![]() | ![]() |
Formats:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2009 Thomson et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. Fgf receptor 3 activation promotes selective growth and expansion of occipitotemporal cortex 1Division of Cancer Sciences and Molecular Pathology, University of Glasgow, Beatson Laboratories for Cancer Research, Garscube Estate, Switchback Road, Glasgow, G61 1BD, UK 2Centre for Integrative Physiology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, EH8 9XD, UK 3Department of Neurological Surgery and Pathology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington, 98101-1304, USA Corresponding author.Rachel E Thomson: rachel.thomson/at/florey.edu.au; Peter C Kind: p.kind/at/ed.ac.uk; Nicholas A Graham: 0206542G/at/student.gla.ac.uk; Michelle L Etherson: 0305302e/at/student.gla.ac.uk; John Kennedy: j.kennedy/at/beatson.gla.ac.uk; Ana C Fernandes: anacffernandes/at/yahoo.com; Catia S Marques: marques.catia.s/at/gmail.com; Robert F Hevner: rhevner/at/u.washington.edu; Tomoko Iwata: t.iwata/at/beatson.gla.ac.uk Received August 25, 2008; Accepted February 3, 2009. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Abstract Background Fibroblast growth factors (Fgfs) are important regulators of cerebral cortex development. Fgf2, Fgf8 and Fgf17 promote growth and specification of rostromedial (frontoparietal) cortical areas. Recently, the function of Fgf15 in antagonizing Fgf8 in the rostral signaling center was also reported. However, regulation of caudal area formation by Fgf signaling remains unknown. Results In mutant mice with constitutive activation of Fgf receptor 3 (Fgfr3) in the forebrain, surface area of the caudolateral cortex was markedly expanded at early postnatal stage, while rostromedial surface area remained normal. Cortical thickness was also increased in caudal regions. The expression domain and levels of Fgf8, as well as overall patterning, were unchanged. In contrast, the changes in caudolateral surface area were associated with accelerated cell cycle in early stages of neurogenesis without an alteration of cell cycle exit. Moreover, a marked overproduction of intermediate neuronal progenitors was observed in later stages, indicating prolongation of neurogenesis. Conclusion Activation of Fgfr3 selectively promotes growth of caudolateral (occipitotemporal) cortex. These observations support the 'radial unit' and 'radial amplification' hypotheses and may explain premature sulcation of the occipitotemporal cortex in thanatophoric dysplasia, a human FGFR3 disorder. Together with previous work, this study suggests that formation of rostral and caudal areas are differentially regulated by Fgf signaling in the cerebral cortex. Background The mammalian cerebral cortex consists of multiple cortical areas with specific functions, each of which connects to a specific area of the body and within the cortex [1]. Patterning and neurogenesis are two key events that influence cortical area formation. The cortical wiring is established based on the prospective area boundaries, the 'protomap', specified by combinations of transcription factors, such as Pax6 and Emx2, expressed in graded patterns in the cortical ventricular zone (VZ) [2-4]. Transcription factor expression gradients are modified by morphogens, expressed focally in the signaling centers during early forebrain development. Fgf8 is expressed in the rostral signaling center, and controls transcription factor expression gradients and area specification by its function in patterning. Concurrently, the cortex grows in size by controlled proliferation and differentiation of progenitor cells in the VZ and subventricular zone (SVZ). This process, neurogenesis, is also regulated by Fgf8, as well as by other Fgfs. Fgf ligands comprise a family of 22 polypeptides that play a variety of roles during brain development [5]. Fgf8 and Fgf17 are expressed in the rostral-most region of the cortical primordium, and specify the frontal cortex and its subdivisions [6-9]. In addition, Fgf8 is shown to regulate the size of the forebrain, especially rostral regions [7,8]. Likewise, Fgf2 knockout mice showed significant reductions of neuronal density and cortical thickness in rostral areas, indicating its important role in neurogenesis [10-12]. Furthermore, a recent study of Fgf15 knockout mice revealed a function of Fgf15 in the rostral signaling center influencing patterning in a fashion opposite of Fgf8, suppressing proliferation, and promoting differentiation of cortical progenitors [13]. In contrast, no specific role for Fgfs has been found in regulating formation of caudal cortical areas. The effects of Fgfs are mediated by the four high-affinity receptor tyrosine kinases, Fgfrs [14,15]. Signaling by Fgfrs was shown to be necessary for growth of rostral, as well as caudal, cortical regions [16]. However, current knowledge concerning the specific roles of individual receptors is limited, presumably due to functional redundancy. Nonetheless, some functions of Fgfrs have emerged. Forebrain-specific knockout of Fgfr1 (Foxg1-Cre;Fgfr1flox/flox) showed a loss of the olfactory bulb, mostly owing to a decrease in progenitor proliferation leading to a deficit in initial bulb evagination [17]. A subtle shift of Pax6 and Emx2 expressions also indicated an alteration in early patterning in this study. Changes in gene expression were more thoroughly assessed by microarray performed in developing cortex in this model at embryonic day (E)12.5, which confirmed the involvement of Fgfr1 signaling in the regulation of cortical patterning genes [18]. Dorso-ventral patterning defects were further demonstrated in a double knockout study, where deletion of both Fgfr1 and Fgfr3 resulted in a loss of neurogenesis