4.5 Article

Fgf signaling regulates development and transdifferentiation of hair cells and supporting cells in the basilar papilla

Journal

HEARING RESEARCH
Volume 289, Issue 1-2, Pages 27-39

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2012.04.018

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institute on Deafness and other Communication Disorders
  2. [P30 CA23100]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The avian basilar papilla (BP) is a likely homolog of the auditory sensory epithelium of the mammalian cochlea, the organ of Corti. During mammalian development Fibroblast growth factor receptor-3 (Fgfr3) is known to regulate the differentiation of auditory mechanosensory hair cells (HCs) and supporting cells (SCs), both of which are required for sound detection. Fgfr3 is expressed in developing progenitor cells (PCs) and SCs of both the BP and the organ of Corti; however its role in BP development is unknown. Here we utilized an in vitro whole organ embryonic culture system to examine the role of Fgf signaling in the developing avian cochlea. SU5402 (an antagonist of Fgf signaling) was applied to developing BP cultures at different stages to assay the role of Fgf signaling during HC formation. Similar to the observed effects of inhibition of Fgfr3 in the mammalian cochlea, Fgfr inhibition in the developing BP increased the number of HCs that formed. This increase was not associated with increased proliferation, suggesting that inhibition of the Fgf pathway leads to the direct conversion of PCs or supporting cells into HCs, a process known as transdifferentiation. This also implies that Fgf signaling is required to prevent the conversion of PCs and SCs into HCs. The ability of Fgf signaling to inhibit transdifferentiation suggests that its down-regulation may be essential for the initial steps of HC formation, as well as for the maintenance of SC phenotypes. (C) 2012 Published by Elsevier B.V.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available