Department of Molecular Neurobiology, Institute of Development, Aging
& Cancer, and Graduate School of Life Sciences, Tohoku University,
Seiryo-machi 4-1, Aoba-ku, Sendai 980-8575, Japan
* Present address: INSERM U106, Bâtiment de Pédiatrie,
Hôpital de la Salpêtrière, 47 Boulevard de l'Hôpital,
75013 Paris, France
Author for correspondence (e-mail:
nakamura{at}idac.tohoku.ac.jp)
Accepted 12 August 2002
![]() |
SUMMARY |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Key words: Lmx1b, Wnt1, Fgf8, Isthmus, Chick
![]() |
INTRODUCTION |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
It was shown that Otx2 and Gbx2 repress each other's
expression to make mes-metencephalic boundary
(Broccoli et al., 1999;
Millet et al., 1999
;
Katahira et al., 2000
). At the
Otx2 and Gbx2 expression boundary, Fgf8 is induced
overlapping with Gbx2 expression domain, which was shown in
transplantation or misexpression experiments
(Hidalgo-Sanchez et al., 1999
;
Katahira et al., 2000
). In
combination culture of mesencephalic and metencephalic tissue, Fgf8
expression was induced at the boundary
(Irving and Mason, 1999
). As
Otx2 and Gbx2 are transcription factors, involvement of secreted factor(s) or
cell surface molecule(s) in Fgf8 induction is assumed.
Wnt1 is a secreted molecule and is expressed in the isthmus.
Wnt1 mutant mice show deletion in the mesencephalon and the
metencephalon (McMahon et al.,
1992). Lmx1b is one of LIM homeodomain proteins and is
expressed in connection with Wnt1. Misexpression by the retrovirus
vector showed that Lmx1b could induce Wnt1 expression
(Adams et al., 2000
).
Expression patterns of Lmx1b and Wnt1 are well correlated
with Fgf8 expression in the isthmus region. In normal development,
expression domain of Lmx1b and Wnt1 and that of
Fgf8 overlaps broadly around the isthmic region in the early stage,
while their expression domains become segregated and located side by side by
E2.5. Therefore, we hypothesized that both Lmx1b and Wnt1 were involved in the
formation and maintenance of the isthmus organizer. To explore the function of
Lmx1b and Wnt1 in the isthmus organizer, we carried out
misexpression of Lmx1b and Wnt1 by in ovo electroporation.
Lmx1b misexpression induced Wnt1, Otx2 and Grg4,
but repressed Fgf8 cell-autonomously. On the one hand, Wnt1
misexpression induced Fgf8 expression non cell-autonomously. Hence,
Lmx1b represses Fgf8 expression cell-autonomously provably via Grg4
and induced non cell-autonomously via Wnt1. On the other hand, Fgf8
misimpression induced Lmx1b expression non cell-autonomously. Otx2
induced Lmx1b expression, while Gbx2 represses Lmx1b
expression. Thus, cell-autonomous and non cell-autonomous regulation among
Otx2, Gbx2, Fgf8, Lmx1b and Wnt1 are deeply involved in formation and
maintenance of the isthmus organizer activity.
![]() |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
In ovo electroporation
Fertilized chicken eggs from a local farm were incubated at 38°C. For
transfection, in ovo electroporation on stage 10 chick embryos
(Hamburger and Hamilton, 1951)
was adopted as previously described
(Funahashi et al., 1999
).
Green fluorescence protein (GFP) expression vector (pEGFP-N1,
Clontech) was co-electroporated to check the efficiency.
In situ hybridization
In situ hybridization for whole mount and for sections was performed as
described (Bally-Cuif et al.,
1995; Ishii et al., 1999). Probes for Fgf8, Otx2, Gbx2, Wnt1,
Pax2, Grg4 and Cash1 have been described previously
(Jasoni et al., 1994
;
Araki and Nakamura, 1999
;
Okafuji et al., 1999
;
Funahashi et al., 1999
;
Katahira et al., 2000
;
Sugiyama et al., 2000
). For
Lmx1b probe, the full length of Lmx1b was used. Digoxigenin
(DIG)- or fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC)-labeled antisense RNA was
generated by T3 or T7 RNA polymerase
(Funahashi et al., 1999
).
