We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information

Results: 4

1.
Fig. 4.

Fig. 4. From: Cyclin D1 promotes neurogenesis in the developing spinal cord in a cell cycle-independent manner.

Forced expression of Cyclin D1 restores neurogenic potential to E13.5 Olig2+ glial-restricted precursors (54). (A) Diagram illustrating the mouse to chick transplantation experimental paradigm. (B) Double-immunolabeling for GFP and NeuN on cE5 spinal cord after transplantation. (C) Quantification of NeuN-expression in GFP+ transplanted cells. Values are mean ± SEM from 11 embryos (GFP-mD1), 3 embryos (GFP-mD2), or 8 embryos (GFP only). (D) Model illustrating the role of Cyclin Ds in pMN development. Fig. S7A provides alternative schemes.

Agnès I. Lukaszewicz, et al. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 July 12;108(28):11632-11637.
2.
Fig. 2.

Fig. 2. From: Cyclin D1 promotes neurogenesis in the developing spinal cord in a cell cycle-independent manner.

Cyclin D1 expression is necessary for neurogenesis in the chick spinal cord. Neurogenesis at cE4 (A and B) or cE5 (C and D), and precursor proliferation (E) were analyzed after electroporation of siRNAs for cD1, cD2 or mt mutant control of cD1 siRNA. mD1 and mD3 indicate murine Cyclin D1- and D3-rescuing cDNAs, respectively. Values represent the percent change in the average proportion of marker-positive cells on the electroporated side relative to the controlateral (nonelectroporated) side × 100% (=%change(E/C)). Values are mean ± SEM of between four and eight sections from three to six embryos. One-way ANOVA statistical analysis (Lim3, P = 0.0022; NeuroM, P < 0.0001; #HB9/#Olig2, P = 0.0002; #NeuN/#PCNA, P < 0.0001; #PCNA, P < 0.0001) and Newman–Keuls or Bonferroni posttest comparisons were performed.

Agnès I. Lukaszewicz, et al. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 July 12;108(28):11632-11637.
3.
Fig. 1.

Fig. 1. From: Cyclin D1 promotes neurogenesis in the developing spinal cord in a cell cycle-independent manner.

Cyclin D1 and D2 expression in the E10.0 pMN domain of the developing mouse spinal cord. (A–C) Triple immunolabeling for Cyclin D1, D2, and Olig2 in the pMN domain at E10.0. C shows a merged view of A and B, with Olig2 omitted for clarity. (D–I) Triple-immunolabeling for HB9, Olig2, and Cyclin D1 (D–F) or D2 (G–I). Dashed lines delineate the Olig2+ pMN domain (VZ) and the MZ containing newly generated HB9+ MNs. Arrowheads indicate Cyclin D/Olig2 double-positive cells, and arrows indicate Cyclin D1/HB9 double-positive cells. (J) Schematic summarizing the relative spatial domains of expression of Olig2, HB9, Cyclin D2, and D1 at E10.0 in the pMN domain. (K) Quantification of the relative proportion of different cell populations, defined by Cyclin D1, D2, Olig2, and HB9 expression, at E10.0. Values are mean ± SEM of between four and six sections from three embryos: *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01 (t test). (L) Quantification of the percentage of Olig2+ cells expressing Cyclin D1, D2, or both at E10.0 in the pMN domain. Values are mean ± SEM of three or four sections from four embryos. D1×D2 indicates predicted overlap assuming expression by independent populations.

Agnès I. Lukaszewicz, et al. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 July 12;108(28):11632-11637.
4.
Fig. 3.

Fig. 3. From: Cyclin D1 promotes neurogenesis in the developing spinal cord in a cell cycle-independent manner.

Genetic interactions between Cyclin Ds and Notch signaling components. (A–F) FISH for chick Hes5-2 (A–C) or Hes6-2 (D–F) combined with immunolabeling of PCNA on E5 spinal cord (A1F1). Dashed lines delineate the VZ, denoted by PCNA. Asterisks indicate reductions in Hes mRNAs. (G) Quantification of the level of expression of chick Hes5-1, Hes5-2, Hes5-3, and Hes6-2 mRNAs, normalized to the level of PCNA expression, in arbitrary units (%change(E/C)). Values are mean ± SEM of four or five sections from 4–10 embryos. Embryos were electroporated with either GFP or the indicated siRNAs. One-way ANOVA statistical analysis (cHes5-1: P = 0.0067; cHes5-2: P = 0.0010; cHes5-3: P = 0.0185; cHes6-2: P = 0.0011) and Newman–Keuls posttest comparisons were performed. The effect of cD2 knockdown on cHes6-2 level was not significant even on the t test (P = 0.0676). (H) Forced expression of Hes cDNAs is epistatic to cD knockdown phenotypes. Here 6-2 and 5-1 indicate coelectroporation of cDNAs for chick Hes6-2 and Hes5-1, respectively, with the indicated siRNAs. The ratio of NeuN+ to PCNA+ cells was quantified at cE5 (%change(E/C)). Values are mean ± SEM of three sections from three embryos. One-way ANOVA analysis (P < 0.0001) and Bonferroni's posttest comparisons were performed.

Agnès I. Lukaszewicz, et al. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 July 12;108(28):11632-11637.

Supplemental Content

Recent activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...
Write to the Help Desk