in ventromedial regions, while deletion of both Fgfr1 and Fgfr2 led to a loss of ventral identities owing to dorsoventral patterning defects at E12.5 [19]. In addition, signaling via Fgfr1, but not Fgfr3, was shown to be required for growth of midline progenitor cell types at E14.5-E16.5 and formation of commissural axon tracts [20,21]. In vitro assays have shown that Fgfr3 responds highly to Fgf8/17, and to Fgf2 [15,22]. Fgfr3 is expressed in progenitor cells in the neuroepithelium from E9.5 and in the cortical VZ/SVZ throughout neurogenesis in mice [23], but is not expressed in postmitotic cortical plate neurons. Interestingly, Fgfr3 is expressed in a rostromedial-low, caudolateral-high gradient in the cortical primordium during E11.5-E13.5 [7,24-26]. Fgfr3 knockout mice show skeletal overgrowth and deafness owing to inner ear defects, indicating the role of Fgfr3 in skeletal growth and hearing [27]. However, the role of Fgfr3 in brain development has been uncertain. In particular, Fgfr3 was reported to have no definite role in cortical patterning [28]. Also, deletion of Fgfr3 did not aggravate the effects of either Fgfr1 or Fgfr2 deletion in the dorsal cortex and the midline [19,20]. However, the expected redundancy of Fgfr activities, and possible subtleties in the Fgfr3-/-brain phenotype, could mask Fgfr3 functions in cortical development. A different perspective on the role of Fgfr3 in brain development has emerged from gain-of-function models. We previously showed that mice expressing a constitutively active mutant Fgfr3 allele displayed an enlarged cerebral cortex with increased cortical thickness and total cell number, mostly due to increased progenitor proliferation [26,29]. Furthermore, the increase in progenitor proliferation in the cortical VZ was graded along the rostrocaudal axis, with the highest effect in caudal region during the early stages of neurogenesis at E11-E13 [26]. Downstream activation of MAPK in E11.5 temporal cortex was largely responsible for this effect. These conditional knock-in mouse models carry mutations substituting the amino acid Lys644 to glutamic acid (K644E) and to methionine (K644M) [30,31]. The mutant allele is knocked-in to the endogenous Fgfr3 locus, allowing expression of the mutant allele in a fashion reflecting normal Fgfr3 expression domains and levels. K644 mutations highly activate Fgfr3 signaling in terms of kinase activity and autophosphorylation in vitro [31-33]. BaF3, mouse pro-B cell line expressing Fgfr3 with this mutation, shows a mitogenic response both in the absence of ligand (approximately 25% of full response) and in a concentration-dependent manner (an increasing response by a further addition of ligand) with an overall 2- to 10-fold increase of response compared to control [32]. The corresponding kinase-domain mutations in human FGFR3 are known to cause a severe and fatal form of achondroplasia, known as thanatophoric dysplasia (TD; OMIM#187601). The cerebral neocortex in TD is markedly enlarged (megalencephaly) and excessively convoluted, especially in temporal and occipital lobes, where sulcation begins prematurely [34]. In addition, TD brains show severe hippocampal dysplasia with rudimentary dentate gyrus, as well as numerous abnormalities of the brainstem and cerebellum [34]. Therefore, the study of Fgfr3 function presents a unique opportunity whereby its biological significance in cerebral cortical development can be directly compared in mice and humans. In the present study, we hypothesized that Fgfr3 may play a role in formation of cortical areas by regulating patterning in addition to progenitor proliferation and focused to analyze cortical area formation and changes in cell cycle parameters. We found that mice carrying biochemically activating mutations in Fgfr3 presented a massive enlargement of the caudolateral cortex surface area in early postnatal stage, with relatively little change in the rostral cortex. The expression of transcription factors remained mostly normal, indicating that patterning of the cortex is influenced little by Fgfr3 activation. In contrast, cumulative bromodeoxyuridine (BrdU) labeling revealed that the length of the G1 phase (TG1) was 1.7 hours shorter in progenitors of the caudal mutant VZ compared to the wild type at E12.5. Therefore, the expansion of caudal cortex surface area likely reflected excessive proliferation of radial glia at early stages of neurogenesis. Finally, cortical thickness was increased in caudal areas of the Fgfr3 mutant mice, which may be explained by a significant increase of intermediate neuronal progenitors at late stages (E18.5), indicating a prolongation of neurogenesis. In summary, this study reveals a unique perturbation of cortical area formation with selective expansion of the caudal cortex surface area, caused by alteration of Fgf signaling along the Fgfr3 gradient. Results Selective expansion of caudolateral cortical areas in the Fgfr3 mutant mice We first addressed whether the change in Fgf signaling along the graded expression of Fgfr3 could influence formation of cortical areas, using mouse models with the gain-of-function, kinase domain mutations targeted in the Fgfr3 gene locus [30,31]. These mice were originally generated to represent the severe skeletal dysplasia. Early lethality associated with the disease needed to be prevented in order to successfully propagate the animal model. It is known that the presence of an exogenous fragment in the Fgfr3 locus suppresses transcription of the Fgfr3 allele [35]. Taking advantage of this, we designed the homologous recombination so that the neo gene flanked by the loxP sequences was inserted in intron 10 located near exon 15 containing the mutation site (Fgfr3+/K644Eneo). Upon crosses with mice