Alkaline phosphatase (ALP)-conjugated anti-DIG or anti-FITC sheep-polyclonal
antibody (Roche Molecular Biochemicals) was used for detection. For double in
situ hybridization, Fast Red TR/Naphthol AS/MX (Sigma FASTTM; Sigma) was
used for detection of the first signal, and 4-nitroblue tetrazolium chloride
(NBT) and 5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indolyl-phosphate (BCIP) were used for detection
of the second signal. ALP for the first detection was inactivated by
incubating with 100 mM glycine-HCl (pH 2.2) for about 15 minutes at room
temperature. In some cases, Fast Red staining was washed out in ethanol, and
NBT staining was washed out by incubating in dimethylformamide (DMF) at
55°C.
BrdU incorporation
BrdU (Bromodeoxyuridine) solution (10 mM, Sigma) was injected into the yolk
vein 48 and 72 hours after electroporation. Thirty minutes after BrdU
injection, the embryos were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde in PBS. Incorporated
BrdU was detected by the addition of monoclonal anti-BrdU antibody (Roche),
followed by incubation with Alexa 594-conjugated anti-mouse secondary antibody
(Molecular Probes). For the quantitative analysis, BrdU-positive area was
measured by Aqua Cosmos image analyzer (Hamamatsu Photonics), and
corresponding area of the experimental and control side on the same section
was compared.
Immunohistochemistry
Rat monoclonal anti-HA antibody (Roche Molecular Biochemicals) was used as
a primary antibody. Horseradish peroxidase (HRP)-conjugated anti-rat IgG
antibody (Iwaikougaku-yakuhin) was used as the second antibody.
Histology
Embryos embedded in Technovite 7100 (Kulter) were serially sectioned at 5
µm, and stained with Hematoxylin-Eosin, as previously described
(Matsunaga et al., 2001).
![]() |
RESULTS |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
|
Morphology after Lmx1b or Wnt1 misexpression
From the spatial and temporal expression pattern of Lmx1b, Wnt1
and Fgf8, we suspected that they may regulate each other's expression
in the isthmic region and may play a role in organizing activity. It has
already been reported that Lmx1b and Wnt1 play important
roles in maintenance of the isthmic organizing activity by misexpression with
retrovirus vectors (Adams et al.,
2000). We adopted in ovo electroporation for misexpression,
because in ovo electroporation assures more rapid and stronger
misexpression.
First, we carried out Lmx1b misexpression experiment. By E7.5 (6 days after electroporation of pMiw-Lmx1b), the size of the tectum was expanded (n=8/8) (Fig. 2A-C). Torus semicircularis was also expanded (n=2/2) (Fig. 2C). The rhombic lip, which is a primordium of the cerebellum, expanded to the posterior (Fig. 2B,C). These results indicate that both mesencephalon and metencephalon are enlarged by Lmx1b misexpression.
|
It has been reported that Wnt1 misexpression with retrovirus
vectors had not affected tectum development
(Adams et al., 2000). As
transfection by electroporation exerts more drastic effects than retrovirus
system (Nakamura and Funahashi,
2001
), we carried out electroporation with pMiw-Wnt1.
Wnt1 misexpression resulted in expansion of the mesencephalon by 48
hours after electroporation (Fig.
2D,E). At E14.5 (13 days after electroporation), the
telencephalon, the tectum and the cerebellum were all enlarged. In the
cerebellum some extra folia were formed (n=3/5)
(Fig. 2F-H).
We wondered whether expansion of the mesencephalon was caused by an increase of cell proliferation, and examined BrdU incorporation after 48 and 72 hours of electroporation of pMiw-Wnt1. Anti-BrdU staining revealed that BrdU incorporation was actually increased at the experimental side compared with the control at 48 hours after electroporation (Fig. 3). For the quantitative analysis, the BrdU-positive area between the corresponding site of the experimental and control side on the same section was compared as a pair. Six pairs from two embryos of 48 hours after electroporation showed that BrdU incorporation was significantly greater at the experimental side than at the control side (Table 1, P<0.05, Student's t-test). Difference in BrdU incorporation between the experimental and control side was not recognized 72 hours after electroporation (data not shown).
|
|
As Wnt1 enhanced cell proliferation, it is of great interest if
Wnt1 represses neuronal differentiation. So, we looked at effects on a
neurogenesis marker, Cash1. Cash1 forces cells to get into
differentiation phase from proliferation phase
(Jasoni et al., 1994).
