4.3 Article

A gene trap mutation of a murine homolog of the Drosophila stem cell factor Pumilio results in smaller testes but does not affect litter size. or fertility

期刊

MOLECULAR REPRODUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT
卷 74, 期 7, 页码 912-921

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/mrd.20687

关键词

Pumilio; PUF; germline stem cell; RNA-binding protein; male fertility; smaller testis; germ cell; spermatogonial cells; Dazl

资金

  1. NICHD NIH HHS [U01 HD045871] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Members of the Pumilio (also called PUF) gene family belong to a class of highly conserved developmental regulators that are present in both flies and humans. Much is known about the function of Pumilio genes in invertebrate development, in particular their role as stem cell factors required for maintenance and/or self-renewal of germline stem cells in Drosophila and Caenorhabditis elegans. It remains unknown whether Pumilio genes are also required for development in mammals; however, several lines of evidence suggest similar functions based on extensive sequence homology, similar RNA-binding properties to their invertebrate counterparts and well-documented interactions with germ cell factors required for fertility. Here we report characterization of a gene trap mutation that disrupts the mouse Pumilio-2 (Pum2) gene. Our data confirm that Pumilio-2 is expressed most abundantly in germ cells with the highest expression in undifferentiated gonocytes and spermatogonia. Furthermore, the mutation in Pum2 results in significantly smaller testes although the mutants are otherwise viable and fertile. In addition, we observed no stronger reproductive defects on a genetic background homozygous for a Pum2 null mutation and heterozygous for a Dazl mutation than Pum2 mutant alone. Thus, as in C. elegans where single members of the Pumilio gene family are dispensable for reproductive development and viability, this individual member of the Pumilio gene family in mice is also not essential for reproduction or viability.

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

4.3
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