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
    • 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
    • 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
    • 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
    • Alerts
  • Contacts
    • Contacts
    • Subscriptions
    • Feedback
CORRESPONDENCE
An apparent lack of effect of satellite cell depletion on hypertrophy could be due to methodological limitations. Response to ‘Methodological issues limit interpretation of negative effects of satellite cell depletion on adult muscle hypertrophy’
Ingrid M. Egner, Jo C. Bruusgaard, Kristian Gundersen
Development 2017 144: 1365-1367; doi: 10.1242/dev.148163
Ingrid M. Egner
Department of Biosciences, University of Oslo, Blindern, Oslo N-0316, Norway
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jo C. Bruusgaard
Department of Biosciences, University of Oslo, Blindern, Oslo N-0316, NorwayDepartment of Health Sciences, Kristiania University College, P.O. Box 1190, Sentrum, Oslo N-0107, Norway.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kristian Gundersen
Department of Biosciences, University of Oslo, Blindern, Oslo N-0316, Norway
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Kristian Gundersen
  • For correspondence: kgunder@ibv.uio.no
  • Article
  • Info & metrics
  • PDF
Loading

In their Correspondence, Charlotte Peterson's group suggests that methodological weaknesses of our paper (Egner et al., 2016) preclude the interpretation that satellite cells (SCs) are obligatory for hypertrophy after mechanical overload (OL), a finding conflicting with their own study concluding that SC depletion does not affect overload hypertrophy (McCarthy et al., 2011).

Most papers are subject to methodological strengths and weaknesses. In our paper (Egner et al., 2016), we highlight some limitations of the McCarthy study (McCarthy et al., 2011), specifically: their reliance on muscle weights as a proxy for fiber hypertrophy rather than using direct cell size measurements; the inclusion in their histological analysis of a high number of fibers with central nuclei or embryonic myosin (eMyHC); and the fact that their paper is based on an unusually small increase in fiber size (≈10%) compared with the 25-60% increase in the existing literature on the 2-week plantaris synergist ablation model (Dearth et al., 2013; Egner et al., 2016; Huey et al., 2016; Perez-Schindler et al., 2013; Zempo et al., 2016). It is this ≈10% hypertrophy in control muscles that they subsequently fail to blunt by SC depletion.

These limitations of the McCarthy paper (McCarthy et al., 2011) can, in our opinion, explain the discrepancies between the two papers. As we understand it, these limitations are uncontested in their Correspondence.

Another important difference between our work and that of McCarthy et al. is that we studied both the plantaris and the extensor digitorum longus (EDL) muscles. We regret that the Peterson group does not regard the EDL as a relevant overload model for hypertrophy, particularly since it has frequently been used as such for at least 40 years by various laboratories (Deveci and Egginton, 2002; Dick and Vrbová, 1993; Egginton et al., 1998; Fortes et al., 2015; Freeman and Luff, 1982; Frischknecht and Vrbová, 1991; Goldspink, 1981; Hamilton et al., 2010; Johnson and Klueber, 1991; Rosenblatt and Parry, 1993; Schiaffino et al., 1972; Young et al., 1992). It seems implausible that the load on the EDL should not be increased by ablating its synergist; the question is how much. We do not think that the electromyography data from stereotype walking experiments in cats cited by the Peterson group (Carlson-Kuhta et al., 1998) provides full justice to the varied movement patterns of free mice in cages (climbing, standing, jumping, etc.), and regardless of this, the EDL clearly undergoes hypertrophy after overload and therefore offers an independent muscle in which to evaluate the necessity of satellite cells.