Wnt1 misexpression repressed Cash1 expression
(n=3/4) (see Fig. 6A)
in the dorsal mesencephalon. Limx1b also exerted similar effects
(n=3/3) (Fig. 4B).
|
|
Regulation of Fgf8 by Lmx1b
As Lmx1b or Wnt1 misexpression affected development of
the mesencephalon and metencephalon, we looked at effects on isthmus-related
genes.
Effects of Lmx1b on Fgf8 expression are not simple. Fgf8 expression was repressed in Lmx1b-expressing cells (Fig. 5C). Repression of Fgf8 by Lmx1b was already detectable at 12 hours after electroporation (n=4/4) (Fig. 5A-C). At 24 hours after electroporation, Fgf8 was still repressed in the Lmx1b-expressing cells, but around them Fgf8 expression was induced (n=3/7) (Fig. 5D-F). The results suggest that Lmx1b repressed Fgf8 expression in a cell-autonomous manner, but induced Fgf8 expression in non cell-autonomous manner.
|
It has been reported that Fgf8 is induced at the border of
Otx2 and Gbx2 expression domain, overlapping with Gbx2
expression (Broccoli et al.,
1999; Millet et al.,
1999
; Katahira et al.,
2000
; Li and Joyner,
2001
; Ye et al.,
2001
). It has also been reported that Otx2 and Fgf8 repress each
other's expression. Thus, a possibility remains that Otx2 is involved in
cell-autonomous repression of Fgf8 by Lmx1b, that is, Lmx1b at first
induces Otx2 expression then Otx2 represses Fgf8 in turn. To
check this possibility, we looked at effects of Lmx1b on Otx2
expression. We then carried out Otx2 misexpression, and looked at the
time course of Fgf8 repression by Otx2.
At 12 hours after Lmx1b misexpression, Otx2 expression was induced ectopically in the metencephalon (n=3/3) (Fig. 6A-C'). Otx2 was induced in the Lmx1b-expressing cells, suggesting that induction is cell-autonomous (Fig. 6B',C'). At 24 hours after electroporation, ectopic Otx2 expression became weak in the isthmic region, but strong in the caudal metencephalon (n=3/4) (Fig. 6D-F).
At 12 hours after electroporation of pMiw-Otx2, Fgf8 expression was not affected (n=8/8) (Fig. 6G-I), which contrasts the result that repression of Fgf8 expression by Lmx1b was detected by 12 hours after electroporation (Fig. 5C). These results indicate that Otx2 is not involved in cell-autonomous repression of Fgf8 by Lmx1b.
Dominant-negative Lmx1b induced ectopic Fgf8 expression in
the mesencephalon
Lmx1b is a LIM-homeodomain protein, and is composed of two LIM domains, a
homeodomain and a C-terminal transcription activation domain
(Johnson et al., 1997). It has
been suggested that LIM domain could work as dominant negative, and that
deletion of LIM domain could work as constitutional activation of the target
gene (Curtiss and Heiling, 1998). In case of Lmx1b, it was shown that deletion
of LIM domain resulted in increase of transcription activity in insulin
enhancer in vitro (German and Wang,
1994
; Johnson et al.,
1997
).
As Lmx1b repressed Fgf8 expression in cell-autonomous manner, we wondered if Lmx1b functions as transcriptional repressor or activator. To answer this question, we misexpressed N-terminal deletion construct of Lmx1b (Lmx1b-C), in which LIM domain is not contained. Lmx1b-C misexpression exerted weak but similar effects as Lmx1b misexpression. In the metencephalon, Lmx1b-C induced Fgf8 expression around the cells where Lmx1b-C was misexpressed at 24 hours after electroporation (n=8/13).
We tried misexpression of LIM domain in order to repress Lmx1b function, but it did not work. So, we constructed an expression vector that encodes the fusion protein of Lmx1b and En2 repressor domain. Lmx1b-EnR misexpression induced ectopic expression of Fgf8 in the caudal mesencephalon in a cell-autonomous manner (n=7/7) (Fig. 6J-M). Co-transfection of wild type Lmx1b and Lmx1b-EnR canceled the effect of Lmx1b-EnR (n=8/8) (Fig. 6N-P), which indicates that Lmx1b-EnR specifically repressed function of Lmx1b. The results suggest that Lmx1b acts as a transcriptional activator in the mes-metencephalic region.
