4.7 Article

Multiplex Genetic Fate Mapping Reveals a Novel Route of Neocortical Neurogenesis, Which Is Altered in the Ts65Dn Mouse Model of Down Syndrome

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE
卷 33, 期 12, 页码 5106-5119

出版社

SOC NEUROSCIENCE
DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5380-12.2013

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [NS051852, NS076503, HD057580]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

While several major classes of neocortical neural precursor cells have been identified, the lineal relationships and molecular profiles of these cells are still largely unknown. Furthermore, the individual contribution of each cell class to neocortical growth during normal development and in neurodevelopmental disorders has not been determined. Using a novel fate-mapping approach, we demonstrate that precursors in the embryonic ventricular (VZ) and subventricular zones (SVZ), which give rise to excitatory neurons, are divided into distinct subtypes based on lineage profile, morphology, and transcription factor expression in vivo. Using this technique, we show that short neural precursors are a unique class of VZ intermediate progenitors derived from radial glial cells and are distinct from the multipolar Tbr2((+)) intermediate progenitors, which divide in the SVZ. To test whether these multiple groups of intermediate progenitors are redundant or whether they are necessary for proper neocortical growth, we measured precursor cell diversity in the Ts65Dn mouse model of Down syndrome (DS), which exhibits reduced neurogenesis and postnatal microcephaly. We report that SNP generation is markedly reduced in the Ts65Dn VZ during mid-neurogenesis, indicating that faulty specification of this progenitor pool is a central component of the neocortical abnormality in DS. Together, these findings demonstrate that neocortical neurons are produced via multiple indirect routes during embryonic development and that these parallel streams of neurogenesis collectively contribute to the proper growth and development of the neocortex.

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