It is interesting that the Peterson group now suggests that the low degree of hypertrophy in their overloaded plantaris could be due to fiber splitting. A very small increase or even reduction in cross-sectional area (CSA) accompanied by an increase in the number of fibers has previously been reported in a few studies (Ferry et al., 2014; Joanne et al., 2012; Parsons et al., 2004), but to our knowledge not for observation periods as short as 2 weeks, and even most long-term studies report a robust hypertrophy (Ballak et al., 2016, 2015; Dunn et al., 1999, 2000; Guerci et al., 2012; Ito et al., 2013; Johnson and Klueber, 1991; White et al., 2009). Although fiber splitting was not studied in either of the two papers, and is not a well-understood phenomenon, we agree that it is a reasonable speculation about the causes of the poor hypertrophy observed in the SC+OL+ muscles by McCarthy et al. (2011) (since we observed more robust hypertrophy, we think it less likely to be a significant issue in our own work). Although it is possible that an initial hypertrophy was masked by subsequent fiber splitting, we would argue that this makes the material poorly suited to unravel the importance of SCs for hypertrophy defined as a size increase of pre-existing cells.

We are pleased that the Peterson group agrees that both papers demonstrate that the SC depletion was sufficient to abolish myonuclear accretion. The number of myonuclei is the crucial parameter because it is the myonuclei and not the SCs that are involved in the protein synthesis during hypertrophy. We therefore do not understand why a discussion about possible moderate differences in the degree of SC depletion is relevant. It also seems illogical to us that an alleged higher residual SC population in our study should lead to less hypertrophy.

We also disagree that McCarthy has demonstrated a more efficient SC ablation, and are unable to follow the authors when they state in the Correspondence that ‘We do not include tamoxifen-treated mice that are less than 90% depleted in our analyses’ as in their paper they report a range of 84 to 98% (fig. 1B legend in McCarthy et al., 2011). Moreover, whereas we report data from the plantaris, where the degree of depletion ranged from 66 to 84%, they reported data from the gastrocnemius. This is unfortunate as observations from the gastrocnemius are not directly relevant for studies on the plantaris. The numbers are not comparable because both the absolute number of SCs and their ability to proliferate varies between muscles (Gibson and Schultz, 1983; Lagord et al., 1998; Ono et al., 2010).

The Peterson group moves on to state ‘That SCs are not effectively depleted is most clearly demonstrated by the observation that markers of muscle regeneration [embryonic myosin heavy chain (eMyHC)-positive and centrally nucleated fibers] are significantly higher in SC− compared with SC+ plantaris with overload (figure 2B-D in Egner et al., 2016)’. This description of the data is formally correct, but highly misleading. Thus, the difference between the two papers is that McCarthy et al. reported a >15× higher frequency of fibers with such markers in their OL+SC+ group compared with our data (comparing figure 3C,D in McCarthy et al., 2011 and figure 2B,C in Egner et al., 2016). We attribute this to more overload- or surgery-induced damage observed in their muscles. Both groups reported, however, the same frequency of fibers with such markers in the OL+SC− muscles. If the frequency of fibers with central nuclei or eMyHC is related to the number of SCs, this would indicate that the number of residual SCs is similar in the two studies.

In any case, the reduction in a prominent damage and repair process by SC depletion reported in the McCarthy paper has little bearing on our paper as, contrary to what is argued in the Correspondence, we observed much less damage. Thus, in the material analyzed in McCarthy et al., they reported that 30% of the fibers in the OL+SC+ population displayed central nuclei/eMyHC, whereas we report 4% and none of our experimental groups was above 13%. We also would point out that whereas McCarthy included their significant population of fibers with such markers, we excluded the relatively few we had from further analysis. Our reasoning was that hypertrophy is defined as a size increase in pre-existing cells, and that damage or repair are confounding factors in the study of this phenomenon. Although it seems likely that such markers are related to damage and repair, at this stage we do not know if they appear in pre-existing fibers, regenerating fibers, new fibers or split fibers. In any case, a high incidence of fibers with such markers is a confounding factor.

Importantly, the appearance of central nuclei/eMyHC is less of a problem in the EDL. The fraction of fibers with such markers was 1.3% or lower in all the experimental groups. The EDL model has the advantage that the overload is probably gentler than for the plantaris because the size ratio between the ablated and remaining synergist is smaller, and perhaps because the muscles on the ventral side are less loadbearing, as discussed by the Peterson group. Thus, the EDL model might be less supraphysiological than the plantaris model.

