![[Feedback]](/icons/banner/feedbackACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[For Subscribers]](/icons/banner/subscriberACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[Archive]](/icons/banner/archiveACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[Search]](/icons/banner/searchACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[Contents]](/icons/banner/tocACT.gif){kind=icon}
|
|
|
|
|
||
Vol. 17, Issue 7, 3075-3084, July 2006
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
*Key Laboratory of Stem Cell Biology and Laboratory of Molecular Cell Biology, Institute of Biochemistry and Cell Biology, Shanghai Institutes for Biological Sciences and Graduate School of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai 200031, China; Division of Developmental Neurobiology, National Institute for Medical Research, The Ridgeway, Mill Hill, London NW7 1AA, United Kingdom; and Department of Biological Sciences and Biotechnology, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
Submitted November 30, 2005;
Revised March 30, 2006;
Accepted April 14, 2006
Monitoring Editor: Marianne Bronner-Fraser
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
 TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
). For the mechanism of neural induction, Spemann and Mangold (1924) proposed that the organizer, the dorsal lip of blastopore, instructs neighboring nascent embryonic ectoderm cells to adopt neural fates. Since the last decade, the default model proposes that ectodermal cells acquire their neural identity autonomously in the absence of inhibitory bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) signals. The organizer secretes BMP antagonists to block BMP signaling, which allows the ectoderm to differentiate into neural tissue in a default way (Hemmati-Brivanlou and Melton, 1997a, 1997b). Recently, however, studies in chicks show that fibroblast growth factor (FGF) signaling is essential for neural induction by repressing BMP mRNA expression and also by a BMP repression independent pathway with an unknown mechanism. Wnt signaling is also involved in this process, suggesting a more complicated mechanism (Wilson et al., 2000, 2001; Wilson and Edlund, 2001). In Xenopus, FGF and an insulin-like growth factor (IGF) play positive roles in neural induction through receptor tyrosine kinases, and FGF promotes neural induction through phosphorylating the linker region of Smad1 to inhibit BMP signaling (Streit et al., 2000; Pera et al., 2003; Delaune et al., 2005; Kuroda et al., 2005). However, several questions, like whether BMP inhibition is really sufficient to specify neural fate and whether FGF signaling plays any direct and BMP independent role(s) in neural induction, remain obscure (Stern, 2005).
Mouse embryonic carcinoma (EC) P19 cells can be induced to differentiate into neurons and glial cells when aggregated in the presence of retinoic acid (RA; Jones-Villeneuve et al., 1982, 1983; Mcburney et al., 1982). Exposure of monolayer cultured P19 cells to RA leads to formation of endoderm- and mesoderm-like cells (Jones-Villeneuve et al., 1982, 1983; den Hertog et al., 1993), whereas aggregation of P19 cells without chemical inducers results in the differentiation of the extraembryonic endoderm (Smith et al., 1987; Mummery et al., 1991), implying that both RA (diffusible signals) and cell aggregation (cell–cell contact) are essential for P19 cell neural differentiation. Moreover, overexpression of RA induced genes could trigger P19 cell neural differentiation without RA treatment, but the cell aggregation is still needed (Gao et al., 2001; Tang et al., 2002). These observations suggest that cell aggregation might mediate an independent pathway, which is parallel to RA signaling during P19 cell neural differentiation. To identify the molecule(s) involved in P19 cell aggregation and to uncover its relationship with neural fate determination would be interesting.
FGF8, a member of the FGF family, has been shown to be essential for multiple developmental processes. It is expressed in several regions of mouse embryo: i.e., the epiblast, primitive streak, surface ectoderm of branchial arches, apical ectodermal ridge of the limb bud, isthmus of midbrain-hindbrain junction, and forebrain (Crossley and Martin, 1995). Consistent with its expression pattern, FGF8 is important for induction and patterning of the embryo during gastrulation, limb development, and midbrain-hindbrain formation. FGF8 knockout mice could not survive beyond embryonic day 9.5 (E9.5), because of defects in epithelial-mesenchymal transition (Sun et al., 1999). FGF8 also induces, initiates, and sustains the formation of limb buds by promoting sonic hedgehog expression (Crossley et al., 1996a). Implantation of FGF8 beads into the caudal diencephalons could mimic the isthmic organizer to induce a supernumerary midbrain and isthmic tissue (Crossley et al., 1996b). However, little is known if FGF8 plays any role in the neural induction of early mouse embryos. In this study, we identified FGF8 as an early responsive molecule to the aggregation of P19 cells, and showed that FGF signaling is essential for P19 cell neural differentiation.
|
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
). Sequence corresponding to FGF8 mRNA 733–751 base pairs was chosen as the RNA interference (RNAi) target and inserted into the BglII/HindIII sites of PPE, a modification of pSuper (Zhang et al., 2004), to generate the FGF8 RNAi expression vector.