that express Cre recombinase, the neo gene is removed and the allele with Fgfr3 mutation is transcribed (for example, EIIa-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E) [30,31]. Formation of the cortical areas can be detected by analyzing the projection of thalamocortical axons to the cortex at postnatal week 1 in mice [4]. Ubiquitous expression of the K644E mutation heterozygously (EIIa-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E) leads to lethality within postnatal day 1 (P1), possibly owing to the skeletal phenotype [30], and is unsuitable for postnatal analysis of cortical areas. We therefore tested the survival of mice with K644E and K644M mutations [31] by crossing with Nestin- and Foxg1-Cre mice, which allows expression of Cre recombinase preferentially in the brain. Nestin-Cre [36] drives recombination in the central nervous system starting from E11. In contrast, Foxg1-Cre [37] allows recombination starting from E8.5 in more limited regions, mainly in the forebrain, although some other regions such as facial and head ectoderm, mid-hindbrain junction, and pharyngeal pouches are also shown to express Cre recombinase. As the axonal growth from the diencephalon would affect development of the neocortex, use of Foxg1-Cre is advantageous. The result of the crosses showed that, despite the lack of skeletal abnormalities, the Foxg1-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E offspring died within P1 (n > 8) from unknown causes. In contrast, Nestin-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E and Foxg1-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644M offspring survived for more than 3 weeks (n > 10 each genotype). We therefore analyzed area formation using these lines. Cortical area formation was analyzed in early postnatal mice by immunohistochemistry for the serotonin transport protein 5-hydroxy-tryptamine (5-HTT), which detects thalamocortical axon terminals, as well as cytochrome C oxidase histochemistry, which visualizes the high cellular metabolism associated with synaptic activities [6,38,39]. Areas including the primary somatosensory (S1) and auditory (A1) areas were successfully visualized in Nestin-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E (Figure 1a, b
The position of S1 appeared to be rostrally shifted (relative to the rostral and caudal poles) in Nestin-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E in comparison to wild-type littermates due to surface area expansion, which was particularly obvious in caudal regions (Figure 1a, b
Taken together, in the presence of the Fgfr3 kinase domain mutation, the surface area of the caudal and lateral cortex was particularly enlarged, while that of the rostral and medial areas showed little change, leading to an overall appearance of relative 'shifts' in rostral and medial directions towards the domain of less Fgfr3 expression. Cortical patterning was unchanged in the Fgfr3 mutant cortex Positioning of cortical areas along the rostrocaudal and lateromedial axes is initially determined by patterning processes occurring early in cortical development. We next studied whether activation of Fgfr3 perturbs the expression of Fgf8 in the rostral signaling center at the initial patterning stage (E9.5) and those of cortical transcription factor gradients formed at E11.5-E13.5. For the analysis of embryonic brains, we used a model in which the Fgfr3 mutation is ubiquitously expressed (Ella-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E) [26,29]. Use of EIIa-Cre is advantageous as, under the cross with this line, a ubiquitous promoter, EIIa, drives Cre recombination from the one-cell zygote stage. In the conditional knock-in line, expression of the mutant Fgfr3 allele remains under the transcriptional regulation of the endogenous Fgfr3 promoter, and as such its expression faithfully reflects the spaciotemporal expression of the endogenous Fgfr3 in Ella-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E. Whole mount in situ hybridization showed no obvious differences in the expression domain or levels of Fgf8 in wild type and Ella-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E at E9.5 (n > 6; Figure 3a–d
An interesting change was observed in the expression of a cortical hem marker, Wnt2b [41]. Unlike in wild-type embryos, Wnt2b expression did not extend to the most caudal region of the cortical primordium in EIIa-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E (Figure 3g, h Shorter cell cycle length in the caudal Fgfr3 mutant cortex at E12.5 We have previously demonstrated the role of Fgfr3 in controlling progenitor numbers during cortical development [26,29]. In this context, we predicted that the cortical area phenotype described above might be associated with changes in cell cycle parameters along the Fgfr3 expression gradient. We therefore analyzed cell cycle kinetics in the EIIa-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E cortical primordium at the onset of neurogenesis in rostral and caudal regions using the established method [42] (Figure 4a, b
We performed cumulative BrdU labeling over a total period of 11 hours, at 8 time points with intervals of 1.5 hours. The labeling index (LI) was then plotted at each time point after initial BrdU injection (Figure 4c, d
