1/2Prx1-Cre embryos could result from decreased mesenchymal cell proliferation or increased cell death. However, proliferation in the distal mesenchyme of Fgfr1/2Prx1-Cre forelimb buds was not affected (Fig. 3M-P), similar to the observations in Fgf4/8Msx2-Cre limb buds (Sun et al., 2002). Increased mesenchymal cell death was not detected in mutant forelimb mesenchyme at E9.5 (25 somites; data not shown); however, at E10 (30-32 somites), increased levels of cell death in Fgfr1/2Prx1-Cre forelimb mesenchyme were clearly present, as shown by caspase 3 IHC (Fig. 3Q,R) and TUNEL labeling (see Fig. S2 in the supplementary material). Apoptotic cells were found in both proximal and central regions of the limb bud, but were excluded from the most-distal limb mesenchyme. At E10.5, no abnormal cell death was observed in Fgfr1/2Prx1-Cre forelimbs (Fig. 3S,T). As reported previously, after loss of AER-FGFs, forelimbs show similar mesenchymal defects, including increased proximal cell death and reduced limb bud size, that occur at similar stages of development (E10) (Boulet et al., 2004; Sun et al., 2002), demonstrating that AER-FGF signals are mediated by both FGFR1 and FGFR2 during early mesenchymal development.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Limb bud proximodistal length

    Fig. 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 3.

Limb development phenotypes resulting from FGF receptor inactivation in limb mesenchyme with Prx1-Cre. (A) β-galactosidase staining of Prx1-Cre, R26R forelimb at E9.5. (B-D) Skeletal preparations of P0 wild-type control (WT), Fgfr1Prx1-Cre and Fgfr1/2Prx1-Cre mice. (E-L) Appearance (E-H) and histology (I-L) of E10 forelimb buds of WT, Fgfr1Prx1-Cre, Fgfr2Prx1-Cre and Fgfr1/2Prx1-Cre embryos showing a reduced proximodistal axis in Fgfr1/2Prx1-Cre forelimb buds. (M-P) Phosphohistone H3 (pHH3) immunohistochemistry to assess proliferation at E10 (M,N) and E10.5 (O,P). (Q-T) Caspase 3 immunohistochemistry used to assess cell death at E10 (Q,R) and E10.5 (S,T). Note that the region of reduced density of pHH3-positive cells in proximal mesenchyme of Fgfr1/2Prx1-Cre embryos at E10 (N) corresponds to the region with increased apoptosis (R). Data are representative of at least three embryos. Scale bars: in A, I for I-L and M for M-T, 50 μm.

When compared with RAR-Cre (RAR is also known as Rarb - Mouse Genome Informatics), Fgf4/8 double conditional knockout (Fgf4/8RAR-Cre) forelimbs (Boulet et al., 2004), in which complete loss of FGF4 and FGF8 activity results in skeletal agenesis, Fgfr1/2Prx1-Cre forelimbs were hypoplastic but formed a normally segmented skeleton. Notably, the Fgfr1/2Prx1-Cre skeletal phenotype was similar to that of Fgf4/8Msx2-Cre forelimbs, in which AER-FGF signals are transiently present at early stages. This suggested that in Fgfr1/2Prx1-Cre forelimbs, early mesenchymal cells still receive FGF signals, albeit at a significantly reduced level. Consistent with this, it has been reported that complete mesenchymal deletion mediated by Prx1-Cre may occur by as late as E12.5 (Hill et al., 2006; Kmita et al., 2005; Lewis et al., 2001), suggesting incomplete mesenchymal inactivation of FGFRs by Prx1-Cre during early limb development. However, the hypomorphic nature of the Fgfr1/2Prx1-Cre mutation allows transient FGF signaling, which can then be contrasted with both pre-limb bud initiation and post-limb bud initiation deletions of Fgf4 and Fgf8.

DISCUSSION

Mesenchymal cell death is not sufficient to cause skeletal agenesis

Previous studies concluded that AER-FGF signals regulate limb skeletal formation by maintaining mesenchymal cell survival and, in turn, maintaining the progenitor cell population that will be needed for PD segment formation. After loss of AER-FGF signals, mesenchymal cell death reduces progenitor cell numbers. It has been proposed that skeletal agenesis occurs when progenitor cell numbers fall below some threshold (Boulet et al., 2004; Sun et al., 2002). However, when compared with Fgf4/8RAR-Cre forelimbs, which completely lack a limb skeleton, both Fgf4/8Msx2-Cre and Fgfr1/2Prx1-Cre forelimbs show similar patterns of mesenchymal cell death but they do form a skeleton (Fig. 4B,D,E). It is worth noting that although proximally located cell death domains overlap with the prospective stylopod region, the humerus is the least affected skeletal element in Fgf4/8Msx2-Cre forelimbs. These observations suggest that increased mesenchymal cell death is not sufficient to cause skeletal agenesis.