P19 Cell Neural Differentiation
P19C6, a subclone of the mouse embryonic carcinoma P19 cell line, was used in this study, and the RA-induced P19 cell neural differentiation was performed as previously described (Gao et al., 2001; Tang et al., 2002).
The monolayer P19 cells (30–40% confluent) were transiently transfected with Myc-FGF8-pcDNA3 with calcium phosphate (Sambrook and Russell, 2001) and were cultured in 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS)/DMEM/F12 in the presence of 10–6 M RA for 2 d, and then the medium was changed to N2 medium for 5 d before immunostaining analysis. For neural induction with growth factors, the monolayer P19 cells were seeded at a density of 1 x 105 cells/well in six-well plates containing 10% FBS/DMEM/F12. The next day, the medium was changed to 10% FBS/DMEM/F12 supplemented with growth factors (10 ng/ml, PeproTech, London, United Kingdom), RA (10–6 M), and heparin (2 µg/ml). The cells were cultured for 2 d and then trypsinized and fixed for immunostaining analysis.
The P19 cell lines stably transfected with Myc-FGF8-pcDNA3 expression vector (FGF8/P19) were established as previously described (Gao et al., 2001; Tang et al., 2002). Monolayer FGF8/P19 cells (60–70% confluent) were cultured in 10% FBS/DMEM/F12 with 10–6 M RA for 2 d, and medium was changed into N2 medium for up to 2 wk. Every other day, cells were trypsinized and fixed for immunostaining analysis.
The P19 cell lines stably transfected with Flag-Smad6 expression vector (Smad6/P19) were established as above. Smad6/P19 cells were maintained in 10% FBS/DMEM/F12. For neural differentiation, cells were switched into serum-free DMEM/F12 medium and cultured for 3 d with the medium changed daily. BMP2 (10 ng/ml, PeproTech), SU5402 (5 µM, Calbiochem, La Jolla, CA; Mueller et al., 2002; Gunhaga et al., 2003) or U0126 (5 µM, Calbiochem; Kretzschmar et al., 1997) were added at the beginning of serum starvation and maintained for the first 2 d.
RT-PCR
Total RNAs were extracted from cells using Trizol reagent (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA). Reverse transcription was performed with 5 µg of total RNA using SuperScript II reverse transcriptase (Invitrogen). The PCR reaction consisted of denaturation at 94°C for 45 s, annealing for 45 s, and extension at 72°C for 45 s. PCR primers and reaction parameters for each gene are shown in Table 1.
|
).
Immunostaining
Immunocytochemistry was performed as described (Gao et al., 2001). The following antibodies were used: monoclonal: FGF8 (R&D Systems, Minneapolis, MN), Smad1 (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Santa Cruz, CA), MAP2 (Sigma, St. Louis, MO), TuJ1 (Sigma), GFAP (Sigma), Oct4 (Santa Cruz); and polyclonal: c-terminal phosphorylated Smad1 (Cell Signaling Technology, Beverly, MA), group B1 Sox proteins (Sox1/(2)/3; Okada et al., 2004; Tanaka et al., 2004). Sox1/(2)/3 antibody has a preference for Sox1 and Sox3 over Sox2. Goat anti-GATA4 or AFP antibodies were from Santa Cruz. FITC- and Cy3-conjugated secondary antibodies were obtained from Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories (West Grove, PA). Normal mouse and rabbit IgG (Zymed, South San Francisco, CA) were used as the negative control. The Smad1 subcellular localization images were captured with a confocal microscopy (TCS SP2, Leica, Heidelberg, Germany) with a 100x objective lens. Other images were taken with Olympus BX50 fluorescence microscopy (Tokyo, Japan).
FGF8 Protein Quantification
The monolayer P19 cells and P19 cell aggregates were washed twice with phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) and fixed with 4% PFA. Monolayer cells were permeated and blocked with 0.1% Triton X-100, 0.5% normal goat serum, and 1% BSA in PBS at RT for 1 h and immunostained with anti-FGF8 antibody. Cell aggregates were frozen sectioned as 10-µm sections and immunostained as above. The immunofluorescence intensity was taken with Leica confocal microscopy (TCS SP2) as described (Thompson et al., 1998; Fernandez et al., 2000). In each experiment, at least 20 cells or cell aggregate sections were quantified and the fluorescence intensity data were used for statistical analysis. For data comparison, all parameters for each image taken were tightly fixed.
Luciferase Assay
Luciferase assays were performed as described previously (Cheng et al., 2004). For analyzing the inhibitory effect of Smad6, Vector/P19 cells and Smad6/P19 cells were transiently cotransfected with Vent2-Lux with or without constitutively active BMP receptor IB (ca-BMPR-IB; Beall and Pearce, 2001; Ulloa and Tabibzadeh, 2001). Eight hours after transfection, medium was changed to DMEM/F12. Data were obtained 24 h after serum starvation.
