4.8 Article

c-kit+ precursors support postinfarction myogenesis in the neonatal, but not adult, heart

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1208114109

关键词

heart repair; stem cell; vasculogenesis; angiogenesis

资金

  1. Empire State Stem Cell Board, New York State Department of Health [123456]
  2. National Institutes of Health [DK065992, DK072277]
  3. NYSTEM [C023050]
  4. European Union [223372]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We examined the myogenic response to infarction in neonatal and adult mice to determine the role of c-kit(+) cardiovascular precursor cells (CPC) that are known to be present in early heart development. Infarction of postnatal day 1-3 c-kit(BAC)-EGFP mouse hearts induced the localized expansion of (c-kit)EGFP(+) cells within the infarct, expression of the c-kit and Nkx2.5 mRNA, myogenesis, and partial regeneration of the infarction, with (c-kit)EGFP(+) cells adopting myogenic and vascular fates. Conversely, infarction of adult mice resulted in a modest induction of (c-kit)EGFP(+) cells within the infarct, which did not express Nkx2.5 or undergo myogenic differentiation, but adopted a vascular fate within the infarction, indicating a lack of authentic CPC. Explantation of infarcted neonatal and adult heart tissue to scid mice, and adoptive transfer of labeled bone marrow, confirmed the cardiac source of myogenic (neonate) and angiogenic (neonate and adult) cells. FACS-purified (c-kit)EGFP(+)/(alpha MHC)mCherry(-) (noncardiac) cells from microdissected infarcts within 6 h of infarction underwent cardiac differentiation, forming spontaneously beating myocytes in vitro; cre/LoxP fate mapping identified a noncardiac population of (c-kit)EGFP(+) myocytes within infarctions, indicating that the induction of undifferentiated precursors contributes to localized myogenesis. Thus, adult postinfarct myogenic failure is likely not due to a context-dependent restriction of precursor differentiation, and c-kit induction following injury of the adult heart does not define precursor status.

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

4.8
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