Candidate repressor of Fgf8
As Lmx1b acted as a transcriptional activator, some repressor(s) should
intervene in repression of Fgf8 by Lmx1b. It was indicated that Grg4
interacts with the octapeptide domain of Pax2/5 (Eberhand et al., 2000) to
convert it to transcriptional repressor. Grg4 is expressed in the
mesencephalon but not in the isthmus in normal development,
(Fig. 6Q)
(Koop et al., 1996;
Sugiyama et al., 2000
;
Ye et al., 2001
), and
Grg4 misexpression resulted in repression of Fgf8 expression
in the isthmus (Sugiyama et al.,
2000
). Therefore, we examined the effects of Lmx1b on
Grg4 expression. At 6 hours after electroporation of pMiw-Lmx1b,
Grg4 expression was induced in the metencephalon, (n=5/7)
(Fig. 6R,S). As repression of
Fgf8 by Lmx1b was not observed before 6 hours after electroporation
(n=4/4) and induction of Grg4 occurred before Fgf8
repression, it is plausible that Lmx1b first induced Grg4 and then
Grg4 repressed Fgf8.
Wnt1 misexpression affects Fgf8 expression
As Lmx1b induced Fgf8 non cell-autonomously, secreted
molecules may be involved in this process. Wnt1 is a secreted molecule
expressed in an overlapping manner with Lmx1b. So, we suspected that
Lmx1b induced Fgf8 via Wnt1 induction. By 9 hours after
electroporation of Lmx1b, Wnt1 was induced in cell-autonomous manner
(n=1/3). By 24 hours after electroporation, Wnt1 was induced
broadly (n=6/6) (Fig.
7A-E). Then, we examined if Fgf8 could be induced by Wnt1
to assess our idea. As expected, Fgf8 was induced by Wnt1 in the
metencephalic region by 12 hours after electroporation (n=2/4). At 24
hours after electroporation of pMiw-Wnt1, Fgf8 expression was
expanded in the metencephalic region (n=6/6)
(Fig. 7G). But Fgf8
was not induced in the mesencephalon and in the caudal metencephalon, though
misexpression was seen from the mesencephalon to the metencephalon
(Fig. 7G,H).
|
Next, we checked effects of Wnt1 on Lmx1b expression. Lmx1b expression was not affected by 24 hours after pMiw-Wnt1 electroporation. (n=6/6) (Fig. 7I-K). Wnt1 did not affect Otx2 (n=7/7) or Gbx2 (n=7/7) expression at 24 hours after electroporation (Fig. 7L-Q). As Wnt1 was induced by Lmx1b, Lmx1b may occupy higher hierarchical position in gene expression cascade in the isthmic region.
Further analysis in gene expression cascade among Lmx1b, Otx2,
Gbx2 and Fgf8
We have shown that Lmx1b may be put at the higher hierarchical
position in gene expression cascade in the isthmus and may play important
roles in mes/mesencephalic development, so we further analyzed their
relationship. We have already shown that Lmx1b could induce Otx2.
Then we examined if Otx2 could induce Lmx1b. At 24 hours after
electroporation of pMiw-Otx2, Lmx1b expression was induced in the
mesencephalon and the metencephalon (n=4/6)
(Fig. 8A-C). The result
indicates that Otx2 and Lmx1b could induce each other's expression.
|
Next, we looked at the effects of Fgf8 on Lmx1b expression. Lmx1b was broadly induced in the diencephalon and mesencephalon by Fgf8b misexpression at 24 hours after electroporation (n=4/4) (Fig. 8D-F). However, by 36 hours after electroporation, Lmx1b expression disappeared from most part of the mesencephalon and ring-like expression in the diencephalon remained, although misexpression was seen broadly when checked by GFP, (n=4/4) (Fig. 8G,H). Moreover, endogenous Lmx1b expression in the isthmus was lost (Fig. 8H).
Fgf8b misexpression induced Gbx2 and Irx2
expression widely in the mesencephalon [see
figure 7D,E by Sato et al.
(Sato et al., 2001)], and
changed the fate of the mesencephalic alar plate to differentiate into the
cerebellum (Sato et al.,
2001
). As Fgf8 induces Gbx2 expression, we wondered if
Lmx1b was repressed by Gbx2. To examine this possibility, we
misexpressed Gbx2 and looked at Lmx1b expression.
Gbx2 repressed Lmx1b expression at 24 hours after
electroporation (n=4/4) (Fig.