The average Tc of neuroepithelial cells is known to increase as development proceeds, mainly due to lengthening of TG1[43]. We further examined the individual length of G1, G2 and M phase (TG1, TG2, and TM, respectively) in the caudal region, where a change in Tc was observed. Three embryos were used for each genotype. With cumulative injections of BrdU, we first determined the combined length of G2 and M phases (TG2+M) based on the time taken to label all cells in the M phase (mitotic cells). TG2+M is known to be relatively constant and estimated to be around 2.0 hours [43]. We therefore performed single injections of BrdU for 1.5 and 2.0 hours, and then measured the percentage of phospho-histone H3+ (pHH3+) mitotic cells that were also labeled with BrdU. At 2 hours after BrdU injection, all mitotic cells were BrdU+ in both wild type and EIIa-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E (n = 3). The mitotic index (MI) was similar in wild type and EIIa-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E along the rostrocaudal axis (rostral, 0.061 ± 0.022 and 0.054 ± 0.016, respectively; caudal, 0.060 ± 0.019 and 0.074 ± 0.013, respectively; n = 6; not significant). Both TM and TG2 were also similar in wild type and EIIa-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E (Table 3). Finally, TG1 was shown to be 1.67 hours (1 hour 40 minutes) shorter in EIIa-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E caudal cortex progenitors compared to wild type. Therefore, the shorter Tc observed in the caudal region of the EIIa-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E cortical primordium was attributed to a reduction of TG1. Cell cycle exit in the Fgfr3 mutant cortex was similar at E13.5 In contrast, there were no significant changes in cell cycle exit in the EIIa-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E cortical primordium at E13.5 (Figure (Figure5).5
Prolonged neurogenesis in the caudal Fgfr3 mutant cortex The vast majority of cortical neurons is generated during 11 cell cycles between E11 and E18 in mice [43,44]. The shorter Tc and TG1 described above could result in completion of progenitor proliferation at an earlier stage, or might lead to additional cell cycles within the neurogenic phase during E11-E18. To distinguish between these possibilities, we analyzed the incorporation of BrdU in cortical progenitors at the latest stage of neurogenesis, E18.5, a time point when cortical neurogenesis is coming to completion. Although fewer than at E11-E14 [26], significant numbers of proliferating progenitor cells were still evident within the dorsal VZ/SVZ in the wild-type cortex at E18.5 (Figure (Figure6d).6d
Increase of intermediate progenitor cells in the Fgfr3 mutant cortex The developing cortical VZ/SVZ contains two distinct populations of progenitors for glutamatergic projection neurons, known as radial glia and intermediate progenitor cells (IPCs) [45-47]. We next investigated how the two progenitor populations are differentially regulated in rostral and caudal regions of the EIIa-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E cortex, using markers specific for each population, namely Pax6 (radial glia) and Tbr2 (IPCs) [47] (Figure (Figure66 Whereas total proliferating cells in the VZ/SVZ were increased in EIIa-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E in the caudal region (Figure (Figure6d),6d In summary, the results show that the total numbers of both proliferating progenitors and IPCs were increased in the caudal cortex of EIIa-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E mice, and that an increase in the proliferating IPC population was observed without a significant increase in the total progenitors in the rostral cortex of EIIa-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E. Increased thickness in the caudal Fgfr3 mutant cortex at E18.5 The radial unit hypothesis states that the surface area of the cortex is determined early in corticogenesis by the number of radial unit founder cells generated by symmetric progenitor divisions [1]. In contrast, cortical thickness is thought to be determined by the neurogenic output from each radial unit [1], with intermediate progenitors serving to amplify, and possibly regulate, neuronal output from radial units (the radial amplification hypothesis) [48]. Previously, we showed an enlargement of surface area in the EIIa-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E mutant cortical primordium compared to wild type that was visually apparent at E12.5 [29]. Based on the above theories and our previous observation, we predicted that cortical thickness should be increased in the EIIa-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E mutants due to greater production or proliferation of intermediate progenitor cells. We measured cortical thickness at early and late stages of neurogenesis. At E12.5, the cerebral wall consists mostly of the VZ with a small area of SVZ starting to appear, particularly in the lateral region, which is apparent with Tbr2 immunoreactivity [45,47]. There were no significant differences in cortical thickness between the wild type and EIIa-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E mutant at either the rostral or caudal level (data not shown), which is consistent with our previous report where thickness was measured at a medial level [29]. At E14.5, the presence of the SVZ is more apparent, with a concordant increase in Tbr2+ cells, and the cortical plate starts to emerge [45,47]. We have indeed shown previously that at E14.5, the cortical thickness was increased in the EIIa-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E mutant by 38.1% (medial level) [29]. In contrast, at E18.5, more distinct laminar structures emerge in the cortical plate, although they are not yet mature. An increase in cortical thickness in EIIa-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E compared to wild type was visually apparent at the caudal level, particularly that of the intermediate zone and the cortical plate (Figure 7c, d
