4.8 Article

Onecut1 and Onecut2 redundantly regulate early retinal cell fates during development

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1405354111

关键词

transcription factors; neural development; retinal development; cell fate determination; gene regulation

资金

  1. National Eye Institute [EY020545, EY007361]
  2. Whitehall Foundation
  3. State University of New York/Research Foundation
  4. Research to Prevent Blindness

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Previously, we have shown that Onecut1 (Oc1) and Onecut2 (Oc2) are expressed in retinal progenitor cells, developing retinal ganglion cells (RGCs), and horizontal cells (HCs). However, in Oc1-null mice, we only observed an 80% reduction in HCs, but no defects in other cell types. We postulated that the lack of defects in other cell types in Oc1-null retinas was a result of redundancy with Oc2. To test this theory, we have generated Oc2-null mice and now show that their retinas also only have defects in HCs, with a 50% reduction in their numbers. However, when both Oc1 and Oc2 are knocked out, the retinas exhibit more profound defects in the development of all early retinal cell types, including completely failed genesis of HCs, compromised generation of cones, reduced production (by 30%) of RGCs, and absence of starburst amacrine cells. Cone subtype diversification and RGC subtype composition also were affected in the double-null retina. Using RNA-Seq expression profiling, we have identified downstream genes of Oc1 and Oc2, which not only confirms the redundancy between the two factors and renders a molecular explanation for the defects in the double-null retinas, but also shows that the onecut factors suppress the production of the late cell type, rods, indicating that the two factors contribute to the competence of retinal progenitor cells for the early retinal cell fates. Our results provide insight into how onecut factors regulate the creation of cellular diversity in the retina and, by extension, in the central nervous system in general.

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