4.7 Article

CCAAT/enhancer-binding protein phosphorylation biases cortical precursors to generate neurons rather than astrocytes in vivo

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE
卷 25, 期 46, 页码 10747-10758

出版社

SOC NEUROSCIENCE
DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2662-05.2005

关键词

neural stem cells; MEK; in utero electroporation; neurogenesis; gliogenesis; cortical development; ERK; transcription factors

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The intracellular mechanisms that bias mammalian neural precursors to generate neurons versus glial cells are not well understood. We demonstrated previously that the growth factor-regulated mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase (MEK) and its downstream target, the CCAAT/enhancer-binding protein (C/EBP) family of transcription factors, are essential for neurogenesis in cultured cortical precursor cells (Menard et al., 2002). Here, we examined a role for this pathway during cortical cell fate determination in vivo using in utero electroporation of the embryonic cortex. These studies demonstrate that inhibition of the activity of either MEK or the C/EBPs inhibits the genesis of neurons in vivo. Moreover, the MEK pathway mediates phosphorylation of C/EBP beta in cortical precursors, and expression of a C/EBP beta construct in which the MEK pathway phosphorylation sites are mutated inhibits neurogenesis. Conversely, expression of a C/EBP beta construct, in which the same sites are mutated to glutamate and therefore are constitutively phosphorylated, enhances neurogenesis in the early embryonic cortex. A subpopulation of precursors in which C/EBP activity is inhibited are maintained as cycling precursors in the ventricular/subventricular zone of the cortex until early in postnatal life, when they have an enhanced propensity to generate astrocytes, presumably in response to gliogenic signals in the neonatal environment. Thus, activation of an MEK-C/EBP pathway in cortical precursors in vivo biases them to become neurons and against becoming astrocytes, thereby acting as a growth factor-regulated switch.

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