4.7 Article

Sox2-CreER mice are useful for fate mapping of mature, but not neonatal, cochlear supporting cells in hair cell regeneration studies

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 5, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/srep11621

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [DC006471, 1R21DC013879, P30CA21765]
  2. American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities (ALSAC) of St. Jude Children's Research Hospital
  3. Office of Naval Research [N000140911014, N000141210191, N000141210775]
  4. National Organization for Hearing Research (NOHR) Foundation
  5. Hearing Health Foundation (Emerging Research Grant)
  6. Hartwell Foundation (Individual Biomedical Research Award)
  7. Medical Research Council [MR/N004299/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  8. MRC [MR/N004299/1] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Studies of hair cell regeneration in the postnatal cochlea rely on fate mapping of supporting cells. Here we characterized a Sox2-CreER knock-in mouse line with two independent reporter mouse strains at neonatal and mature ages. Regardless of induction age, reporter expression was robust, with CreER activity being readily detectable in >85% of supporting cells within the organ of Corti. When induced at postnatal day (P) 28, Sox2-CreER activity was exclusive to supporting cells demonstrating its utility for fate mapping studies beyond this age. However, when induced at P-1, Sox2-CreER activity was also detected in >50% of cochlear hair cells, suggesting that Sox2-CreER may not be useful to fate map a supporting cell origin of regenerated hair cells if induced at neonatal ages. Given that this model is currently in use by several investigators for fate mapping purposes, and may be adopted by others in the future, our finding that current protocols are effective for restricting CreER activity to supporting cells at mature but not neonatal ages is both significant and timely.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available