Statistics
Each experiment was repeated at least three times. Data shown were expressed as mean ± SEM. Student’s t tests were used to compare the effects of all treatments. Differences were considered statistically significant as follows: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001 (see Figures 1–6).
|
RESULTS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
|
). Taken together, our results show that the aggregation of P19 cells could rapidly increase FGF8 mRNA and protein expression.
Aggregation-dependent FGF8 Elevation Is Pluripotent Stem Cell Related
To determine whether the cell aggregation-induced FGF8 up-regulation is an universal phenomenon or a cell type–specific event, we analyzed pluripotent stem cells such as, Wnt-1 overexpressing P19 (Wnt-1/P19) cells, the aggregation of which could lead to neural differentiation without RA treatment (Tang et al., 2002), the mouse embryonic stem (ES) cell line, D3, and other non-ES/EC cell–related cells. As shown in Figure 2, aggregation of Wnt-1/P19 cells could increase FGF8 mRNA expression (Figure 2A), and this was also true for D3 ES cells, in which FGF8 mRNA was up-regulated in the first day of cell aggregation and started to down-regulate in the third day (Figure 2B). There was no FGF8 expression change in the aggregation of other non-ES/EC cells such as human neuroblastoma SH-SY5Y cells, rat glioma C6 cells, and mouse mammary tumor GR2H6 cells (Figure 2, C–E). These data suggest that the aggregation-induced FGF8 up-regulation is a pluripotent stem cell–related event and might be involved in the differentiation of these cells.
|
-tubulin (TuJ1), neurofilament, and GAP43 (unpublished data).
|
45% of cells became MAP2-positive by day 9. GFAP-positive cells were detected at day 7 of differentiation and maintained at a constant level (10%) during the next 5 d. In contrast, control monolayer pcDNA3/P19 cells could differentiate into neither neurons nor astrocytes (Figure 3G). Because FGF8 is a secreted protein, it can be added with RA into the medium of monolayer P19 cells. As shown in Figure 3H, FGF8 and RA together could promote the differentiation of pluripotent P19 EC cells (Oct4+Sox+) into neural stem cells (Oct4–Sox+; Wood and Episkopou, 1999). Other FGF family members as well as IGF-1 had similar effects, probably due to activation of the same FGF signaling pathway (Pera et al., 2003).
The monolayer P19 cells induced by RA differentiated into the endoderm and mesoderm-like cells (Jones-Villeneuve et al., 1982, 1983; den Hertog et al., 1993). We would like to know whether FGF8- and RA-induced monolayer P19 cells could differentiate into the endoderm and mesoderm cell lineages. As shown in Figure 3I, RA-induced monolayer P19 cells (lane 3) expressed endoderm marker HNF3 and GATA6 (Levinson-Dushnik and Benvenisty, 1997; Li et al., 2004) and the mesoderm marker Brachyury (Bra; Vidricaire et al., 1994; Leahy et al., 1999), whereas FGF8-induced monolayer P19 cells (lane 4) expressed the mesoderm marker Bra and Goosecoid (Gsc; Artinger et al., 1997; Yasunaga et al., 2005). Besides the endoderm and mesoderm markers, the neural stem cell marker, Sox1, only expressed in FGF8 plus RA-induced monolayer P19 cells (lane 5) and in RA-induced P19 cell aggregates (lane 6). Proteins of two other endoderm markers, AFP and GATA4, could also be detected in RA- and FGF8-induced monolayer P19 cells (Supplementary Figure S2).
Together, these results suggest that the cell aggregation–induced FGF8 elevation is sufficient for RA-induced neural differentiation of P19 cells, and this neural differentiation is accompanied by mesoderm and endoderm cell lineages.
Inhibition of FGF8 Expression by RNAi and Blocking FGF Signaling by SU5402 Lead to Reduced P19 Cell Neural Differentiation
Given that FGF8 overexpression could promote monolayer P19 cell neural differentiation, we wonder whether inhibition of FGF8 elevation could impair the RA-induced P19 cell neural differentiation. Twenty P19 cell clones with stable transfection of the FGF8 RNAi plasmid (FGF8 RNAi/P19) were generated, and five of them showed a significant reduction of FGF8 mRNA in monolayer state by RT-PCR; clones 8 (FGF8 RNAi-8/P19) and 18 (FGF8 RNAi-18/P19) were chosen for further study (Figure 4A). The empty RNAi vector–transfected P19 cell line (PPE/P19) served as the negative control. The inhibition of the aggregation-induced FGF8 up-regulation was evident at both FGF8 mRNA (Figure 4B) and protein (Figure 4C) levels in FGF8 RNAi/P19 cells, compared with the control PPE/P19 cells.