    Fig. 4.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 4.

Comparison of forelimb development and phenotypes derived from genetic studies in the mouse. (A) Models for AER-FGF functions in mesenchymal differentiation and chondrogenic primordia formation along the PD axis during normal limb development. Fgf8 expression in limb field ectoderm at early stages of development stimulates the FGFR-dependent MAP kinase signaling pathway in all mesenchymal cells of the nascent limb bud (red shading) (Corson et al., 2003). Initial Sox9 expression demarcates the stylopod primordia. Having received AER-FGF signals, these Sox9-expressing cells commit to osteochondroprogenitors and will form a mesenchymal condensation. Distal mesenchymal cells, which remain undifferentiated, continue to proliferate under the influence of the AER and receive AER-FGF signals. As Sox9 expression expands with limb outgrowth, the zeugopod and autopod primordia are sequentially established. (B-E) Phenotypes resulting from genetic manipulations of AER-FGF signaling. Loss of AER-FGF signaling does not prevent mesenchymal cells from expressing Sox9, but insufficient AER-FGF signaling triggers mesenchymal cell death that leads to skeletal hypoplasia. (B) Attenuated mesenchymal FGF signal transduction achieved by inactivation of Fgfr1 and Fgfr2 with the Prx1-Cre transgene (see Fig. 3). With progressive Fgfr inactivation during early limb bud development, AER-FGF signals are attenuated in limb mesenchyme. Although reduced in size, chondrogenic primordia still form along the PD axis, which leads to a normally segmented but small and dysmorphic skeleton. (C) The RAR-Cre transgene results in complete inactivation of Fgf8 before forelimb bud initiation (Moon and Capecchi, 2000). Without Fgf8, mesenchymal cells in the nascent limb bud fail to receive FGF signaling. Sox9-expressing cells that are derived from these mesenchymal cells cannot commit to osteochondroprogenitors and fail to form the stylopod primordia. Increased (and precocious) Fgf4 expression in the AER restores FGF signaling in distal undifferentiated mesenchyme allowing the zeugopod and autopod primordia to sequentially form following Sox9 expression. (D) The Msx2-Cre transgene inactivates Fgf4 and Fgf8 after forelimb bud initiation, allowing transient AER-FGF signaling (Sun et al., 2002). Initial FGF signaling in nascent limb mesenchyme ensures stylopod primordia formation. Subsequent loss of Fgf4 and Fgf8 impedes continual commitment of distal mesenchymal cells to osteochondroprogenitors, which is required for formation of normally sized skeletal segments. The severely hypoplastic zeugopod and autopod are formed from small numbers of committed mesenchymal cells that are either derived from nascent limb mesenchyme or result from partial rescue of distal limb mesenchyme by Fgf9 and Fgf17. (E) The RAR-Cre transgene results in complete inactivation of Fgf4 and Fgf8 before forelimb bud initiation (Boulet et al., 2004). Without AER-FGF signaling, Sox9-expressing cells cannot commit to osteochondroprogenitors and fail to form any chondrogenic primordia. Owing to distal mesenchymal defects, the AER or AER functions are not maintained at later stages and distal mesenchymal proliferation is inevitably reduced, which further reduces limb bud size. (F,G) Phenotypes resulting from genetic ablation of the AER at different times of limb development. Proliferation in distal mesenchyme or in mesenchyme adjacent to the AER is reduced after loss of the AER, but mesenchymal cell death is manifested only when the AER is disrupted at early stages. (F) Inactivation of Fgfr2 in the AER after forelimb bud initiation (see Figs 1, 2). AER degeneration results in an arrest of development in distal mesenchyme and autopod primordia fail to form owing to decreased mesenchymal proliferation and loss of the differentiation function of AER-FGFs. Further skeletal development of stylopod and zeugopod primordia, which are established before AER degeneration, is not affected by loss of AER functions at later developmental stages. (G) Inactivation of Fgfr2b (Revest et al., 2001) or conditional inactivation of Fgfr2 in limb field ectoderm before limb bud initiation (in the hindlimb, Figs 1, 2). The absence of any AER function results in decreased mesenchymal proliferation, massive mesenchymal cell death, and subsequent limb bud agenesis. S, stylopod; Z, zeugopod; A, autopod.

The notion that there is a threshold number of mesenchymal cells to form limb skeletal segments was originally proposed to explain limb PD patterning defects that result from X-irradiation-induced mesenchymal cell death (Wolpert et al., 1979). However, skeletal defects following X-irradiation are very different from those following loss of both Fgf4 and Fgf8. After X-irradiation, proximal skeletal elements are either not formed or reduced in size, whereas skeletal phenotypes in the autopod are much less severe. It is worth noting that in the X-irradiation model, similar levels of cell death occur in proximal and distal mesenchyme. By contrast, after loss of both Fgf4 and Fgf8, even though mesenchymal cell death is limited to proximal mesenchyme, distal skeletal elements are either not formed or are severely hypoplastic. As AER functions are not affected by X-irradiation (Wolpert et al., 1979), such phenotypic differences strongly suggest that loss of AER-FGFs must cause additional mesenchymal defects that result in severe distal skeletal phenotypes.