Discussion In the present study, we demonstrate that genetic models with biochemically activating kinase-domain mutations in Fgfr3 (Nestin-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E and Foxg1-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644M) show a massive surface area expansion of the caudolateral cortex, which is highly correlated with the gradient of Fgfr3 expression in the VZ at early stages of neurogenesis (summary in Figure Figure8a).8a
Regulation of patterning by Fgfr3 The expression of the rostral signaling factor Fgf8 and protomap transcription factors, including Pax6, Emx2, and Coup-Tf1, showed no obvious changes in mice with kinase-domain mutations in Fgfr3 (EIIa-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E) at E9.5 and E11.5-E13.5, respectively (Figure (Figure3).3 Regulation of neurogenesis by Fgfr3 In our previous study, we used 1 hour BrdU incorporation as a measure of cell proliferation in the cortical VZ/SVZ in the EIIa-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E developing cortex at E11.5, E12.5 and E13.5 [26]. Graded BrdU incorporation was observed with the highest increase in the mutant cortex compared to wild type in the caudal region at E12.5 and E13.5. Although overall cell proliferation became less profound as development progressed [43], the magnitude of the proliferation increase in the mutant progenitor population compared to that of wild type became larger. In the current study, we addressed how cell cycle parameters, including cell cycle length and cell cycle exit, are regulated by Fgfr3 early in neurogenesis. We have shown that Fgfr3 activation in caudal regions of the developing forebrain reduces cell cycle duration (Figure (Figure44 In contrast, an increase in the progenitor subpopulation was observed at E18.5 at the very late stage of neurogenesis (Figure (Figure6).6 Increases in cortical thickness was observed specifically in the caudal region in EIIa-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E embryos (Figure (Figure7).7 The study indicates that Coup-Tf1 functions to increase overall neurogenesis by promoting cell cycle exit at early to mid-stages of neurognesis (E11.5 and E15.5) and that suppression of MAPK and activation of β-catenin signaling pathways are responsible for this effect [57]. Interestingly, the study also shows that Coup-Tf1 promotes Fgfr3 expression, making Fgfr3 an interesting downstream target and possibly an effecter of cortical patterning, translating the gradients of transcription factors into progenitor proliferation. However, at this moment this seems to be unlikely as we have shown in this and previous studies [29] that activation of Fgfr3 leads to an increase in cortical progenitor proliferation, little effect on cell cycle exit, and activation of the MAPK signaling pathway. Fgfr3 activation as a cause of human cortical malformation The current study implicates the importance of FGFR3 in the normal and pathological development of the cerebral cortex in humans. Occipitotemporal surface expansion and hippocampal dysplasia are two prominent characteristics of the cortical malformation in human TD, a disease caused by kinase-domain mutations in human FGFR3 corresponding to the models used in this study [34]. Mice do not normally form sulcus, which is a known limitation of the animal model. However, the selective surface area expansion in the caudal cortical area observed in the mouse model (Figures (Figures11 Further clarification of Fgfr3 functions in cerebral cortex development will depend on detailed analysis of the Fgfr3 knockout cortex. Results from characterization of cortical patterning in Fgfr3 knockout mice have not been conclusively reported so far [28]. In our hands, the Fgfr3 knockout mice [27] rarely survive beyond P1 in the C57/Bl6 background (data not shown). Further investigation of the Fgfr3 knockout phenotype, possibly in a more favorable genetic background, must be undertaken. Regulation of cortical area location and size by Fgf signaling We hypothesize that both patterning and progenitor proliferation are regulated by signaling from the multiple Fgf ligands, possibly utilizing the graded Fgfr3 activity and that of the other Fgf receptor members present in the cortex (Figure (Figure8b).8b In vitro assays showed that the Fgfr3IIIc isoform, the main alternative splicing isoform in the developing brain [58], is able to mediate signals from Fgf2, Fgf8, Fgf15, Fgf17, and Fgf18 with high affinity [15,22]; however, binding of Fgf7 produced very little signal [15]. It is theoretically possible that Fgfr3 could mediate the effects of Fgf2/8/15/17/18, depending on the ligand expression domains and its own expression, exerting its effect either in patterning and/or in progenitor proliferation. The results of this study, however, indicate that Fgfr3 is unlikely to mediate the rostral Fgf signals in patterning, but rather mediates the effect in progenitor proliferation in the caudal region. In contrast, the rostral Fgf signals are likely to be mediated by Fgfr1 and Fgfr2 [17,19]. The ligand that utilizes Fgfr3 in the caudal region remains unknown. Conclusion We demonstrate that activation of Fgfr3 selectively promotes growth of the caudolateral (occipitotemporal) cortex, similar to the cortical malformation observed in human TD. We provide evidence that activation of Fgfr3 alters caudal-specific cell proliferative properties, namely shortening of the cell cycle length and prolongation of neurogenesis, without altering cell cycle exit. Few changes were observed in early patterning events. Being expressed in a unique graded pattern at the outset of neurogenesis, Fgfr3, together with other Fgf receptor members, may regulate formation of cortical areas. Materials and methods Mice All procedures were performed in accordance with the Project Licence under Home Office Animal (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. Mice heterozygous