|
; Fukuchi and Grove, 2003). These results show that inhibition of FGF signaling by repressing FGF8 expression, blocking FGFR signaling, or neutralizing FGF8 protein activity could attenuate the RA-induced P19 cell neural differentiation, supporting the view that both cell aggregation–induced FGF8 elevation and intact FGF signaling are necessary for RA-induced P19 cell neural differentiation. Because RA and aggregation could induce a transient FGF8 up-regulation followed by a sustained expression of FGF4 during P19 cell neural differentiation (top panel of Figure 4D and Supplementary Figure S1), we would like to distinguish the different roles between FGF8 and FGF4 in this process. In the FGF8-RNAi/P19 cells aggregation stage, the weak FGF4 expression could still be detected, implying the specificity of the FGF8 RNAi construct, but its expression was ceased in the differentiation stage (middle panel of Figure 4D). Interestingly, if FGF signaling was inhibited transiently by adding SU5402 only in the first day of P19 cell aggregation, it inhibited both FGF8 and FGF4 expression and also impaired neural differentiation (bottom panel of Figure 4D and Figure 4E, e and f, and F). These results suggest that there are two waves of FGF expression during RA-induced P19 cell neural differentiation, a transient FGF8 elevation and a sustained FGF4 up-regulation. The FGF8 expression depends on the intact FGF signaling, and the sustained FGF4 expression depends on FGF8 elevation. Both FGF8 and FGF4 inhibition are responsible for reduced P19 cell neural differentiation.
FGF Signaling Is Directly Involved in the Neural Differentiation of P19 Cells
Having established a crucial role for the cell aggregation–induced FGF8 elevation in P19 cell neural differentiation, we wanted to learn the molecular mechanism(s) involved in this process. It has been shown that FGF signaling can block BMP pathway by phosphorylating the linker region of Smad1 and inhibiting its nuclear translocation (Kretzschmar et al., 1997; Pera et al., 2003; Kuroda et al., 2005). Consistent with these observations, we also found that FGF8 inhibited BMP signaling through phosphorylating the linker region of Smad1 and blocking its nuclear translocation in P19 cells, and Erk1/2 activation was involved in this process (Supplementary Figure S4).
To further investigate whether FGF signaling plays any BMP-inhibition–independent role in P19 cell neural differentiation, we overexpressed an inhibitory Smad, Smad6, to block the BMP pathway in P19 cells and examined its neural differentiation. Smad6 was up-regulated in an Smad6 stably transfected P19 cell line (Smad6/P19; Figure 5A), and BMP signaling was inhibited in the Smad6-overexpressing cells (Figure 5B). Immunostaining showed that less endogenous Smad1 localized in the nucleus of Smad6/P19 cells, compared with the control Vector/P19 cells, in both serum-containing and serum-free medium (Figure 5C, a–d). Immunostaining of c-terminal phosphorylated Smad1 showed that the activated Smad1 could be found in Vector/P19 cells and Smad6/P19 cells with serum containing medium, but could hardly be detected in Smad6/P19 cells in serum-free medium (Figure 5C, e–h). Together, these results suggest that there are BMP activities in Vector/P19 cells and Smad6/P19 cells with serum-containing medium, but not in Smad6/P19 cells with serum-free medium.
|
, 2003b), we speculated that this was the reason the Smad6/P19 cells could not differentiate into neural cells in serum-containing medium. To confirm this, we added BMP2 (5–10 ng/ml) into the serum-free medium and found that it severely impaired Smad6/P19 cell neural differentiation (Figure 5D, e and h). To prove that endogenous FGF signaling is directly involved in P19 cell neural differentiation, we treated Smad6/P19 cells with SU5402 (5 µM) or U0126 (5 µM) and found that these cells could hardly differentiate into TuJ1-positive cells in serum-free medium (Figure 5D, f–h). These results suggest that besides inhibiting BMP signaling, FGF signaling coordinates other pathways via the MEK-ERK pathway to induce P19 cell neural differentiation. |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
; Smith et al., 1987; Mummery et al., 1991; Armour et al., 1999). Understanding the mechanisms underlying aggregation would be helpful to dissect the relationship between cell–cell/cell–ECM interaction and cell fate determination. FGF signaling is involved in cell contact–associated events. The neural cell adhesion mediated by NCAM leads to activation of FGF signaling. Activated FGFR-Ras-MAPK and FGFR-PI3k-Akt pathways promote neurite outgrowth and neuronal survival (Kolkova et al., 2000). ES cells overexpressing dominant negative FGFR2 show impaired epithelial differentiation with synthesis defects of laminin and type IV collagen, because regulation of embryoid body (EB) basement membrane formation depends on FGF-Akt/PKB (Li et al., 2001). Consistent with these observations, we found that FGF8 expression was elevated in the first day of P19 cell aggregation, and FGF8 was the only factor within FGF family responding to P19 cell aggregation (Figure 1 and Supplementary Figure S1). Importantly, the aggregation-induced FGF8 elevation is pluripotent stem cell related, suggesting its potential function in stem cell fate determination (Figure 2). Through gain and loss of function assays, we showed that FGF8 and FGF signaling were both sufficient and necessary for the cell aggregation related neural fate determination of P19 cells (Figures 3 and 4).