Continual proliferation of distal mesenchyme is essential for distal skeletal formation

Previous studies concluded that skeletal defects, after loss of both Fgf4 and Fgf8, are not due to reduced mesenchymal proliferation, as distal mesenchymal proliferation was not affected by loss of AER-FGF signals when examined before E10.5 (Sun et al., 2002). Although AER-FGF signals are dispensable for mesenchymal proliferation, they are essential to maintain mesenchymal gene expression. One such gene is Fgf10, which is abundantly expressed in distal mesenchyme throughout early limb development (Ohuchi et al., 1997). After loss of both Fgf4 and Fgf8, Fgf10 expression is greatly reduced in distal mesenchyme and is barely detectable at later stages (Boulet et al., 2004; Sun et al., 2002). During limb development, Fgf10 functions to maintain FGFR2b signaling in the AER and the integrity of the AER (Min et al., 1998; Ohuchi et al., 2000; Sekine et al., 1999). This is supported by the observation that after loss of both Fgf4 and Fgf8, there is a higher than normal level of cell death in the AER between E10.5 and E11.5, when Fgf10 expression is no longer maintained (Boulet et al., 2004; Sun et al., 2002).

As illustrated by Fgfr2Msx2-Cre forelimb defects (Fig. 4F), the integrity of the AER is important for maintaining distal mesenchymal proliferation. Therefore, we suggest that after loss of both Fgf4 and Fgf8, distal mesenchymal proliferation is eventually reduced following downregulation of Fgf10 and premature degeneration of the AER. Thus, in the absence of both Fgf4 and Fgf8, increased mesenchymal cell death results in an initial reduction in limb bud size. The extreme reduction in limb size that occurs by E11.5 is likely to be due to the combined effects of reduced distal mesenchymal proliferation and sustained cell death that result in the complete cessation of limb bud outgrowth.

Continual proliferation of distal mesenchyme is important for distal skeletal element formation. When the AER is excised from chick limb buds at late stages, distal skeletal truncation (loss of autopod elements) correlates with reduced distal mesenchymal proliferation, as mesenchymal cell death no longer occurs after AER removal at late stages of development (Dudley et al., 2002). Fgfr2Msx2-Cre forelimb phenotypes further indicate that autopod skeleton formation requires proliferation of distal mesenchymal cells to form a primordium prior to overt morphological changes. The resurgence of autopod skeletal formation after X-irradiation is also likely to be due to restoration of distal mesenchymal proliferation by the intact AER after X-irradiation. Thus, we suggest that distal skeletal defects after loss of both Fgf4 and Fgf8 are more likely to be due to reduced mesenchymal proliferation than to increased mesenchymal cell death.

A role for FGF signaling during limb mesenchymal differentiation

As reported previously, disruption of Fgf8 prior to limb bud initiation results in a limb skeleton that completely lacks the stylopod (Fig. 4C). Formation of the zeugopod and autopod are less affected, presumably owing to increased Fgf4 expression that maintains some AER-FGF functions (Lewandoski et al., 2000; Moon and Capecchi, 2000). During limb bud development, Fgf8 expression precedes that of other AER-FGFs, resulting in a window of time in which only FGF8 is present (from E9.0 to ∼E10 in mouse forelimbs). After that, AER-FGF signals comprise FGF8 and other FGFs (FGF4, 9 and 17) (Sun et al., 2000; Sun et al., 2002). In the absence of Fgf8, even though Fgf4 is precociously expressed (Lewandoski et al., 2000), there is still a period of time (from E9.0 to∼ E9.75 in mouse forelimbs) when mesenchymal cells fail to receive FGF signals from the AER. This gap in FGF signaling results in stylopod agenesis. Moreover, as shown by Fgf4/8Msx2-Cre forelimb phenotypes (Fig. 4D), when mesenchymal cells receive FGF signals during this period of time, stylopod formation proceeds relatively normally and is not affected by extensive proximal cell death or dramatic limb bud size reduction. Thus, stylopod agenesis after loss of Fgf8 cannot simply be due to reduced mesenchymal cell number, as suggested in previous studies (Lewandoski et al., 2000; Sun et al., 2002).