with the Fgfr3 mutation and with one copy of the Cre gene, including EIIa-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E, Nestin-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E and Foxg1-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644M, were produced by crossing either Fgfr3+/K644Eneo [30] or Fgfr3+/K644Mneo [31] with EIIa-Cre [30], Nestin-Cre [36], or Foxg1-Cre [37], respectively. Fgfr3+/K644Eneo, Fgfr3+/K644Mneo, and Nestin-Cre colonies were maintained in C57BL/6. The backgrounds of EIIa-Cre and Foxg1-Cre were 129;FBV/N and 129Svj, respectively. Animals were genotyped using the K644 mutation site [30] and the presence of Cre. In all experiments, littermates with genotypes of +/+; Fgfr3+/+, +/cre; Fgfr3+/+, or +/+; Fgfr3+/K644E/Mneo, were used as controls. Analysis of the cortical area position Mice were perfused by 4% (w/v) paraformaldehyde in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS). After cryoprotection, cortices were flat-frozen using the weight of a microscopic slide. Tangential sections (50 μm) were subjected to immunohistochemistry with anti-mouse 5-hydroxy-tryptamine (5-HTT; 1:2000; Calbiochem, Nottingham, UK) [59] or cytochrome C oxidase histochemistry [38]. Sections were incubated in reaction mix containing 40 mg/ml sucrose, 0.15 mg/ml cytochrome C (C-2506; Sigma, Dorset, UK), 0.5 mg/ml DAB (D-3001, Sigma) in 0.1 M phosphate buffer, at 37°C for 3 hours to overnight. The measurement of the barrel location was performed by Image J (NIH). Cumulative BrdU labeling Average length of total cell cycle duration (Tc), length of the S phase (Ts), and growth fraction (GF) were determined according to published protocols [43,60,61]. Mice were time-mated and the day of the vaginal plug was counted as E0.5. At E12.5, mice were injected intraperitoneally with BrdU in PBS at 50 μg/g body weight. Subsequent injections were performed at a maximum interval of 3 hours, with a final BrdU injection 0.5 hour prior to termination. Embryos were collected at 8 survival points, 0.5, 2.0, 3.5, 5.0, 6.5, 8.0, 9.5 and 11.0 hours after the initial injection. Morphological landmarks based on plates 1 and 6 at E12.5 [62] were used to identify sections at the rostral and caudal levels, respectively. A 25 μm channel spanning the dorsal VZ was used for counting BrdU-labeled cells. The LI was calculated as the proportion of BrdU-labeled cells to total cells. A least-squares curve fit was generated in the graphs of LI versus survival time post-BrdU injection using a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet kindly provided by Professor Richard Nowakowski [42]. The GF was calculated as the maximum LI value attained over the experimental period. Tc and Ts were calculated using the following equations [61]: y-intercept = GF × Ts/Tc; Time to reach maximum LI = Tc - Ts. To determine the combined lengths of G2 and M (TG2+M) phases, a single-injection BrdU-labeling protocol was used [61]. TG2+M was calculated as the length taken to label all cells in the M phase (mitotic cells) with BrdU. Within each 100 μm channel in the dorsomedial cortex, the percentage of BrdU+pHH3+ cells was determined. MI was calculated by dividing the number of mitotic cells by the total number of cells within a 50 μm channel in the dorsomedial cortex. The duration of M phase (TM) was then calculated using the following equations: MI = Total number of mitotic cells/Total number of cells; TM = Tc × MI. TG2 and TG1 were calculated using the following equations: TG2 = (G2 + M) - TM; TG1 = Tc - Ts - (TG2+M). Immunohistochemistry Coronal sections (10 μm) were deparaffinised and rehydrated. Antigen retrieval was achieved by boiling in 10 mM citrate buffer (pH 6.4) for 30 minutes. Endogenous peroxidase activity was quenched by 3% (v/v) hydrogen peroxide for 10 minutes. Blocking was in 10% normal goat serum in PBS. Incubation with the anti-BrdU antibody (B-44, 1:75; BD Biosciences, Oxford, UK) was performed overnight at 4°C. The secondary antibody was applied for 1 hour (mouse Immpress Kit, VectorLabs, Peterborough, UK). Immunoreactivity was detected by 3,3'-diaminobenzidine (DAB) and counterstained in haematoxylin Harris (Surgipath, Peterborough, UK). For mitotic index, pHH3 rabbit polyclonal antibody (1:200; Upstate, Millipore, Herts, UK) and rabbit secondary antibody (rabbit Immpress Kit, VectorLabs) was used. For double immunohistochemistry, sections were incubated in 2 mol/dm3 HCl for 1 hour at 37°C after antigen retrieval. Blocking solution was 10% (v/v) normal goat serum, 2% bovine albumin, 0.1% (v/v) Triton-X100 in PBS. Antibodies used were: anti-Tbr2 (rabbit polyclonal, 1:2000; Chemicon, Nottingham, UK); anti-Pax6 (rabbit polyclonal, 1:500; Covance, Cambridge BioScience, Cambridge, UK); anti-Ki67 (rabbit polyclonal, 1:1000; Novocastra, New Castle upon Tyne, UK); goat anti-mouse AlexaFluor 488, and goat-anti-rabbit AlexaFluor 594 (1:200; Invitrogen, Paisley, UK). Sections were mounted in VectaSield (VectorLabs) containing 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI). In situ hybridization Riboprobe templates were kindly provided by Drs Gail Martin (Fgf8), John Rubenstein (Coup-Tf1), David Price (Pax6), Shinichi Aizawa (Emx2), and Wnt2b (Thomas Theil). Embryos were fixed in 4% (w/v) paraformaldehyde/PBS overnight. Embryos were dehydrated and stored in methanol at -20°C until genotyped. Embryos were rehydrated in methanol/PBS with 0.1% (v/v) Tween-20 (PTW). Treatment with 10 μg/ml Proteinase K/PTW was performed at room temperature for exactly 5 (E9.5) or 15 minutes (E11.5 and E13.5) and the reaction was stopped by incubation in 4% (w/v) paraformaldehyde, 0.1% glutaraldehyde in PBS. Embryos pre-incubated in hybridization buffer (50% (v/v) deionized formamide, 5 × SSC, 