4.6 Article

Ameloblastin and amelogenin share a common secretory pathway and are co-secreted during enamel formation

Journal

MATRIX BIOLOGY
Volume 27, Issue 4, Pages 352-359

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.matbio.2008.01.003

Keywords

enamel matrix; ameloblastin; amelogenin; secretory granule; brefeldin A; dual immunolabeling

Funding

  1. CIHR [64178-1] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The epithelially-derived ameloblasts secrete two main categories of extracellular matrix proteins, amelogenins (AMEL) and nonamelogenins. These proteins assume differential distributions in the forming enamel layer and thereby regulate deposition and structuring of the mineral phase. The objective of this study was to elucidate whether their distribution results from distinctive physicochemical behaviors or differences in intracellular routing. Dual-immunogold labeling was used to visualize the presence of AMEL and ameloblastin (AMBN), the major nonamelogenin, and quantify the proportion of secretory granules containing one or both of these proteins in ameloblasts during the phase of appositional growth of the enamel layer in continuously-erupting rat incisors. Some rats were treated with brefeldin A (BFA) to generate a synchronized cohort of newly-formed secretory granules. The results show that nearly 70% of granules contain both AMEL and AMBN, 13% label only for AMBN and 1% only for AMEL. These proportions reach 98% (AMEL + AMBN) and 2% (AMBN only) following BFA treatment. The observation that AMEL is almost always packaged with AMBN suggests a functional association between these two proteins. The subpopulation of granules containing only AMBN could be responsible for augmenting its local concentration along secretory surfaces against which hydroxyapatite crystals actively elongate. (c) 2008 Elsevier B.V./lnternational Society of Matrix Biology. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available