Previous studies also indicate that loss of AER-FGF signals do not prevent mesenchymal cells from expressing Sox9, the earliest marker for chondrogenic differentiation (Akiyama et al., 2002; Wright et al., 1995), but do prevent formation of mesenchymal condensations (Boulet et al., 2004; Sun et al., 2002). Normally, Sox9 functions to commit undifferentiated mesenchymal cells to osteochondroprogenitors, a cell type that will give rise to both chondrocytes and osteoblasts and to promote mesenchymal condensation formation (Akiyama et al., 2002). During forelimb development, Sox9 expression begins at E10 in a subpopulation of mesenchymal cells (Akiyama et al., 2005). It is worth noting that at E9.5, prior to Sox9 expression, AER-FGF-induced MAP kinase activity is already present in the entire forelimb mesenchyme (Corson et al., 2003). Thus, we hypothesize that AER-FGF signals are required for Sox9-mediated mesenchymal condensation formation. In support of this hypothesis, previous studies have shown that FGF signaling through the MAP kinase signaling pathway can function synergistically with SOX9 to upregulate Sox9 expression and that the level of SOX9 protein is critical for the formation of a mesenchymal condensation (Bi et al., 2001; Murakami et al., 2000). Thus, stylopod agenesis after loss of Fgf8 is not due to reduced mesenchymal cell numbers, but rather to the failure of Sox9-expressing cells to undergo further chondrogenic differentiation.

AER-FGF functions during PD pattern formation

During limb skeletal development, prior to initiation of a mesenchymal condensation, some mesenchymal cells undergo initial stages of chondrogenic differentiation, characterized by expression of Sox9, but without apparent changes in cell morphology (chondrogenic primordia). Initial Sox9 expression is localized to central regions of the limb bud, surrounded by undifferentiated mesenchymal cells. Later, the Sox9 expression domain expands following limb outgrowth, but is still excluded from distal mesenchyme beneath the AER (Akiyama et al., 2005). Owing to the lack of definitive markers for each PD segment at early stages, it is difficult to determine whether the initial Sox9 expression domain contains progenitors for all three PD segments, or only for the most-proximal segment.

Recent lineage-tracing studies with Shh-Cre and the ROSA26 (R26R) β-galactosidase reporter suggest that the initial Sox9 expression domain might not contain progenitors for all three PD segments. Along the PD axis, progeny of Shh-Cre-expressing cells are found in the autopod and part of the zeugopod, but never in the stylopod (Harfe et al., 2004). The origin of Shh-Cre-expressing cells is limited to the zone of polarizing activity (ZPA) in the posterior edge of limb mesenchyme, and does not appear to overlap with the central Sox9 expression domain. This suggests that skeletal lineages in the zeugopod and autopod are not derived from the initial Sox9 expression domain, but rather are formed at later stages after their progenitors move out of the ZPA. Thus, Sox9 expression is sequentially regulated along the PD axis, which is consistent with the conclusion that chondrogenic differentiation along the PD axis follows a proximal-to-distal sequence (Summerbell et al., 1973).

We suggest that the initial Sox9 domain demarcates a chondrogenic primordium for the stylopod, in which Sox9-expressing cells only contribute to very proximal skeletal elements. With continual transition of distal undifferentiated cells into Sox9-expressing cells, chondrogenic primordia for the zeugopod and autopod become sequentially established (Fig. 4A). During this sequential differentiation process, AER-controlled proliferation provides a source of undifferentiated mesenchymal cells that continually receive AER-FGF signals and progressively differentiate into more-distal skeletal elements. Such a mechanism ensures continual commitment of mesenchymal cells to the osteochondroprogenitors that are essential for mesenchymal condensation formation along the PD axis. This could explain the different skeletal phenotypes in Fgf8RAR-Cre and Fgf4/8Msx2-Cre as well as Fgfr2Msx2-Cre forelimbs, in which AER-FGFs or all AER functions are inactivated at different times during development (Fig. 4C,D,F).

In addition to temporal differences in Sox9 expression, different PD segments might also regulate Sox9 expression through distinct molecular mechanisms. This is supported by recent studies of hindlimb phenotypes (lack of the stylopod and zeugopod but normal autopod) in Gli3 and Plzf (also known as Zbtb16 - Mouse Genome Informatics) double-knockout mice (Barna et al., 2005). In the absence of both Gli3 and Plzf, Sox9 is not expressed in early limb mesenchyme, which, as we suggest, results in failure of proximal chondrogenic primordia formation and subsequent failure of proximal skeletal element formation. However, owing to normal mesenchymal proliferation and normal Sox9 expression in distal mesenchymal cells at later stages, autopod chondrogenic primordia and distal skeletal development proceeds normally in mutant hindlimb buds.

In a recent review, after examination of segment-specific marker gene expression, Tabin and Wolpert present ideas that distal proliferation and proximal differentiation are tightly coupled at early stages and that segmental primordia are sequentially established along the PD axis (Tabin and Wolpert, 2007). It is worth noting that establishment of chondrogenic primordia, marked by Sox9 expression, occurs in a similar timeframe to this PD segmentation process that is defined by segment-specific gene expression. Since, in the absence of Sox9, segment-specific genes themselves are insufficient to induce the formation of a mesenchymal condensation (Akiyama et al., 2002), these results suggest that PD skeletal pattern formation requires coordination of chondrogenic- and segment-specific differentiation.