8I-K).
![]() |
DISCUSSION |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Role of Lmx1b and Wnt1 in the isthmus organizer formation
Transplantation experiments showed that isthmic region has the organizing
activity for the tectum and cerebellum. As Fgf8 beads mimic the isthmus
organizing activity, and misexpression of Fgf8b changed the fate of the
mesencephalic alar plate to differentiate into the cerebellum, it has been
accepted that Fgf8 is the most important organizing molecule
(Crossley et al., 1996;
Liu et al., 1999
;
Martinez et al., 1999
;
Shamim et al., 1999
;
Sato et al., 2001
). En1/2,
Pax2/5 and Fgf8 could induce each other's expression, and this positive
feedback loop of En1/2, Pax2/5 and Fgf8 may play an important role for the
maintenance of the organizing activity. If one of these molecules is
misexpressed in the diencephalon, this feedback loop is turned on, and the
ectopic tectum is induced in the diencephalon.
Lmx1b and Wnt1 are expressed in the whole mesencephalon
at first, and localized to the isthmus. As Wnt1 knock-out mice show
deletion in the midbrain and hindbrain, it was suggested that Wnt1 is
necessary for mid-hindbrain development
(McMahon and Bradley, 1990;
Thomas and Capecchi, 1991; McMahon et al.,
1992
). But misexpression of Wnt1 by retrovirus vector or
by transplanting the Wnt1-producing cells did not exert significant effects on
mid-hindbrain development (Sugiyama et
al., 1998
; Adams et al.,
2000
), so its role in this system is still obscure. Recently,
Lmx1b was misexpressed by retrovirus vector, and it was suggested
that Lmx1b should be given higher hierarchical position than
Wnt1 in the gene expression cascade in the isthmus
(Adams et al., 2000
). In the
present study, we have shown by misexpression by in ovo electroporation that
Fgf8 expression was repressed in Lmx1b misexpressing cells,
but Fgf8 expression was induced around Lmx1b misexpressing
cells. This complicated phenomenon may be explained as follows. First,
Wnt1 may be induced by Lmx1b in cell-autonomous manner, then Wnt1 may
induce Fgf8 expression in turn. As Wnt1 is a secreted molecule, Wnt1
may be involved in non cell-autonomous induction of Fgf8 by
Lmx1b.
Several molecules are abutting at the mid-hindbrain boundary
(Fig. 9). At the midbrain side,
Otx2, Lmx1b and Wnt1 are expressed, and Gbx2, Fgf8
and Irx2 are expressed at the hindbrain side. Otx2 and Gbx2, Fgf8 and
Otx2, and Lmx1b and Gbx2, repress each other's expression. However, Lmx1b
cell-autonomously represses Fgf8, but induces Fgf8 in the
neighboring cells. Otx2 could not induce Fgf8 expression. By these
complicated gene regulation mechanisms gene expression pattern in the isthmic
region may be set, in a sense automatically, once initial switch of some of
them is turned on. Fgf8b misexpression may be one of such cases of
autoregulation. After Fgf8b misexpression, Lmx1b was induced widely
in the mesencephalon at first, but later Lmx1b expression was
restricted in the diencephalic region just as ring, which reminds us of ring
like expression in the isthmus in normal embryos. This self regulation may be
explained if we consider that Gbx2 is also induced by Fgf8b
(Sato et al., 2001). As Gbx2
represses Lmx1b expression (see
Fig. 7I-K), Lmx1b
expression, which was induced broadly in the mesencephalon at first, may be
repressed by Gbx2. Lmx1b expression may remain just outside of the
Gbx2 area to result in ring-like expression in the diencephalic region.
Another example is that Fgf8 was induced when R1 and midbrain was juxtaposed
(Hidalgo-Sanchez et al.,
1999
). This phenomenon may be explained by that Otx2 and
Lmx1b are expressed in the mesencephalic region, and that
Wnt1 may be induced by Lmx1b. As Wnt1 is a secreted molecule, it may
induce Fgf8 expression in non cell-autonomous manner, that is, in the
R1 region. The intimate relationship of these molecules may participate in
setting the site of organizer, and mid-hindbrain boundary.
|
In the isthmic region many molecules are expressed, and they are in the
complicated network of regulation. Fgf8, Pax2/5 and En1 are in the positive
feedback loop for their expression. Pax2 expression covers whole the
mesencephalon and comes to be localized in the isthmic region
(Okafuji et al., 1999). As it
could induce Fgf8 in the diencephalon, Pax2 has also been suggested
to be involved in Fgf8 induction
(Okafuji et al., 1999
;
Ye et al., 2001
). It was
further shown that in Pax2-/- mice Fgf8
expression in the isthmus was abolished though its expression in the cardiac
mesoderm was not affected (Ye et al.,
2001
).