FGF8 mRNA is expressed in the proximal-posterior epiblast of E6.0–E6.5 mouse embryos, and in the primitive streak of E7.5 embryos (Crossley and Martin, 1995). FGF4 transcript is first detected in the inner cell mass of E4.5 embryos, and its expression overlaps with FGF8 in the epiblast of E6.5 and the primitive streak of E7.5 embryos (Niswander and Martin, 1992). FGF4 expression in the primitive streak is dependent on FGF8, because in E7.5 FGF8 mutant embryo the FGF4 expression is lost in this region, which causes the failure of cell migration and a defect of posterior neural induction (Sun et al., 1999). Consistent with these observations, we found two waves of FGF expression during RA-induced P19 cell neural differentiation: a transient FGF8 elevation and a sustained FGF4 expression. FGF4 expression depended on the FGF8 elevation and intact FGF signaling. Both FGF8 expression inhibition and FGF signaling interruption were responsible for the reduced P19 cell neural differentiation (Figure 4). FGF signaling has been shown to be involved in the vertebrate neural induction, but the exact FGF factor(s) engaged in this process remains unclear. The similarities of FGF8 and FGF4 expression pattern between E7.5 mouse embryo and P19 cell neural differentiation promote us to speculate that FGF8 and FGF4 are the possible candidates involved in neural induction in vivo.
Inhibition of BMP signaling is very important for neural induction (Hemmati-Brivanlou and Melton, 1997a, 1997b), and BMP levels must be tightly controlled for ES cell neural induction (Tropepe et al., 2001; Ying et al., 2003a). In our study, we induced P19 cell neural differentiation in serum-containing medium. Because serum contains trace amounts of BMPs to maintain stem cell pluripotency and restrict differentiation, BMP signals have to be reduced for stem cell neural differentiation (Ying et al., 2003a, 2003b). We showed that treatment of monolayer P19 cells with FGF8 could effectively inhibit BMP pathway (Supplementary Figure S4; Kretzschmar et al., 1997, 1999; Pera et al., 2003; Kuroda et al., 2005). In addition to BMP inhibition, FGF signaling has also been suggested to be responsible for generating the nervous system (Linker and Stern, 2004; Delaune et al., 2005). In chick, FGF is involved in both BMP inhibition–dependent and –independent functions in neural induction (Wilson et al., 2000). However, these assays are conducted by tissue explant or injecting plasmids at very early stages of development, and it cannot exclude altering normal cell movement patterns or initiating multiple cascades of other signaling events (Stern, 2005). It is also unknown whether FGF is involved in a BMP inhibition–independent pathway of neural induction in the mouse embryo. To tackle this question, we inhibited endogenous BMP signaling by overexpressing Smad6, a universal inhibitor of BMP signaling (Linker and Stern, 2004) in P19 cells and found that these cells could spontaneously differentiate into neurons in serum-free medium (Figure 5). In this BMP negative circumstance, Smad6/P19 cell neural differentiation was impaired by blocking the FGF pathway with SU5402 or U0126, which suggested an obligate role for FGF signaling in P19 cell neural differentiation.
On the basis of these results, we proposed that as in Xenopus and chick, BMP inhibition remains central in P19 cell neural fate determination (Figure 6). FGF8 expression, elevated during P19 cell aggregation, results in intracellular Erk1/2 activation and inhibition of Smad1 nuclear translocation. In addition, FGFs exerts direct effects on P19 cell neural differentiation through Erk1/2 phosphorylation. In BMP negative condition, endogenous FGF signaling is sufficient to promote P19 cell neural induction; although in BMP positive conditions, endogenous FGFs are not sufficient and additional FGFs are required to inhibit the BMP pathway. Moreover, much still remains unknown on the direct target of BMP-independent action of FGF activity, which was only addressed in ascidian (Bertrand et al., 2003). Understanding how aggregation induces FGF8 expression will provide insights into the relationship between cell–cell interaction and growth factor secretion, which are both essential for embryonic development.
|
|
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
|
Footnotes |
|---|
The online version of this article contains supplemental material at MBC Online (http://www.molbiolcell.org). 
Address correspondence to: Naihe Jing ( njing{at}sibs.ac.cn)
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
Artinger, M., Blitz, I., Inoue, K., Tran, U., Cho, K. W. (1997). Interaction of goosecoid and brachyury in Xenopus mesoderm patterning. Mech. Dev 5, 187–196.