In summary, AER-FGF signals directly or indirectly regulate mesenchymal survival, proliferation and differentiation during limb development. The complete skeletal agenesis after loss of both Fgf4 and Fgf8 or all AER functions before limb bud initiation (Fig. 4E,G) is likely to be due to the loss of all of these functions. Finally, in contrast to previous conclusions that AER-FGF signals regulate PD skeletal pattern formation by controlling mesenchymal cell number, our analysis indicates that the AER and AER-FGFs regulate PD skeletal pattern formation through coordinating distal mesenchymal proliferation and chondrogenic differentiation.

Supplementary material

Supplementary material for this article is available at http://dev.biologists.org/cgi/content/full/135/3/483/DC1

Acknowledgments

We thank C. Smith and G. Schmid for mouse husbandry and C. Tabin and R. Kopan for helpful discussions. This work was funded by NIH grant HD049808 and NIH training grant 5T32AR007033.

Footnotes

    • Accepted October 26, 2007.
  • © 2008.

References

  1. ↵
    Akiyama, H., Chaboissier, M. C., Martin, J. F., Schedl, A. and de Crombrugghe, B. (2002). The transcription factor Sox9 has essential roles in successive steps of the chondrocyte differentiation pathway and is required for expression of Sox5 and Sox6. Genes Dev. 16,2813 -2828.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    Akiyama, H., Kim, J. E., Nakashima, K., Balmes, G., Iwai, N., Deng, J. M., Zhang, Z., Martin, J. F., Behringer, R. R., Nakamura, T. et al. (2005). Osteochondroprogenitor cells are derived from Sox9 expressing precursors. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 102,14665 -14670.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    Barna, M., Pandolfi, P. P. and Niswander, L. (2005). Gli3 and Plzf cooperate in proximal limb patterning at early stages of limb development. Nature 436,277 -281.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    Barrow, J. R., Thomas, K. R., Boussadia-Zahui, O., Moore, R., Kemler, R., Capecchi, M. R. and McMahon, A. P. (2003). Ectodermal Wnt3/beta-catenin signaling is required for the establishment and maintenance of the apical ectodermal ridge. Genes Dev. 17,394 -409.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. ↵
    Bi, W., Huang, W., Whitworth, D. J., Deng, J. M., Zhang, Z., Behringer, R. R. and de Crombrugghe, B. (2001). Haploinsufficiency of Sox9 results in defective cartilage primordia and premature skeletal mineralization. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98,6698 -6703.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. ↵
    Boulet, A. M., Moon, A. M., Arenkiel, B. R. and Capecchi, M. R. (2004). The roles of Fgf4 and Fgf8 in limb bud initiation and outgrowth. Dev. Biol. 273,361 -372.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  7. ↵
    Corson, L. B., Yamanaka, Y., Lai, K. M. and Rossant, J. (2003). Spatial and temporal patterns of ERK signaling during mouse embryogenesis. Development 130,4527 -4537.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. ↵
    Dudley, A. T., Ros, M. A. and Tabin, C. J. (2002). A re-examination of proximodistal patterning during vertebrate limb development. Nature 418,539 -544.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    Eswarakumar, V. P., Monsonego-Ornan, E., Pines, M., Antonopoulou, I., Morriss-Kay, G. M. and Lonai, P. (2002). The IIIc alternative of Fgfr2 is a positive regulator of bone formation. Development 129,3783 -3793.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  10. ↵
    Eswarakumar, V. P., Lax, I. and Schlessinger, J. (2005). Cellular signaling by fibroblast growth factor receptors. Cytokine Growth Factor Rev. 16,139 -149.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  11. ↵
    Fallon, J. F., Lopez, A., Ros, M. A., Savage, M. P., Olwin, B. B. and Simandl, B. K. (1994). FGF-2: apical ectodermal ridge growth signal for chick limb development. Science 264,104 -107.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. ↵
    Harfe, B. D., Scherz, P. J., Nissim, S., Tian, H., McMahon, A. P. and Tabin, C. J. (2004). Evidence for an expansion-based temporal Shh gradient in specifying vertebrate digit identities. Cell 118,517 -528.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  13. ↵
    Hill, T. P., Taketo, M. M., Birchmeier, W. and Hartmann, C. (2006). Multiple roles of mesenchymal beta-catenin during murine limb patterning. Development 133,1219 -1229.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. ↵
