4.5 Article

A distinct preisthmic histogenetic domain is defined by overlap of Otx2 and Pax2 gene expression in the avian caudal midbrain

期刊

JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE NEUROLOGY
卷 483, 期 1, 页码 17-29

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/cne.20402

关键词

isthmus; reticular formation; isthmic organizer; patterning; tectum; torus; chick

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Correlative in situ hybridization of Otx-9, Pax2, Gbx2. and Fgf8 mRNA probes in adjacent serial sections through the chicken midbrain and isthmus at early to intermediate Stages of development served to map in detail the area of overlap of Otx2 and Pax2 transcripts in the caudal midbrain. The neuronal populations developing within this preisthmic domain. made up a caudal part of the midbrain reticular formation, the inter-fascicular nucleus, and the magnocellular (pre)isthmic nucleus, plus the corresponding part of the periaqueductal gray. The torus semicircularis-the inferior colliculus homolog-expressed Otx2 in its ventricular lining exclusively, but it never expressed Pax2. The parvicellular isthmic nucleus. although placed inside the midbrain lobe, never expressed Otx2,. and its cells rapidly down-regulated an early transient Pax2 signal; this pattern is consistent with its reported isthmic origin and forward tangential translocation. This analysis reveals the existence of four distinct midbrain histogenetic domains along the longitudinal axis.. at least for the alar plate. These presumably result from step-like isthmic organizer effects on Otv-9-expressing midbrain neuroepithelium at different distances from a caudal FGF8 morphogen source (isthmic Fgf8-positive domain). The final phenotypes of these domains are histologically diverse and make up the griseum tectale (rostrally), the optic tectum, the torus semicircularis. and the presently characterized preisthmic domain (lying closest to the isthmic organizer). Available comparative data for reptiles and mammals suggest the general validity of this scheme. (C) 2005 Wiley-Liss. Inc.

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

4.5
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