Regarding the age difference in mice used between the two studies (McCarthy et al. report using 4 month-old and we 3-4 month-old mice), although we cannot exclude that there is a critical period for SC dependence between 3 and 4 months, we are not aware of any evidence for such a notion. C57BL/6J mice are considered mature adults when they are 3-6 months old (Flurkey et al., 2007), and we do not understand why referring to rapid bone growth of mice age <3 months (Ferguson et al., 2003) is relevant to our study.

The Peterson group raises valid concerns about the effect of tamoxifen on body weight. Both groups, however, used the same dosage and our animals appeared healthy. As far as we can tell, neither the McCarthy paper (McCarthy et al., 2011), nor the other papers from the Peterson group quoted in this context in their Correspondence (Fry et al., 2014, 2015; Jackson et al., 2015, 2012), reported numbers for body weights, but by comparing muscle weights corrected and non-corrected for body weight we calculate a difference of 9% for the non-running group in Jackson et al. (2015) compared with our 13%. In their Correspondence, the Peterson group also provides hereto unpublished data on body weight for the McCarthy material, and report that the tamoxifen effect was smaller (4%).

Lower body weights are commonly observed in animals given the estrogen antagonist tamoxifen compared with controls. This seems to be due to reduced accumulation of body fat (Lampert et al., 2013; Liu et al., 2015), whereas protein is not significantly affected (Wade and Heller, 1993). We agree that controls with tamoxifen treatment of the parental Pax7-CreER strain would have been desirable, but these were not used in either of the two studies (Egner et al., 2016; McCarthy et al., 2011). Although we cannot exclude the possibility that the lower weights might have had some influence on the hypertrophic response in our case, we observed no atrophy in OL− muscles that were given tamoxifen; the fibers were similarly large with and without tamoxifen. Moreover, tamoxifen did not blunt hypertrophy after 8 weeks synergist ablation in the parental Pax7-CreER mouse strain (Fry et al., 2014).

Although randomized sampling of fibers on sections is a common method in the literature and provides good estimates of the average values for the whole population, we agree with the Peterson group that measuring all relevant fibers (but we suggest excluding damaged/regenerating fibers) rather than a randomized sample would have been an optimal strategy. It is correct that using standard grid sampling, as we did, would tend to oversample large fibers, but automatic CSA measurements (as used by McCarthy et al.) might also introduce systematic differences. Although such factors might influence absolute values, there would be a similar bias for controls and experimental groups, so we do not think these methodological differences could explain the completely different outcomes of the two studies.

We are more inclined to attribute the different outcome to the appearance and inclusion of a significant population of damaged fibers by McCarthy et al. Their cell size analysis might also be statistically underpowered because there was such a low degree of hypertrophy in the control muscles with intact SCs (Fig. S2E). A potential blunting of a ≈10% hypertrophy by SC depletion might be hard to detect. The re-analysis published in their Correspondence seems to have increased the variance, further aggravating this problem.

Thus, based on our interpretation of the current literature, including the two papers debated here (Egner et al., 2016; McCarthy et al., 2011), we maintain our conclusion that satellite cells seems to be obligatory for a robust de novo hypertrophy.

While we were finalizing this Correspondence Response, this conclusion was supported by new data from a completely different genetic model, but subjected to the same overload experiment. In this study, when satellite cells were prevented from fusing to muscle fibers during overload, hypertrophy was prevented (Goh and Millay, 2017).