    Kmita, M., Tarchini, B., Zakany, J., Logan, M., Tabin, C. J. and Duboule, D. (2005). Early developmental arrest of mammalian limbs lacking HoxA/HoxD gene function. Nature 435,1113 -1116.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. ↵
    Lewandoski, M., Sun, X. and Martin, G. R. (2000). Fgf8 signalling from the AER is essential for normal limb development. Nat. Genet. 26,460 -463.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  16. ↵
    Lewis, P. M., Dunn, M. P., McMahon, J. A., Logan, M., Martin, J. F., St-Jacques, B. and McMahon, A. P. (2001). Cholesterol modification of sonic hedgehog is required for long-range signaling activity and effective modulation of signaling by Ptc1. Cell 105,599 -612.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  17. ↵
    Li, C., Xu, X., Nelson, D. K., Williams, T., Kuehn, M. R. and Deng, C. X. (2005). FGFR1 function at the earliest stages of mouse limb development plays an indispensable role in subsequent autopod morphogenesis. Development 132,4755 -4764.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. ↵
    Logan, M., Martin, J. F., Nagy, A., Lobe, C., Olson, E. N. and Tabin, C. J. (2002). Expression of Cre Recombinase in the developing mouse limb bud driven by a Prxl enhancer. Genesis 33,77 -80.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  19. ↵
    Martin, G. R. (1998). The roles of FGFs in the early development of vertebrate limbs. Genes Dev. 12,1571 -1586.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  20. ↵
    Min, H., Danilenko, D. M., Scully, S. A., Bolon, B., Ring, B. D., Tarpley, J. E., DeRose, M. and Simonet, W. S. (1998). Fgf-10 is required for both limb and lung development and exhibits striking functional similarity to Drosophila branchless. Genes Dev. 12,3156 -3161.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  21. ↵
    Moon, A. M. and Capecchi, M. R. (2000). Fgf8 is required for outgrowth and patterning of the limbs. Nat. Genet. 26,455 -459.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  22. ↵
    Murakami, S., Kan, M., McKeehan, W. L. and de Crombrugghe, B. (2000). Up-regulation of the chondrogenic Sox9 gene by fibroblast growth factors is mediated by the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97,1113 -1118.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  23. ↵
    Niswander, L. and Martin, G. R. (1993). FGF-4 and BMP-2 have opposite effects on limb growth. Nature 361, 68-71.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. ↵
    Niswander, L., Tickle, C., Vogel, A., Booth, I. and Martin, G. R. (1993). FGF-4 replaces the apical ectodermal ridge and directs outgrowth and patterning of the limb. Cell 75,579 -587.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  25. ↵
    Ohuchi, H., Nakagawa, T., Yamamoto, A., Araga, A., Ohata, T., Ishimaru, Y., Yoshioka, H., Kuwana, T., Nohno, T., Yamasaki, M. et al. (1997). The mesenchymal factor, FGF10, initiates and maintains the outgrowth of the chick limb bud through interaction with FGF8, an apical ectodermal factor. Development 124,2235 -2244.
    OpenUrlAbstract
  26. ↵
    Ohuchi, H., Hori, Y., Yamasaki, M., Harada, H., Sekine, K., Kato, S. and Itoh, N. (2000). FGF10 acts as a major ligand for FGF receptor 2 IIIb in mouse multi-organ development. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 277,643 -649.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  27. ↵
    Ornitz, D. M. (2000). FGFs, heparan sulfate and FGFRs: complex interactions essential for development. BioEssays 22,108 -112.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  28. ↵
    Ornitz, D. M. and Itoh, N. (2001). Fibroblast growth factors. Genome Biol. 2,REVIEWS3005 .
    OpenUrlPubMed
  29. ↵
    Ornitz, D. M., Xu, J., Colvin, J. S., McEwen, D. G., MacArthur, C. A., Coulier, F., Gao, G. and Goldfarb, M. (1996). Receptor specificity of the fibroblast growth factor family. J. Biol. Chem. 271,15292 -15297.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  30. ↵
    Orr-Urtreger, A., Givol, D., Yayon, A., Yarden, Y. and Lonai, P. (1991). Developmental expression of two murine fibroblast growth factor receptors, flg and bek. Development 113,1419 -1434.
    OpenUrlAbstract
  31. ↵
    Revest, J. M., Spencer-Dene, B., Kerr, K., De Moerlooze, L., Rosewell, I. and Dickson, C. (2001). Fibroblast growth factor receptor 2-IIIb acts upstream of Shh and Fgf4 and is required for limb bud maintenance but not for the induction of Fgf8, Fgf10, Msx1, or Bmp4. Dev. Biol. 231,47 -62.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  32. ↵