Beall, M. J. and Pearce, E. J. (2001). Human transforming growth factor-beta activates a receptor serine/threonine kinase from the intravascular parasite Schistosoma mansoni. J. Biol. Chem 276, 31613–31619.
Bertrand, V., Hudson, C., Caillol, D., Popovici, C., Lemaire, P. (2003). Neural tissue in ascidian embryos is induced by FGF9/16/20, acting via a combination of maternal GATA and Ets transcription factors. Cell 115, 615–627.[CrossRef][Medline]
Campione-Piccardo, J., Sun, J. J., Craig, J., McBurney, M. W. (1985). Cell-cell interaction can influence drug-induced differentiation of murine embryonal carcinoma cells. Dev. Biol 109, 25–31.[CrossRef][Medline]
Cheng, L., Jin, Z., Liu, L., Yan, Y., Li, T., Zhu, X., Jing, N. (2004). Characterization and promoter analysis of the mouse nestin gene. FEBS Lett 565, 195–202.[CrossRef][Medline]
Crossley, P. H. and Martin, G. R. (1995). The mouse FGF8 gene encodes a family of polypeptides and is expressed in regions that direct outgrowth and patterning in the developing embryo. Development 121, 439–451.[Abstract]
Crossley, P. H., Minowada, G., MacArthur, C. A., Martin, G. R. (1996a). Roles for FGF8 in the induction, initiation, and maintenance of chick limb development. Cell 84, 127–136.[CrossRef][Medline]
Crossley, P. H., Martinez, S., Martin, G. R. (1996b). Midbrain development induced by FGF8 in the chick embryo. Nature 380, 66–68.[CrossRef][Medline]
Delaune, E., Lemaire, P., Kodjabachian, L. (2005). Neural induction in Xenopus requires early FGF signalling in addition to BMP inhibition. Development 132, 299–310.
den Hertog, J., Pals, C. E., Peppelenbosch, M. P., Tertoolen, L. G., de Laat, S. W., Kruijer, W. (1993). Receptor protein tyrosine phosphatase alpha activates pp60c-src and is involved in neuronal differentiation. EMBO J 12, 3789–3798.[Medline]
Esner, M., Pachernik, J., Hampl, A., Dvorak, P. (2002). Targeted disruption of fibroblast growth factor receptor-1 blocks maturation of visceral endoderm and cavitation in mouse embryoid bodies. Int. J. Dev. Biol 46, 817–825.[Medline]
Fernandez, B., Buehler, A., Wolfram, S., Kostin, S., Espanion, G., Franz, W. M., Niemann, H., Doevendans, P. A. (2000). Transgenic myocardial overexpression of fibroblast growth factor-1 increases coronary artery density and branching. Circ. Res 87, 207–213.
Fukuchi-Shimogori, T. and Grove, E. A. (2003). Emx2 patterns the neocortex by regulating FGF positional signaling. Nat. Neurosci 6, 825–831.[CrossRef][Medline]
Gao, X., Bian, W., Yang, J., Tang, K., Kitani, H., Atsumi, T., Jing, N. (2001). A role of N-cadherin in neuronal differentiation of embryonic carcinoma P19 cells. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun 284, 1098–1103.[CrossRef][Medline]
Gunhaga, L., Marklund, M., Sjodal, M., Hsieh, J. C., Jessell, T. M., Edlund, T. (2003). Specification of dorsal telencephalic character by sequential Wnt and FGF signaling. Nat. Neurosci 6, 701–707.[CrossRef][Medline]
Hemmati-Brivanlou, A. and Melton, D. (1997a). Vertebrate embryonic cells will become nerve cells unless told otherwise. Cell 88, 13–17.[CrossRef][Medline]
Hemmati-Brivanlou, A. and Melton, D. (1997b). Vertebrate neural induction. Annu. Rev. Neurosci 20, 43–60.[CrossRef][Medline]
Hou, Q., et al. (2004). SNAP-25 in hippocampal CA1 region is involved in memory consolidation. Eur. J. Neurosci 20, 1593–1603.[CrossRef][Medline]
Jones-Villeneuve, E. M., McBurney, M. W., Rogers, K. A., Kalnins, V. I. (1982). Retinoic acid induces embryonal carcinoma cells to differentiate into neurons and glial cells. J. Cell Biol 94, 253–262.
Jones-Villeneuve, E. M., Rudnicki, M. A., Harris, J. F., Mcburney, M. W. (1983). Retinoic acid induced neural differentiation of embryonal carcinoma cells. Mol. Cell. Biol 3, 2271–2279.
Kolkova, K., Novitskaya, V., Pedersen, N., Berezin, V., Bock, E. (2000). Neural cell adhesion molecule-stimulated neurite outgrowth depends on activation of protein kinase C and the ras-mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway. J. Neurosci 20, 2238–2246.