  • © 2017. Published by The Company of Biologists Ltd

References

  1. ↵
    1. Ballak, S. B.,
    2. Jaspers, R. T.,
    3. Deldicque, L.,
    4. Chalil, S.,
    5. Peters, E. L.,
    6. de Haan, A. and
    7. Degens, H.
    (2015). Blunted hypertrophic response in old mouse muscle is associated with a lower satellite cell density and is not alleviated by resveratrol. Exp. Gerontol. 62, 23-31. doi:10.1016/j.exger.2014.12.020
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Ballak, S. B.,
    2. Busé-Pot, T.,
    3. Harding, P. J.,
    4. Yap, M. H.,
    5. Deldicque, L.,
    6. de Haan, A.,
    7. Jaspers, R. T. and
    8. Degens, H.
    (2016). Blunted angiogenesis and hypertrophy are associated with increased fatigue resistance and unchanged aerobic capacity in old overloaded mouse muscle. Age (Dordr) 38, 39. doi:10.1007/s11357-016-9894-1
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  3. ↵
    1. Carlson-Kuhta, P.,
    2. Trank, T. V. and
    3. Smith, J. L.
    (1998). Forms of forward quadrupedal locomotion. II. A comparison of posture, hindlimb kinematics, and motor patterns for upslope and level walking. J. Neurophysiol. 79, 1687-1701.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. ↵
    1. Dearth, C. L.,
    2. Goh, Q.,
    3. Marino, J. S.,
    4. Cicinelli, P. A.,
    5. Torres-Palsa, M. J.,
    6. Pierre, P.,
    7. Worth, R. G. and
    8. Pizza, F. X.
    (2013). Skeletal muscle cells express ICAM-1 after muscle overload and ICAM-1 contributes to the ensuing hypertrophic response. PLoS ONE 8, e58486. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0058486
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  5. ↵
    1. Deveci, D. and
    2. Egginton, S.
    (2002). Muscle ischaemia in rats may be relieved by overload-induced angiogenesis. Exp. Physiol. 87, 479-488. doi:10.1111/j.1469-445X.2002.tb00061.x
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Dick, J. and
    2. Vrbová, G.
    (1993). Progressive deterioration of muscles in mdx mice induced by overload. Clin. Sci. (Lond.) 84, 145-150. doi:10.1042/cs0840145
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. ↵
    1. Dunn, S. E.,
    2. Burns, J. L. and
    3. Michel, R. N.
    (1999). Calcineurin is required for skeletal muscle hypertrophy. J. Biol. Chem. 274, 21908-21912. doi:10.1074/jbc.274.31.21908
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. ↵
    1. Dunn, S. E.,
    2. Chin, E. R. and
    3. Michel, R. N.
    (2000). Matching of calcineurin activity to upstream effectors is critical for skeletal muscle fiber growth. J. Cell Biol. 151, 663-672. doi:10.1083/jcb.151.3.663
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. ↵
    1. Egginton, S.,
    2. Hudlicka, O.,
    3. Brown, M. D.,
    4. Walter, H.,
    5. Weiss, J. B. and
    6. Bate, A.
    (1998). Capillary growth in relation to blood flow and performance in overloaded rat skeletal muscle. J. Appl. Physiol. 85, 2025-2032.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    1. Egner, I. M.,
    2. Bruusgaard, J. C. and
    3. Gundersen, K.
    (2016). Satellite cell depletion prevents fiber hypertrophy in skeletal muscle. Development 143, 2898-2906. doi:10.1242/dev.134411
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. ↵
    1. Ferguson, V. L.,
    2. Ayers, R. A.,
    3. Bateman, T. A. and
    4. Simske, S. J.
    (2003). Bone development and age-related bone loss in male C57BL/6J mice. Bone 33, 387-398. doi:10.1016/S8756-3282(03)00199-6
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  12. ↵
    1. Ferry, A.,
    2. Schuh, M.,
    3. Parlakian, A.,
    4. Mgrditchian, T.,
    5. Valnaud, N.,
    6. Joanne, P.,
    7. Butler-Browne, G.,
    8. Agbulut, O. and
    9. Metzger, D.
    (2014). Myofiber androgen receptor promotes maximal mechanical overload-induced muscle hypertrophy and fiber type transition in male mice. Endocrinology 155, 4739-4748. doi:10.1210/en.2014-1195