    Rowe, D. A. and Fallon, J. F. (1982). The proximodistal determination of skeletal parts in the developing chick leg. J. Embryol. Exp. Morphol. 68, 1-7.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  33. ↵
    Rowe, D. A., Cairns, J. M. and Fallon, J. F. (1982). Spatial and temporal patterns of cell death in limb bud mesoderm after apical ectodermal ridge removal. Dev. Biol. 93,83 -91.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  34. ↵
    Saunders, J. W. (1948). The proximo-distal sequence of the origin of the parts of the chicken wing and the role of the ectoderm. J. Exp. Zool. 108,363 -404.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  35. ↵
    Sekine, K., Ohuchi, H., Fujiwara, M., Yamasaki, M., Yoshizawa, T., Sato, T., Yagishita, N., Matsui, D., Koga, Y., Itoh, N. et al. (1999). Fgf10 is essential for limb and lung formation. Nat. Genet. 21,138 -141.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  36. ↵
    Summerbell, D. (1974). A quantitative analysis of the effect of excision of the AER from the chick limb-bud. J. Embryol. Exp. Morphol. 32,651 -660.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  37. ↵
    Summerbell, D., Lewis, J. H. and Wolpert, L. (1973). Positional information in chick limb morphogenesis. Nature 244,492 -496.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  38. ↵
    Sun, X., Lewandoski, M., Meyers, E. N., Liu, Y. H., Maxson, R. E., Jr and Martin, G. R. (2000). Conditional inactivation of Fgf4 reveals complexity of signalling during limb bud development. Nat. Genet. 25,83 -86.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  39. ↵
    Sun, X., Mariani, F. V. and Martin, G. R. (2002). Functions of FGF signalling from the apical ectodermal ridge in limb development. Nature 418,501 -508.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  40. ↵
    Tabin, C. and Wolpert, L. (2007). Rethinking the proximodistal axis of the vertebrate limb in the molecular era. Genes Dev. 21,1433 -1442.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  41. ↵
    Trokovic, R., Trokovic, N., Hernesniemi, S., Pirvola, U., Vogt Weisenhorn, D. M., Rossant, J., McMahon, A. P., Wurst, W. and Partanen, J. (2003). FGFR1 is independently required in both developing mid- and hindbrain for sustained response to isthmic signals. EMBO J. 22,1811 -1823.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  42. ↵
    Verheyden, J. M., Lewandoski, M., Deng, C., Harfe, B. D. and Sun, X. (2005). Conditional inactivation of Fgfr1 in mouse defines its role in limb bud establishment, outgrowth and digit patterning. Development 132,4235 -4245.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  43. ↵
    Wang, C. K., Omi, M., Ferrari, D., Cheng, H. C., Lizarraga, G., Chin, H. J., Upholt, W. B., Dealy, C. N. and Kosher, R. A. (2004). Function of BMPs in the apical ectoderm of the developing mouse limb. Dev. Biol. 269,109 -122.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  44. ↵
    Wolpert, L., Tickle, C. and Sampford, M. (1979). The effect of cell killing by x-irradiation on pattern formation in the chick limb. J. Embryol. Exp. Morphol. 50,175 -193.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  45. ↵
    Wright, E., Hargrave, M. R., Christiansen, J., Cooper, L., Kun, J., Evans, T., Gangadharan, U., Greenfield, A. and Koopman, P. (1995). The Sry-related gene Sox9 is expressed during chondrogenesis in mouse embryos. Nat. Genet. 9, 15-20.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  46. ↵
    Yamaguchi, T. P., Bradley, A., McMahon, A. P. and Jones, S. (1999). A Wnt5a pathway underlies outgrowth of multiple structures in the vertebrate embryo. Development 126,1211 -1223.
    OpenUrlAbstract
  47. ↵
    Yu, K., Xu, J., Liu, Z., Sosic, D., Shao, J., Olson, E. N., Towler, D. A. and Ornitz, D. M. (2003). Conditional inactivation of FGF receptor 2 reveals an essential role for FGF signaling in the regulation of osteoblast function and bone growth. Development 130,3063 -3074.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  48. ↵
    Zhang, X., Ibrahimi, O. A., Olsen, S. K., Umemori, H., Mohammadi, M. and Ornitz, D. M. (2006). Receptor specificity of the fibroblast growth factor family. The complete mammalian FGF family. J. Biol. Chem. 281,15694 -15700.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
View Abstract
Previous ArticleNext Article
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