Kretzschmar, M., Doody, J., Massague, J. (1997). Opposing BMP and EGF signalling pathways converge on the TGF-beta family mediator Smad1. Nature 389, 618–622.[CrossRef][Medline]
Kretzschmar, M., Doody, J., Timokhina, I., Massague, J. (1999). A mechanism of repression of TGFbeta/ Smad signaling by oncogenic Ras. Genes Dev 13, 804–816.
Kuroda, H., Fuentealba, L., Ikeda, A., Reversade, B., De Robertis, E. M. (2005). Default neural induction, neuralization of dissociated Xenopus cells is mediated by Ras/MAPK activation. Genes Dev 19, 1022–1027.
Leahy, A., Xiong, J. W., Kuhnert, F., Stuhlmann, H. (1999). Use of developmental marker genes to define temporal and spatial patterns of differentiation during embryoid body formation. J. Exp. Zool 284, 67–81.[CrossRef][Medline]
Levinson-Dushnik, M. and Benvenisty, N. (1997). Involvement of hepatocyte nuclear factor 3 in endoderm differentiation of embryonic stem cells. Mol. Cell. Biol 17, 3817–3822.[Abstract]
Li, L., Arman, E., Ekblom, P., Edgar, D., Murray, P., Lonai, P. (2004). Distinct GATA6- and laminin-dependent mechanisms regulate endodermal and ectodermal embryonic stem cell fates. Development 131, 5277–5286.
Li, X., Chen, Y., Scheele, S., Arman, E., Haffner-Krausz, R., Ekblom, P., Lonai, P. (2001). Fibroblast growth factor signaling and basement membrane assembly are connected during epithelial morphogenesis of the embryoid body. J. Cell Biol 153, 811–822.
Linker, C. and Stern, C. D. (2004). Neural induction requires BMP inhibition only as a late step, and involves signals other than FGF and Wnt antagonists. Development 131, 5671–5681.
Mcburney, M. W., Jones-Vliieneuve, E. M., Edwards, M. K., Anderson, P. J. (1982). Control of muscle and neuronal differentiation in a cultured embryonal carcinoma cell line. Nature 299, 165–167.[CrossRef][Medline]
Mueller, K. L., Jacques, B. E., Kelley, M. W. (2002). Fibroblast growth factor signaling regulates pillar cell development in the organ of corti. J. Neurosci 22, 9368–9377.
Mummery, C. L., van Achterberg, T. A., van den Eijnden-van Raaij, A. J., van Haaster, L., Willemse, A., de Laat, S. W., Piersma, A. H. (1991). Visceral-endoderm-like cell lines induce differentiation of murine P19 embryonal carcinoma cells. Differentiation 46, 51–60.[Medline]
Niswander, L. and Martin, G. R. (1992). Fgf-4 expression during gastrulation, myogenesis, limb and tooth development in the mouse. Development 114, 755–768.[Abstract]
Okada, Y., Shimazaki, T., Sobue, G., Okano, H. (2004). Retinoic-acid- concentration-dependent acquisition of neural cell identity during in vitro differentiation of mouse embryonic stem cells. Dev. Biol 275, 124–142.[CrossRef][Medline]
Pera, E. M., Ikeda, A., Eivers, E., De Robertis, E. M. (2003). Integration of IGF, FGF, and anti-BMP signals via Smad1 phosphorylation in neural induction. Genes Dev 17, 3023–3028.
Sambrook, J. S. and Russell, D. W. (2001). In: Molecular Cloning: A Laboratory Manual, Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press.
Smith, S. C., Reuhl, K. R., Craig, J., McBurney, M. W. (1987). The role of aggregation in embryonal carcinoma cell differentiation. J. Cell. Physiol 131, 74–84.[CrossRef][Medline]
Spemann, H. and Mangold, H. (1924). Über die Induktion von Embryonalanlagen durch Implantation artfremder Organisatoren. W. Roux’ Arch. f. Entw. d. Organis. u. mikrosk. Anat 100, 599–638.
Stern, C. D. (2005). Neural induction: old problem, new findings, yet more questions. Development 132, 2007–2021.
Streit, A., Berliner, A., Papanayotou, C., Sirulnik, A., Stern, C. D. (2000). Initiation of neural induction by FGF signaling before gastrulation. Nature 406, 74–78.[CrossRef][Medline]
Sun, X., Meyers, E. N., Lewandoski, M., Martin, G. R. (1999). Targeted disruption of FGF8 causes failure of cell migration in the gastrulating mouse embryo. Genes Dev 13, 1834–1846.
Tanaka, S., Kamachi, Y., Tanouchi, A., Hamada, H., Jing, N., Kondoh, H. (2004). Interplay of SOX and POU factors in regulation of the Nestin gene in neural primordial cells. Mol. Cell. Biol 24, 8834–8846.