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. Flurkey, K.,
    2. Currer, J. M. and
    3. Harrison, D. E.
    (2007). The mouse in ageing research. In The Mouse in Biomedical Research (ed. J. G. Fox), pp. 637-672. Burlington: Elsvier.
  14. ↵
    1. Fortes, M. A.,
    2. Pinheiro, C. H.,
    3. Guimaraes-Ferreira, L.,
    4. Vitzel, K. F.,
    5. Vasconcelos, D. A. and
    6. Curi, R.
    (2015). Overload-induced skeletal muscle hypertrophy is not impaired in STZ-diabetic rats. Physiol. Rep. 3, e12457. doi:10.14814/phy2.12457
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. ↵
    1. Freeman, P. L. and
    2. Luff, A. R.
    (1982). Contractile properties of hindlimb muscles in rat during surgical overload. Am. J. Physiol. 242, C259-C264.
    OpenUrl
  16. ↵
    1. Frischknecht, R. and
    2. Vrbová, G.
    (1991). Adaptation of rat extensor digitorum longus to overload and increased activity. Pflugers Arch. 419, 319-326. doi:10.1007/BF00371113
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  17. ↵
    1. Fry, C. S.,
    2. Lee, J. D.,
    3. Jackson, J. R.,
    4. Kirby, T. J.,
    5. Stasko, S. A.,
    6. Liu, H.,
    7. Dupont-Versteegden, E. E.,
    8. McCarthy, J. J. and
    9. Peterson, C. A.
    (2014). Regulation of the muscle fiber microenvironment by activated satellite cells during hypertrophy. FASEB J. 28, 1654-1665. doi:10.1096/fj.13-239426
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. ↵
    1. Fry, C. S.,
    2. Lee, J. D.,
    3. Mula, J.,
    4. Kirby, T. J.,
    5. Jackson, J. R.,
    6. Liu, F.,
    7. Yang, L.,
    8. Mendias, C. L.,
    9. Dupont-Versteegden, E. E.,
    10. McCarthy, J. J. et al.
    (2015). Inducible depletion of satellite cells in adult, sedentary mice impairs muscle regenerative capacity without affecting sarcopenia. Nat. Med. 21, 76-80. doi:10.1038/nm.3710
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    1. Gibson, M. C. and
    2. Schultz, E.
    (1983). Age-related differences in absolute numbers of skeletal muscle satellite cells. Muscle Nerve 6, 574-580. doi:10.1002/mus.880060807
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  20. ↵
    1. Goh, Q. and
    2. Millay, D. P.
    (2017). Requirement of myomaker-mediated stem cell fusion for skeletal muscle hypertrophy. Elife 6, e20007. doi:10.7554/elife.20007
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  21. ↵
    1. Goldspink, D. F.
    (1981). The Development and Specialisation of Skeletal Muscle. Cambridge: Cambride University Press.
  22. ↵
    1. Guerci, A.,
    2. Lahoute, C.,
    3. Hébrard, S.,
    4. Collard, L.,
    5. Graindorge, D.,
    6. Favier, M.,
    7. Cagnard, N.,
    8. Batonnet-Pichon, S.,
    9. Précigout, G.,
    10. Garcia, L. et al.
    (2012). Srf-dependent paracrine signals produced by myofibers control satellite cell-mediated skeletal muscle hypertrophy. Cell Metab. 15, 25-37. doi:10.1016/j.cmet.2011.12.001
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  23. ↵
    1. Hamilton, D. L.,
    2. Philp, A.,
    3. MacKenzie, M. G. and
    4. Baar, K.
    (2010). A limited role for PI(3,4,5)P3 regulation in controlling skeletal muscle mass in response to resistance exercise. PLoS ONE 5, e11624. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0011624
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. ↵
    1. Huey, K. A.,
    2. Smith, S. A.,
    3. Sulaeman, A. and
    4. Breen, E. C.
    (2016). Skeletal myofiber VEGF is necessary for myogenic and contractile adaptations to functional overload of the plantaris in adult mice. J. Appl. Physiol. 120, 188-195. doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.00638.2015
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  25. ↵
    1. Ito, N.,
    2. Ruegg, U. T.,
    3. Kudo, A.,
    4. Miyagoe-Suzuki, Y. and
    5. Takeda, S.