This Issue

 Download PDF

Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Development.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
FGF signaling regulates mesenchymal differentiation and skeletal patterning along the limb bud proximodistal axis
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Development
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Development web site.
Share
Research Article
FGF signaling regulates mesenchymal differentiation and skeletal patterning along the limb bud proximodistal axis
Kai Yu, David M. Ornitz
Development 2008 135: 483-491; doi: 10.1242/dev.013268
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Research Article
FGF signaling regulates mesenchymal differentiation and skeletal patterning along the limb bud proximodistal axis
Kai Yu, David M. Ornitz
Development 2008 135: 483-491; doi: 10.1242/dev.013268

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Alerts

Please log in to add an alert for this article.

Sign in to email alerts with your email address

Article navigation

  • Top
  • Article
    • Summary
    • INTRODUCTION
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & tables
  • Supp info
  • Info & metrics
  • PDF + SI
  • PDF

Related articles

Cited by...

More in this TOC section

  • The HMG box transcription factors Sox1a and Sox1b specify a new class of glycinergic interneuron in the spinal cord of zebrafish embryos
  • Gene-environment interaction impacts on heart development and embryo survival
  • Morphogenesis of neurons and glia within an epithelium
Show more RESEARCH ARTICLES

Similar articles

Other journals from The Company of Biologists

Journal of Cell Science

Journal of Experimental Biology

Disease Models & Mechanisms

Biology Open

Advertisement

The people behind the papers – Elena Popa and Abigail Tucker

Elena Popa and Abigail Tucker

“After what felt like hundreds of failed attempts, finally being able to see Sox2 staining under the microscope felt like a huge relief!”

First author Elena Popa and Abigail Tucker, Professor of Development and Evolution at King's College London, talk about their research into tooth development in the mouse and other organisms.


Spotlight - CRISPR babies: a view from the centre of the storm

Matt Porteus (right) and Robin Lovell-Badge (left) clarify some statements made by He Jiankui. Courtesy of Vivian Tam (School of Biomedical Sciences, University of Hong Kong)

Matt Porteus (right) and Robin Lovell-Badge (left) clarify some statements made by He Jiankui. Courtesy of Vivian Tam (School of Biomedical Sciences, University of Hong Kong)

Robin Lovell-Badge gives his perspective on the recent report from Jiankui He of the world's first genome edited babies and discusses if and how clinical applications of germline genome editing in humans may be justifiable.


Developmental biology for agriculture

Example crop plants

In the latest Spotlight for our Advocacy series, Scott Boden and Lars Østergaard argue that technological advances in sequencing, genome editing and advanced data processing should allow developmental biologists to improve crop performance as crop yields come under pressure to meet the growing human population's needs.

Demonstrating some of these principles in a new Research Article, Laura Dixon and team analyse the flowering and growth responses of a range of wheat cultivars to warmer growth temperatures.


A new Instagram account for Development 

Our Instagram cover image, Nematostella

Our new Instagram account promotes the beauty of developmental biology through the work of our authors. Do join us there!


Workshop - New frontiers in the brain: unexpected roles of the choroid plexus-cerebrospinal fluid system in health and disease

Wiston House, where the workshop will take place

We are pleased to announce a Company of Biologist's Workshop, organised by Fiona Doetsch and Maria Lehtinen, bringing together scientists working on all aspects of choroid plexus and cerebrospinal fluid biology. The Workshop will be held in July 2019 at Wiston House, UK. Ten funded early-career places are available – apply here before 31 March 2019.

Call for papers: Chromatin and Epigenetics

Call for papers: Chromatin and Epigenetics

Development is pleased to welcome submissions for an upcoming Special Issue on ‘Chromatin and Epigenetics’, edited by Benoit Bruneau, Haruhiko Koseki, Susan Strome and Maria-Elena Torres-Padilla. This special issue aims to showcase the best research covering the chromatin-based and epigenetic mechanisms which regulate development across the plant and animal kingdoms. Submission deadline: 31 March 2019. 


PreLights – A direct and widespread role for the nuclear receptor EcR in mediating the response to ecdysone in Drosophila

PreLighter Natalie Dye

Extensive and dynamic genome binding by a steroid hormone receptor highlights the interconnection between systemic and local cues for organ development, shows a preprint written by Christopher Uyehara and Daniel McKay and highlighted by Natalie Dye.

Catch up with other recent preLights selected for the developmental biology community.


Articles of interest in our sister journals

Wnt signaling in orofacial clefts: crosstalk, pathogenesis and models
Kurt Reynolds, Priyanka Kumari, Lessly Sepulveda Rincon, Ran Gu, Yu Ji, Santosh Kumar, Chengji J. Zhou
Disease Models & Mechanisms 2019 12: dmm037051 

Loss of the deglutamylase CCP5 perturbs multiple steps of spermatogenesis and leads to male infertility
Tiziana Giordano, Sudarshan Gadadhar, Satish Bodakuntla, et al.
J Cell Sci 2019 132: jcs226951

Articles

  • Accepted manuscripts
  • Issue in progress
  • Latest complete issue
  • Issue archive
  • Archive by article type
  • Special issues
  • Subject collections
  • Sign up for alerts

About us

  • About Development
  • About the Node
  • Editors and board
  • Editor biographies
  • Travelling Fellowships
  • Grants and funding
  • Workshops and Meetings
  • The Company of Biologists

For authors

  • Submit a manuscript
  • Aims and scope
  • Presubmission enquiries
  • Article types
  • Manuscript preparation
  • Cover suggestions
  • Editorial process
  • Promoting your paper
  • Open Access
  • Biology Open transfer

Journal info

  • Journal policies
  • Rights and permissions
  • Media policies
  • Reviewer guide
  • Sign up for alerts

Contact

  • Contact Development
  • Subscriptions
  • Advertising
  • Feedback

 Twitter   YouTube   LinkedIn

© 2019   The Company of Biologists Ltd   Registered Charity 277992