4.6 Article

β1 integrin-mediated effects of tenascin-R domains EGFL and FN6-8 on neural stem/progenitor cell proliferation and differentiation in vitro

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 283, 期 41, 页码 27927-27936

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M804764200

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30670793]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Jiang Su Province [BK2006150]
  3. International Coorperation Projects of Jiang Su Province [BZ2006050]
  4. Pharmacodynamics Research and Evaluation Fund of Jiang Su Province
  5. Initial Fund of China Pharmaceutical University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Neural stem/progenitor cells (NSCs) have the capacity for self-renewal and differentiation into major classes of central nervous system cell types, such as neurons, astrocytes, and oligodendrocytes. The determination of fate of NSCs appears to be regulated by both intrinsic and extrinsic factors. Mounting evidence has shown that extracellular matrix molecules contribute to NSC proliferation and differentiation as extrinsic factors. Here we explore the effects of the epidermal growth factor-like (EGFL) and fibronectin type III homologous domains 6-8 (FN6-8) of the extracellular matrix molecule tenascin-R on NSC proliferation and differentiation. Our results show that domain FN6-8 inhibited NSC proliferation and promoted NSCs differentiation into astrocytes and less into oligodendrocytes or neurons. The EGFL domain did not affect NSC proliferation, but promoted NSC differentiation into neurons and reduced NSC differentiation into astrocytes and oligodendrocytes. Treatment of NSCs with beta 1 integrin function-blocking antibody resulted in attenuation of inhibition of the effect of FN6-8 on NSC proliferation. The influence of EGFL or FN6-8 on NSCs differentiation was inhibited by beta 1 integrin antibody application, implicating beta 1 integrin in proliferation and differentiation induced by EGFL and FN6-8 mediated triggering of NSCs.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据