    (2013). Activation of calcium signaling through Trpv1 by nNOS and peroxynitrite as a key trigger of skeletal muscle hypertrophy. Nat. Med. 19, 101-106. doi:10.1038/nm.3019
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. ↵
    1. Jackson, J. R.,
    2. Mula, J.,
    3. Kirby, T. J.,
    4. Fry, C. S.,
    5. Lee, J. D.,
    6. Ubele, M. F.,
    7. Campbell, K. S.,
    8. McCarthy, J. J.,
    9. Peterson, C. A. and
    10. Dupont-Versteegden, E. E.
    (2012). Satellite cell depletion does not inhibit adult skeletal muscle regrowth following unloading-induced atrophy. Am. J. Physiol. Cell Physiol. 303, C854-C861. doi:10.1152/ajpcell.00207.2012
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  27. ↵
    1. Jackson, J. R.,
    2. Kirby, T. J.,
    3. Fry, C. S.,
    4. Cooper, R. L.,
    5. McCarthy, J. J.,
    6. Peterson, C. A. and
    7. Dupont-Versteegden, E. E.
    (2015). Reduced voluntary running performance is associated with impaired coordination as a result of muscle satellite cell depletion in adult mice. Skelet. Muscle 5, 41. doi:10.1186/s13395-015-0065-3
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  28. ↵
    1. Joanne, P.,
    2. Hourdé, C.,
    3. Ochala, J.,
    4. Caudéran, Y.,
    5. Medja, F.,
    6. Vignaud, A.,
    7. Mouisel, E.,
    8. Hadj-Said, W.,
    9. Arandel, L.,
    10. Garcia, L. et al.
    (2012). Impaired adaptive response to mechanical overloading in dystrophic skeletal muscle. PLoS ONE 7, e35346. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0035346
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. ↵
    1. Johnson, T. L. and
    2. Klueber, K. M.
    (1991). Skeletal muscle following tonic overload: functional and structural analysis. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 23, 49-55. doi:10.1249/00005768-199101000-00009
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  30. ↵
    1. Lagord, C.,
    2. Soulet, L.,
    3. Bonavaud, S.,
    4. Bassaglia, Y.,
    5. Rey, C.,
    6. Barlovatz-Meimon, G.,
    7. Gautron, J. and
    8. Martelly, I.
    (1998). Differential myogenicity of satellite cells isolated from extensor digitorum longus (EDL) and soleus rat muscles revealed in vitro. Cell Tissue Res. 291, 455-468. doi:10.1007/s004410051015
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  31. ↵
    1. Lampert, C.,
    2. Arcego, D. M.,
    3. Laureano, D. P.,
    4. Diehl, L. A.,
    5. da Costa Lima, I. F.,
    6. Krolow, R.,
    7. Pettenuzzo, L. F.,
    8. Dalmaz, C. and
    9. Vendite, D.
    (2013). Effect of chronic administration of tamoxifen and/or estradiol on feeding behavior, palatable food and metabolic parameters in ovariectomized rats. Physiol. Behav. 119, 17-24. doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2013.05.026
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  32. ↵
    1. Liu, L.,
    2. Zou, P.,
    3. Zheng, L.,
    4. Linarelli, L. E.,
    5. Amarell, S.,
    6. Passaro, A.,
    7. Liu, D. and
    8. Cheng, Z.
    (2015). Tamoxifen reduces fat mass by boosting reactive oxygen species. Cell Death Dis. 6, e1586. doi:10.1038/cddis.2014.553
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  33. ↵
    1. McCarthy, J. J.,
    2. Mula, J.,
    3. Miyazaki, M.,
    4. Erfani, R.,
    5. Garrison, K.,
    6. Farooqui, A. B.,
    7. Srikuea, R.,
    8. Lawson, B. A.,
    9. Grimes, B.,
    10. Keller, C. et al.
    (2011). Effective fiber hypertrophy in satellite cell-depleted skeletal muscle. Development 138, 3657-3666. doi:10.1242/dev.068858
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  34. ↵
    1. Ono, Y.,
    2. Boldrin, L.,
    3. Knopp, P.,
    4. Morgan, J. E. and
    5. Zammit, P. S.
    (2010). Muscle satellite cells are a functionally heterogeneous population in both somite-derived and branchiomeric muscles. Dev. Biol. 337, 29-41. doi:10.1016/j.ydbio.2009.10.005
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  35. ↵
