4.2 Article

Beyond laminar fate: Toward a molecular classification of cortical projection/pyramidal neurons

Journal

DEVELOPMENTAL NEUROSCIENCE
Volume 25, Issue 2-4, Pages 139-151

Publisher

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000072263

Keywords

corticogenesis; cell fate; reeler; golli-lacZ; Tbr1; Er81; Otx1; Brn2; bromodeoxyuridine; cholera toxin B

Funding

  1. NINDS NIH HHS [NS01937] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cortical projection neurons exhibit diverse morphological, physiological, and molecular phenotypes, but it is unknown how many distinct types exist. Many projection cell phenotypes are associated with laminar fate (radial position), but each layer may also contain multiple types of projection cells. We have investigated two hypotheses: (1) that different projection cell types exhibit characteristic molecular expression profiles and (2) that laminar fates are determined primarily by molecular phenotype. We found that several transcription factors were differentially expressed by projection neurons, even within the same layer: Otx1 and Er81, for example, were expressed by different neurons in layer 5. Retrograde tracing showed that Er81 was expressed in corticospinal and corticocortical neurons. In contrast, Otx1 has been detected only in corticobulbar neurons [Weimann et al., Neuron 1999;24:819-831]. Birthdating demonstrated that different molecularly defined types were produced sequentially, in overlapping waves. Cells adopted laminar fates characteristic of their molecular phenotypes, regardless of cell birthday. Molecular markers also revealed the locations of different projection cell types in the malformed cortex of reeler mice. These studies suggest that molecular profiles can be used advantageously for classifying cortical projection cells, for analyzing their neurogenesis and fate specification, and for evaluating cortical malformations. Copyright (C) 2003 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available