In normal development, Otx2 and Gbx2 are expressed from
very early stage of development. At first their expression domains are
overlapping, but are completely segregated around stage 10 in chick embryos.
It was shown that Otx2 and Gbx2 repress each other's expression so that their
expression domains become segregated. By the repressive interaction between
Otx2 and Gbx2, mid-hindbrain boundary may be set. Independently, Pax2
expression may be induced by the vertical signal, and Fgf8 may be
induced in the isthmic region. Considering appearance of Lmx1b
expression and its induction by Otx2, Lmx1b may be induced by Otx2 in
the midbrain region, though there is a possibility that vertical signal
contribute to induction of Lmx1b. Wnt1 may be induced in turn.
However, Fgf8 expression was not affected at first in
Wnt1-/- mice, but was later disrupted
(Lee et al., 1997). This
result together with the misexpression experiments including the present study
that Lmx1b or Wnt1 did not exert severe morphological effects, indicates that
Lmx1-Wnt1 system may work to maintain Fgf8 expression rather than
initiation of its expression. Fgf8 expression may be kept just caudal
to the Wnt1 and Lmx1b expression ring
(Fig. 9).
Growth accelerating activity of Wnt1
Both Lmx1b and Wnt1 misexpression caused enlargement of
cerebellum or rhombic lip and the tectum. Extra folia were developed in the
cerebellum. As Lmx1b induces Wnt1 expression, both Lmx1 and Wnt1 may
have exerted similar effect. It has been reported that Wnt1
transgenic mice show overgrowth of neural tube
(Dickinson et al., 1994).
Wnt1 was misexpressed under the control of Hoxb4 enhancer,
which resulted in dramatic increase in the number of mitosis in the
ventricular layer and expansion of it. Very recently, Megason and McMahon
(Megason and McMahon, 2002
)
reported in a very sophisticated manner that Wnt protein is distributed in a
dorsal to ventral gradient in the spinal cord. They suggested that
Wnt-ß-catenin/TCF signaling pathway positively regulates cell cycle
progression and negatively regulates cell cycle exit in the spinal cord
through transcriptional regulation of cyclin D1 and cyclin D2. In the present
study, Cash1 was repressed by both Lmx1b and Wnt1, which may
indicates that ventricular cells in the tectum are also prevented from getting
into differentiation phase. In the tectum anlagen, more cells incorporated
BrdU at the Wnt1-transfection site than at the control side at 48
hours after electroporation (see Fig.
3). Difference in BrdU incorporation was not discerned at 72 hours
after electroporation. The results indicate that Wnt1 actually
enhanced cell proliferation, but the effect on BrdU incorporation was
transient so that the size difference between the Wnt1-transfected and the
control tecta may have been subtle.
![]() |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
---|
![]() |
REFERENCES |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Adams, K. A., Maida, J. M., Golden, J. A. and Riddle, R. D.
(2000). The transcription factor Lmx1b maintains Wnt1 expression
within the isthmic organizer. Development
127,1857
-1867.
Alvarado-Mallart, R.-M. (1993). Fate and potentialities of the avian mesencephalic/metencephalic neuroepithelium. J. Neurobiol. 24,1341 -1355.[Medline]
Araki, I. and Nakamura, H. (1999).
Engrailed defines the position of dorsal di-mesencephalic boundary by
repressing diencephalic fate. Development
126,5127
-5135.
Bally-Cuif, L., Cholley, B. and Wassef, M. (1995). Involvement of Wnt-1 in the formation of the mes/metencephalic boundary. Mech. Dev. 53, 23-34.[CrossRef][Medline]
Broccoli, V., Boncinelli, E. and Wurst, W. (1999). The caudal limit of Otx2 expression positions the isthmic organizer. Nature 401,164 -168.[CrossRef][Medline]
Crossley, P. H., Martinez, S. and Martin, G. R. (1996). Midbrain development induced by FGF8 in the chick embryo. Nature 380,66 -68.[CrossRef][Medline]
Curtiss, J. and Heilig, J. S. (1998). DeLIMiting development. BioEssays 20, 58-69.[CrossRef][Medline]
Dickinson, M. E., Krumlauf, R. and McMahon, A. P.