    1. Parsons, S. A.,
    2. Millay, D. P.,
    3. Wilkins, B. J.,
    4. Bueno, O. F.,
    5. Tsika, G. L.,
    6. Neilson, J. R.,
    7. Liberatore, C. M.,
    8. Yutzey, K. E.,
    9. Crabtree, G. R.,
    10. Tsika, R. W. et al.
    (2004). Genetic loss of calcineurin blocks mechanical overload-induced skeletal muscle fiber type switching but not hypertrophy. J. Biol. Chem. 279, 26192-26200. doi:10.1074/jbc.M313800200
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  36. ↵
    1. Perez-Schindler, J.,
    2. Summermatter, S.,
    3. Santos, G.,
    4. Zorzato, F. and
    5. Handschin, C.
    (2013). The transcriptional coactivator PGC-1alpha is dispensable for chronic overload-induced skeletal muscle hypertrophy and metabolic remodeling. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 110, 20314-20319. doi:10.1073/pnas.1312039110
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  37. ↵
    1. Rosenblatt, J. D. and
    2. Parry, D. J.
    (1993). Adaptation of rat extensor digitorum longus muscle to gamma irradiation and overload. Pflugers Arch. 423, 255-264. doi:10.1007/BF00374404
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  38. ↵
    1. Schiaffino, S.,
    2. Bormioli, S. P. and
    3. Aloisi, M.
    (1972). Cell proliferation in rat skeletal muscle during early stages of compensatory hypertrophy. Virchows Arch. B Cell Pathol. 11, 268-273.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  39. ↵
    1. Wade, G. N. and
    2. Heller, H. W.
    (1993). Tamoxifen mimics the effects of estradiol on food intake, body weight, and body composition in rats. Am. J. Physiol. 264, R1219-R1223.
    OpenUrl
  40. ↵
    1. White, J. P.,
    2. Reecy, J. M.,
    3. Washington, T. A.,
    4. Sato, S.,
    5. Le, M. E.,
    6. Davis, J. M.,
    7. Wilson, L. B. and
    8. Carson, J. A.
    (2009). Overload-induced skeletal muscle extracellular matrix remodelling and myofibre growth in mice lacking IL-6. Acta Physiol. (Oxf.) 197, 321-332. doi:10.1111/j.1748-1716.2009.02029.x
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  41. ↵
    1. Young, J. C.,
    2. Kandarian, S. C. and
    3. Kurowski, T. G.
    (1992). Skeletal muscle glucose uptake following overload-induced hypertrophy. Life Sci. 50, 1319-1325. doi:10.1016/0024-3205(92)90282-T
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  42. ↵
    1. Zempo, H.,
    2. Suzuki, J.,
    3. Ogawa, M.,
    4. Watanabe, R. and
    5. Isobe, M.
    (2016). A different role of angiotensin II type 1a receptor in the development and hypertrophy of plantaris muscle in mice. J. Appl. Genet. 57, 91-97. doi:10.1007/s13353-015-0291-8
    OpenUrlCrossRef
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.
An apparent lack of effect of satellite cell depletion on hypertrophy could be due to methodological limitations. Response to ‘Methodological issues limit interpretation of negative effects of satellite cell depletion on adult muscle hypertrophy’
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Development
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Development web site.
Share
An apparent lack of effect of satellite cell depletion on hypertrophy could be due to methodological limitations. Response to ‘Methodological issues limit interpretation of negative effects of satellite cell depletion on adult muscle hypertrophy’
Ingrid M. Egner, Jo C. Bruusgaard, Kristian Gundersen
Development 2017 144: 1365-1367; doi: 10.1242/dev.148163
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
An apparent lack of effect of satellite cell depletion on hypertrophy could be due to methodological limitations. Response to ‘Methodological issues limit interpretation of negative effects of satellite cell depletion on adult muscle hypertrophy’
Ingrid M. Egner, Jo C. Bruusgaard, Kristian Gundersen
Development 2017 144: 1365-1367; doi: 10.1242/dev.148163

