4.7 Article

Tenascin-C Is an Inhibitory Boundary Molecule in the Developing Olfactory Bulb

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE
卷 29, 期 30, 页码 9405-9416

出版社

SOC NEUROSCIENCE
DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2356-09.2009

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health (NIH) [DC005706, DC007600, DC00210]
  2. Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  3. NIH-National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
  4. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We recently described the boundary-like expression pattern of the extracellular matrix molecule tenascin-C (Tnc) in the developing mouse olfactory bulb (OB) (Shay et al., 2008). In the present study, we test the hypothesis that Tnc inhibits olfactory sensory neuron (OSN) axon growth in the developing OB before glomerulogenesis. The period of time before glomerular formation begins, when axons remain restricted to the developing olfactory nerve layer (ONL), is crucial for axon sorting. Here, we show with in vitro analyses that OSN neurite outgrowth is inhibited by Tnc in a dose-dependent manner and that, in stripe assays, axons preferentially avoid Tnc. Using Tnc-null mice, we also show that that glomerular development is delayed in the absence of Tnc. In wild-type mice, OSN axons coalesce into immature or protoglomeruli, which further differentiate and segregate into glomeruli. Glomeruli are first identifiable as discrete structures at birth. In null mice, glomeruli appear immature at birth, remain fused to the ONL, and have a significantly larger diameter compared with wild-type controls. By postnatal day 4, null glomeruli are indistinguishable from controls. Thus, OSN axons appear delayed in their coalescence into glomerular structures. These data correlate with behavioral reports of Tnc-null mice, which are delayed by 24 h in their acquisition of an olfactory behavior (de Chevigny et al., 2006). Collectively, these data demonstrate that Tnc is an inhibitory boundary molecule in the developing OB during a key period of development.

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

4.7
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