(1994). Evidence for a mitogenic effect of Wnt-1 in the
developing mammalian central nervous system.
Development 120,1453
-1471.
Eberhard, D., Jimenez, G., Heavey, B. and Busslinger, M.
(2000). Transcriptional repressor by Pax5 (BSAP) through
interaction with corepressor of the Groucho family. EMBO
J. 19,2292
-2303.
Funahashi, J.-i., Okafuji, T., Ohuchi, H., Noji, S., Tanaka, H. and Nakamura, H. (1999). Role of Pax-5 in the regulation of a mid-hindbrain organizer's activity. Dev. Growth. Differ. 41,59 -72.[CrossRef][Medline]
German, M. S. and Wang, J. (1994). The insulin gene contains multiple transcriptional elements that respond to glucose. Mol. Cell. Biol. 14,4067 -4075.[Abstract]
Hamburger, V. and Hamilton, H. L. (1951). A series of normal stages in the development of the chick embryo. J. Morphol. 88,49 -92.
Hidalgo-Sanchez, M., Simeone, A. and Alvarado-Mallart, R.-M.
(1999). Fgf8 and Gbx2 induction concomitant
with Otx2 repression is correlated with midbrain-hindbrain fate of
caudal prosencephalon. Development
126,3191
-3203.
Irving, C. and Mason, I. (1999). Regeneration
of isthmic tissue is the result of a specific and direct interaction between
rhombomere 1 and midbrain. Development,
126,3981
-3989.
Ishii, Y., Fukuda, K., Saiga, H., Matsushita, S. and Yasugi, S. (1997). Early specification of intestinal epithelium in the chicken embryo: a study on the localization and regulation of CdxA expression. Dev. Growth. Differ. 39,643 -653.[Medline]
Jasoni, C. L., Walker, M. B., Morris, M. D. and Reh, T. A.
(1994). A chicken achaete-scute homolog (CASH-1) is expressed in
a temporally and spatially discrete manner in the developing nervous system.
Development 120,769
-783.
Johnson, J. D., Zhang, W., Rudnick, A., Rutter, W. and German, M. (1997). Transcriptional synergy between LIM-homeodomain proteins and basic helix-loop-helix proteins: the LIM2 domain determines specificity. Mol. Cell. Biol. 17,3488 -3496.[Abstract]
Katahira, T., Sato, T., Sugiyama, S., Okafuji, T., Araki, I., Funahashi, J.-I. and Nakamura, H. (2000). Interaction between Otx2 and Gbx2 defines the organizing center for the optic tectum. Mech. Dev. 91,43 -52.[CrossRef][Medline]
Koop, K. E., MacDonald, L. M. and Lobe, C. G. (1996). Transcripts of Grg4, a murine groucho-related gene, are detected in adjacent tissues to other murine neurogenic gene homologues during embryonic development. Mech. Dev. 59, 73-87.[CrossRef][Medline]
Lee, S. M., Danielian, P. S., Fritzsch, B. and McMahon, A.
P. (1997). Evidence that FGF8 signalling from the
midbrain-hindbrain junction regulates growth and polarity in the developing
midbrain. Development
124,959
-969.
Li, J. Y. and Joyner, A. L. (2001). Otx2 and
Gbx2 are required for refinement and not induction of mid-hindbrain gene
expression. Development
128,4979
-4991.
Liu, A., Losos, K. and Joyner, A. L. (1999).
FGF8 can activate Gbx2 and transform regions of the rostral mouse brain into a
hindbrain fate. Development
126,4827
-4838.
Marin, F. and Puelles, L. (1994). Patterning of the embryonic avian midbrain after experimental inversions: a polarizing activity from the isthmus. Dev. Biol. 163, 19-37.[CrossRef][Medline]
Martinez, S., Wassef, M. and Alvarado-Mallart, R. M. (1991). Induction of a mesencephalic phenotype in the 2-day-old chick prosencephalon is preceded by the early expression of the homeobox gene en. Neuron 6,971 -981.[Medline]
Martinez, S., Marin, F., Nieto, M. A. and Puelles, L. (1995). Induction of ectopic engrailed expression and fate change in avian rhombomeres: intersegmental boundaries as barriers. Mech. Dev. 51,289 -303.[CrossRef][Medline]
Martinez, S., Crossley, P. H., Cobos, I., Rubenstein, J. L. R.
and Martin, G. R. (1999). FGF8 induces formation of an
ectopic isthmic organizer and isthmocerebellar development via a repressive
effect on Otx2 expression. Development
126,1189
-1200.