0.8% (v/v) Tween-20, 50 μg/ml heparin, 1 mg/ml yeast tRNA, 5 mM EDTA, 0.1% (w/v) CHAPS, 2% (w/v) Blocking Reagent, Roche, Welwyn, UK) at 65°C for 1 hour. Riboprobes were diluted 1:300 in the hybridization buffer and denatured at 80°C for 10 minutes. Hybridization was performed at 65°C overnight. Embryos were washed with post-hybridization buffer (50% (v/v) formamide, 1 × SSC, 0.1% (v/v) Tween-20) at 65°C, then with Tris-buffered saline (TBS) with 0.1% (v/v) Tween-20 (TBST) at room temperature. Embryos were blocked in 2% (w/v) Blocking Reagent solution (Roche) with 20% (v/v) Sheep serum (S2263, Sigma) for 2 hours before incubation with anti-DIG antibody (1:1500; Roche) at 4°C overnight. After washes with TBST, color reaction was performed with Nitroblue tetrazolium (NBT) and 5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indolyl phosphate (BCIP) in NTMT (100 mM Tris, pH 9, 100 mM NaCl, 50 mM MgCl2, 1% (v/v) Tween-20). Cortical thickness Comparable regions of EIIa-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E and wild type littermates were selected using morphological landmarks consistent with plates 4 and 12 at E18.5 [62]. Using Image J, five lines were drawn from the ventricular to the basal surface and an average was calculated from the length measured. Three embryos were used per genotype. Statistics Student's t-test was performed to test the significance of difference in numerical data for two-sample unequal variance with a two-tailed distribution. A standard deviation is used for presentation of data. Abbreviations BrdU: bromodeoxyuridine; E: embryonic day; Fgf: fibroblast growth factor; Fgfr: Fgf receptor; GF: growth fraction; IPC: intermediate progenitor cell; LI: labeling index; MI: mitotic index; P: postnatal day; PBS: phosphate-buffered saline; pHH3: phospho-histone H3; SVZ: subventricular zone; TD: thanatophoric dysplasia; VZ: ventricular zone. Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Authors' contributions RET designed, performed and analyzed experiments for cell cycle parameters, proliferative phase and cortical thickness. MLE and ACF helped with these experiments. PCK, NAG, JK, CSM performed cortical area analysis. RFH helped with the interpretation of results and writing of the final draft. TI coordinated the project, designed and performed the experiments, analyzed and interpreted the results and wrote the paper. All authors approved the manuscript. Additional file 1 Increase of proliferating intermediate progenitor cells in the EIIa-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E cortex at E18.5. (a-d) Time-mated females were injected with bromodeoxyuridine (BrdU) for 1 hour prior to termination at E18.5. Immunohistochemistry for Tbr2 (red) and BrdU (green) were used to identify proliferating intermediate progenitor cells (IPCs) in wild-type (a, c) and EIIa-Cre;Fgfr3+/K644E cortex (b, d) in the rostral (a, b) and caudal regions (c, d). Scale bar: 32 μm. Click here for file(985K, pdf) Acknowledgements We thank Drs David Price, Kate Storey, colleagues and core facility staff of the Beatson Institute for Cancer Research for their continuous support and encouragement. This work was supported by grants BBS/B08736 from the Biotechnology and Biological Science Research Council and Neurosciences Foundation, Glasgow, UK, and the start-up fund from University of Glasgow. References
|
PubMed related articles
Your browsing activity is empty. Activity recording is turned off. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Science. 1988 Jul 8; 241(4862):170-6.
[Science. 1988]Science. 2005 Nov 4; 310(5749):805-10.
[Science. 2005]Neuron. 2007 Oct 25; 56(2):252-69.
[Neuron. 2007]Nat Rev Neurosci. 2007 Aug; 8(8):583-96.
[Nat Rev Neurosci. 2007]Science. 2001 Nov 2; 294(5544):1071-4.
[Science. 2001]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 May 1; 104(18):7652-7.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007]Development. 2003 May; 130(9):1903-14.
[Development. 2003]Development. 2006 May; 133(9):1831-44.
[Development. 2006]Cell. 2000 Oct 13; 103(2):211-25.
[Cell. 2000]J Biol Chem. 2006 Jun 9; 281(23):15694-700.
[J Biol Chem. 2006]J Neurosci. 2004 Mar 3; 24(9):2247-58.
[J Neurosci. 2004]Development. 2003 Mar; 130(6):1101-11.
[Development. 2003]Development. 2005 Sep; 132(17):3947-61.
[Development. 2005]J Biol Chem. 2006 Jun 9; 281(23):15694-700.
[J Biol Chem. 2006]J Biol Chem. 1996 Jun 21; 271(25):15292-7.
[J Biol Chem. 1996]Dev Biol. 1993 Feb; 155(2):423-30.
[Dev Biol. 1993]Development. 2003 May; 130(9):1903-14.
[Development. 2003]Nat Neurosci. 2003 Aug; 6(8):825-31.
[Nat Neurosci. 2003]J Neurochem. 2007 Mar; 100(6):1565-78.
[J Neurochem. 2007]Dev Biol. 2005 Mar 1; 279(1):73-85.
[Dev Biol. 2005]Hum Mol Genet. 2000 Jul 1; 9(11):1603-13.
[Hum Mol Genet. 2000]Hum Mol Genet. 2001 Jun 1; 10(12):1255-64.
[Hum Mol Genet. 2001]EMBO J. 1996 Feb 1; 15(3):520-7.
[EMBO J. 1996]Acta Neuropathol. 2005 Sep; 110(3):208-21.
[Acta Neuropathol. 2005]Hum Mol Genet. 2000 Jul 1; 9(11):1603-13.
[Hum Mol Genet. 2000]Hum Mol Genet. 2001 Jun 1; 10(12):1255-64.
[Hum Mol Genet. 2001]Hum Mol Genet. 1999 Jan; 8(1):35-44.
[Hum Mol Genet. 1999]Neuron. 2007 Oct 25; 56(2):252-69.
[Neuron. 2007]Hum Mol Genet. 2000 Jul 1; 9(11):1603-13.
[Hum Mol Genet. 2000]Hum Mol Genet. 2001 Jun 1; 10(12):1255-64.
[Hum Mol Genet. 2001]Nat Genet. 1999 Sep; 23(1):99-103.
[Nat Genet. 1999]Dev Biol. 2000 Jun 15; 222(2):296-306.
[Dev Biol. 2000]Science. 2001 Nov 2; 294(5544):1071-4.
[Science. 2001]Brain Res. 1979 Jul 27; 171(1):11-28.
[Brain Res. 1979]Neuron. 2004 Aug 5; 43(3):359-72.
[Neuron. 2004]Neuron. 2004 Aug 5; 43(3):359-72.
[Neuron. 2004]Development. 2007 Feb; 134(3):545-55.
[Development. 2007]J Neurochem. 2007 Mar; 100(6):1565-78.
[J Neurochem. 2007]Dev Biol. 2005 Mar 1; 279(1):73-85.