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
    • References
  • Info & metrics
  • PDF

Related articles

Cited by...

More in this TOC section

  • Methodological issues limit interpretation of negative effects of satellite cell depletion on adult muscle hypertrophy
  • Defective adgra2 (gpr124) splicing and function in zebrafish ouchless mutants
Show more CORRESPONDENCE

Similar articles

Other journals from The Company of Biologists

Journal of Cell Science

Journal of Experimental Biology

Disease Models & Mechanisms

Biology Open

Advertisement

A new Editor-in-Chief for Development

http://dev.biologists.org/sites/default/files/Snippet/0318_News.jpg

“I'm very keen that Development continues to innovate and support our community.”

We're delighted to announce the appointment of James Briscoe, Group Leader at The Francis Crick Institute, London, as our new Editor-in-Chief. Read our interview with James to find out his career and research interests, the importance of interdisciplinary thinking in developmental biology, and his views on the current state and future opportunities in scientific publishing. Also, check out the Editorial from Sarah Bray, Kate Storey and Katherine Brown to learn more about the announcement, and about our recent community consultation.


Review – Developing in 3D: the role of CTCF in cell differentiation

In this Review, Rodrigo G. Arzate-Mejía, Félix Recillas-Targa and Victor G. Corces discuss evidence linking CTCF to the control of developmental processes in various cell and tissue types through 3D organization of the genome.


From stem cells to human development ­– meeting reporter competition

In September, Development is hosting our next meeting focusing on human developmental biology. We are excited to announce a competition for a reporter to cover the meeting for the Node. The winner will get free registration to the meeting, and it’s a fantastic opportunity to practice your science communication skills - find out more here.


Spotlight ­– Susan Strome

“I realised that I could think it through on my own – I didn't require that my advisor tell me what to do or how to do it”

Recently appointed an editor at Development, we caught up with Susan to discuss her early career switch from prokaryotes to worms, her experiences of small and big science, and why teaching is so important to her.


On the Node – The people behind the papers

Development and homeostasis depend crucially on the maintenance of cell identity, and in gamete-producing tissues the somatic/germline distinction is paramount. A recent paper in Development explores how cell identity is secured in the Drosophila ovary by studying the function of the conserved tumour suppressor L(3)mbt. To find out more about the story, the Node caught up with first author Rémi-Xavier Coux and his supervisor Ruth Lehmann of the Skirball Institute at New York University School of Medicine.  


Santa Cruz Developmental Biology Meeting

Development is a proud sponsor of the upcoming Santa Cruz Developmental Biology Meeting, which takes place 11-15 August 2018 at the University of California, Santa Cruz . Registration for this meeting is now open!


Articles of interest in our sister journals

Rap1, Canoe and Mbt cooperate with Bazooka to promote zonula adherens assembly in the fly photoreceptor
Rhian F. Walther, Mubarik Burki, Noelia Pinal, Clare Rogerson, Franck Pichaud. J Cell Sci 2018 131: jcs207779.

H2AFX and MDC1 promote maintenance of genomic integrity in male germ cells
Erika Testa, Daniela Nardozi, Cristina Antinozzi, Monica Faieta, Stefano Di Cecca, Cinzia Caggiano, Tomoyuki Fukuda, Elena Bonanno, Lou Zhenkun, Andros Maldonado, Ignasi Roig, Monica Di Giacomo, Marco Barchi. J Cell Sci 2018 131: jcs214411.

Articles

  • Accepted manuscripts
  • Issue in progress
  • Latest complete issue
  • Issue archive
  • Archive by article type
  • Special issues
  • Subject collections
  • 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
  • Figure preparation
  • Cover suggestions
  • Editorial process
  • Promoting your paper
  • Open Access
  • Biology Open transfer

Journal info

  • Journal policies
  • Rights and permissions
  • Media policies
  • Reviewer guide
  • Alerts

Contact

  • Contact Development
  • Subscriptions
  • Advertising
  • Feedback

 Twitter   YouTube   LinkedIn

© 2018   The Company of Biologists Ltd   Registered Charity 277992