Matsunaga, E., Araki, I. and Nakamura, H.
(2000). Pax6 defines the dimesencephalic boundary by
repressing En1 and Pax2. Development
127,2357
-2365.
Matsunaga, E., Araki, I. and Nakamura, H.
(2001). Role of Pax3/7 in the tectum regionalizartion.
Development 128,4069
-4077.
McMahon, A. P. and Bradley, A. (1990). The Wnt-1 (int-1) proto-oncogene is required for development of a large region of the mouse brain. Cell 62,1073 -1085.[Medline]
McMahon, A. P., Joyer, A., Bradley, A. and McMahon, J. A. (1992). The midbrain-hindbrain phenotype of Wnt1-/Wnt1- mice results from stepwise deletion of engrailed-expressing cells by 9.5 days postcoitum. Cell 69,581 -595.[Medline]
Megason, S. G. and McMahon, A. P. (2002). A
mitogen gradient of dorsal midline Wnts organize growth in the CNS.
Development 129,2087
-2098.
Millet, S., Campbell, K., Epstein, D. J., Losos, K., Harris, E. and Joyner, A. L. (1999). A role for Gbx2 in repression of Otx2 and positioning the mid/hindbrain organizer. Nature 401,161 -164.[CrossRef][Medline]
Nakamura, H. and Funahashi, J.-i. (2001). Introduction of DNA into chick embryos by in ovo electroporation. Methods 24,43 -48.[CrossRef][Medline]
Okafuji, T., Funahashi, J. and Nakamura, H. (1999). Roles of Pax-2 in initiation of the chick tectal development. Dev. Brain Res. 116, 41-49.[Medline]
Sato, T., Araki, I. and Nakamura, H. (2001).
Inductive signal and tissue responsiveness to define the tectum and the
cerebellum, Development
128,2461
-2469.
Shamim, H., Mahmood, R., Logan, C., Doherty, P., Lumsden, A. and
Mason, I. (1999). Sequential roles for Fgf4, En1 and Fgf8 in
specification and regionalisation of the midbrain.
Development 126,945
-959.
Suemori, H., Kadokawa, Y., Goto, K., Araki, I., Kondoh, H. and Nakatsuji, N. (1990). A mouse embryonic stem cell line showing pluripotency of differentiation in early embryos and ubiquitous betagalactosidase expression. Cell. Differ. Dev. 29,181 -186.[CrossRef][Medline]
Sugiyama, S., Funahashi, J., Kitajewski, J. and Nakamura, H. (1998). Crossregulation between En-2 and Wnt-1 in chick tectal development. Dev. Growth. Differ. 40,157 -166.[Medline]
Sugiyama, S., Funahashi, J.-i. and Nakamura, H. (2000). Antagonizing activity of chick Grg4 against tectum-organizing activity. Dev. Biol. 221,168 -180.[CrossRef][Medline]
Thomas, K. R. and Capecchi, M. R. (1990). Targeted disruption of the murine int-1 proto-oncogene resulting in severe abnormalities in midbrain and cerebellar development. Nature 346,847 -850.[CrossRef][Medline]
Wakamatsu, Y., Watanabe, Y., Nakamura, H. and Kondoh, H.
(1997). Regulation of the neural crest cell fate by N-myc:
promotion of ventral migration and neuronal differentiation.
Development 124,1953
-1962.
Ye, W., Bouchard, M., Stone, D., Liu, A., Vella, F., Lee, J., Nakamura, H., Ang, S.-L., Busslinger, M. and Rosenthal, A. (2001). Distinct regulators control the expression of the mid-hindbrain organizer signal FGF8. Nat. Neurosci. 4,1175 -1181.[CrossRef][Medline]
Yuan, S. and Schoenwolf, G. C. (1999). The spatial and temporal pattern of C-Lmx1 expression in the neuroectoderm during chick neurulation. Mech. Dev. 88,243 -247.[CrossRef][Medline]