[Dev Biol. 2005]J Neurochem. 2007 Mar; 100(6):1565-78.
[J Neurochem. 2007]Development. 2004 Nov; 131(22):5639-47.
[Development. 2004]J Neurochem. 2007 Mar; 100(6):1565-78.
[J Neurochem. 2007]Dev Biol. 2005 Mar 1; 279(1):73-85.
[Dev Biol. 2005]J Neurocytol. 1989 Jun; 18(3):311-8.
[J Neurocytol. 1989]J Neurosci. 1995 Sep; 15(9):6046-57.
[J Neurosci. 1995]J Neurosci. 1995 Sep; 15(9):6046-57.
[J Neurosci. 1995]J Neurosci. 1995 Sep; 15(9):6046-57.
[J Neurosci. 1995]J Neurosci. 1995 Sep; 15(9):6046-57.
[J Neurosci. 1995]Trends Neurosci. 1995 Sep; 18(9):379-83.
[Trends Neurosci. 1995]J Neurochem. 2007 Mar; 100(6):1565-78.
[J Neurochem. 2007]J Neurosci. 1995 Sep; 15(9):6058-68.
[J Neurosci. 1995]J Neurosci. 2005 Jan 5; 25(1):247-51.
[J Neurosci. 2005]Science. 1988 Jul 8; 241(4862):170-6.
[Science. 1988]Dev Neurosci. 2008; 30(1-3):24-32.
[Dev Neurosci. 2008]Dev Biol. 2005 Mar 1; 279(1):73-85.
[Dev Biol. 2005]J Neurosci. 1995 Sep; 15(9):6058-68.
[J Neurosci. 1995]J Neurosci. 2005 Jan 5; 25(1):247-51.
[J Neurosci. 2005]Dev Biol. 2005 Mar 1; 279(1):73-85.
[Dev Biol. 2005]Science. 2001 Nov 2; 294(5544):1071-4.
[Science. 2001]Development. 2003 Mar; 130(6):1101-11.
[Development. 2003]Nat Neurosci. 2003 Aug; 6(8):825-31.
[Nat Neurosci. 2003]Development. 2004 Nov; 131(22):5639-47.
[Development. 2004]Development. 2003 May; 130(9):1903-14.
[Development. 2003]Development. 2006 May; 133(9):1831-44.
[Development. 2006]J Neurochem. 2007 Mar; 100(6):1565-78.
[J Neurochem. 2007]J Neurosci. 1995 Sep; 15(9):6046-57.
[J Neurosci. 1995]J Neurosci. 2005 Jul 13; 25(28):6533-8.
[J Neurosci. 2005]J Neurosci. 1995 Sep; 15(9):6058-68.
[J Neurosci. 1995]J Neurosci. 2005 Jan 5; 25(1):247-51.
[J Neurosci. 2005]Neurosci Res. 2006 Jul; 55(3):223-33.
[Neurosci Res. 2006]J Neurosci Res. 1994 Mar 1; 37(4):445-52.
[J Neurosci Res. 1994]Development. 2003 Jan; 130(1):93-102.
[Development. 2003]Science. 1991 Oct 11; 254(5029):282-5.
[Science. 1991]Nat Rev Neurosci. 2007 Jun; 8(6):427-37.
[Nat Rev Neurosci. 2007]Cereb Cortex. 2008 Sep; 18(9):2117-31.
[Cereb Cortex. 2008]Dev Biol. 2005 Mar 1; 279(1):73-85.
[Dev Biol. 2005]Acta Neuropathol. 2005 Sep; 110(3):208-21.
[Acta Neuropathol. 2005]Annu Rev Neurosci. 2003; 26():355-80.
[Annu Rev Neurosci. 2003]Nat Genet. 1996 Apr; 12(4):390-7.
[Nat Genet. 1996]Neuron. 2007 Oct 25; 56(2):252-69.
[Neuron. 2007]Development. 2003 Mar; 130(6):1101-11.
[Development. 2003]Int J Dev Biol. 1996 Dec; 40(6):1185-8.
[Int J Dev Biol. 1996]J Biol Chem. 2006 Jun 9; 281(23):15694-700.
[J Biol Chem. 2006]J Biol Chem. 1996 Jun 21; 271(25):15292-7.
[J Biol Chem. 1996]Development. 2003 Mar; 130(6):1101-11.
[Development. 2003]Development. 2006 Aug; 133(15):2937-46.
[Development. 2006]Hum Mol Genet. 2000 Jul 1; 9(11):1603-13.
[Hum Mol Genet. 2000]Hum Mol Genet. 2001 Jun 1; 10(12):1255-64.
[Hum Mol Genet. 2001]Nat Genet. 1999 Sep; 23(1):99-103.
[Nat Genet. 1999]Dev Biol. 2000 Jun 15; 222(2):296-306.
[Dev Biol. 2000]J Neurosci. 2006 Feb 1; 26(5):1355-65.
[J Neurosci. 2006]Brain Res. 1979 Jul 27; 171(1):11-28.
[Brain Res. 1979]J Neurosci. 1995 Sep; 15(9):6046-57.
[J Neurosci. 1995]J Neurocytol. 1992 Mar; 21(3):185-97.
[J Neurocytol. 1992]J Neurosci. 1993 Feb; 13(2):820-33.
[J Neurosci. 1993]J Neurocytol. 1989 Jun; 18(3):311-8.
[J Neurocytol. 1989]J Neurosci. 1993 Feb; 13(2):820-33.
[J Neurosci. 1993]