Tang, K., Yang, J., Gao, X., Wang, C., Liu, L., Kitani, H., Atsumi, T., Jing, N. (2002). Wnt-1 promotes neuronal differentiation and inhibits gliogenesis in P19 cells. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun 293, 167–173.[CrossRef][Medline]
Thompson, S. D., Franklyn, J. A., Watkinson, J. C., Verhaeg, J. M., Sheppard, M. C., Eggo, M. C. (1998). Fibroblast growth factors 1 and 2 and fibroblast growth factor receptor 1 are elevated in thyroid hyperplasia. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab 83, 1336–1341.
Tropepe, V., Hitoshi, S., Sirard, C., Mak, T. W., Rossant, J., van der Kooy, D. (2001). Direct neural fate specification from embryonic stem cells: a primitive mammalian neural stem cell stage acquired through a default mechanism. Neuron 30, 65–78.[CrossRef][Medline]
Ulloa, L. and Tabibzadeh, S. (2001). Lefty inhibits receptor-regulated Smad phosphorylation induced by the activated transforming growth factor-beta receptor. J. Biol. Chem 276, 21397–21404.
Vidricaire, G., Jardine, K., McBurney, M. W. (1994). Expression of the Brachyury gene during mesoderm development in differentiating embryonal carcinoma cell cultures. Development 120, 115–122.[Abstract]
Waddington, C. H. and Schmidt, C. A. (1933). Induction by heteroplastic grafts of the primitive streak in birds. Roux’s Arch. Entw. Mech. Org 128, 522–563.[CrossRef]
Wilson, S. I. and Edlund, T. (2001). Neural induction: toward a unifying mechanism. Nat. Neurosci 4, Suppl, 1161–1168.[Medline]
Wilson, S. I., Graziano, E., Harland, R., Jessell, T. M., Edlund, T. (2000). An early requirement for FGF signaling in the acquisition of neural cell fate in the chick embryo. Curr. Biol 10, 421–429.[CrossRef][Medline]
Wilson, S. I., Rydstrom, A., Trimborn, T., Willert, K., Nusse, R., Jessell, T. M., Edlund, T. (2001). The status of Wnt signalling regulates neural and epidermal fates in the chick embryo. Nature 411, 325–330.[CrossRef][Medline]
Wood, H. B. and Episkopou, V. (1999). Comparative expression of the mouse Sox1, Sox2 and Sox3 genes from pre-gastrulation to early somite stages. Mech. Dev 86, 197–201.[CrossRef][Medline]
Yasunaga, M., Tada, S., Torikai-Nishikawa, S., Nakano, Y., Okada, M., Jakt, L. M., Nishikawa, S., Chiba, T., Era, T., Nishikawa, S. (2005). Induction and monitoring of definitive and visceral endoderm differentiation of mouse ES cells. Nat. Biotechnol 23, 1542–1550.[CrossRef][Medline]
Ye, W., Shimamura, K., Rubenstein, J. L., Hynes, M. A., Rosenthal, A. (1998). FGF and Shh signals control dopaminergic and serotonergic cell fate in the anterior neural plate. Cell 93, 755–766.[CrossRef][Medline]
Ying, Q. L., Stavridis, M., Griffiths, D., Li, M., Smith, A. (2003a). Conversion of embryonic stem cells into neuroectodermal precursors in adherent monoculture. Nat. Biotechnol 21, 183–186.[CrossRef][Medline]
Ying, Q. L., Nichols, J., Chambers, I., Smith, A. (2003b). BMP induction of Id proteins suppresses differentiation and sustains embryonic stem cell self-renewal in collaboration with STAT3. Cell 115, 281–292.[CrossRef][Medline]
Zhang, L., Fogg, D. K., Waisman, D. M. (2004). RNA interference-mediated silencing of the S100A10 gene attenuates plasmin generation and invasiveness of Colo 222 colorectal cancer cells. J. Biol. Chem 279, 2053–2062.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  T. Kunath, M. K. Saba-El-Leil, M. Almousailleakh, J. Wray, S. Meloche, and A. Smith FGF stimulation of the Erk1/2 signalling cascade triggers transition of pluripotent embryonic stem cells from self-renewal to lineage commitment Development, August 15, 2007; 134(16): 2895 - 2902. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
—, MAP2+% cells in FGF8/P19 cells; – –
—, GFAP+% cells in FGF8/P19 cells; – –
) and Oct4–Sox+ (
) cells were determined. (I) RT-PCR analysis of expression of endoderm, mesoderm and ectoderm markers from noninduced P19 cells (lane 1), monolayer P19 cells without induction (lane 2), or induced by FGF8 (lane 3), RA (lane 4), FGF8 plus RA (lane 5), and RA-induced P19 cell aggregation (lane 6). Scale bar, 100 µm.
