4.4 Article

Role of fibroblast growth factor receptors 1 and 2 in the ureteric bud

期刊

DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY
卷 276, 期 2, 页码 403-415

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ydbio.2004.09.002

关键词

fibroblast growth factor receptors; kidney development; ureteric bud; branching morphogenesis; stromal patterning; conditional knockout

资金

  1. NICHD NIH HHS [5 P30 HD34615-02] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIDDK NIH HHS [R01 DK041612, DK-41612] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fibroblast growth receptors (FGFRs) consist of four signaling family members. Mice with deletions of fgfr1 or fgfr2 are embryonic lethal prior to the onset of kidney development. To determine roles of FGFR1 and FGFR2 in the ureteric bud, we used a conditional targeting approach. First. we generated transgenic mice using the Hoxb7 promoter to drive ere recombinase and green fluorescent protein expression throughout ureteric bud tissue. We crossed Hoxb7creEGFP mice with mice carrying lox-p sites flanking critical regions of fgfr1 and/or fgfr2. Absence of fgfr1 from the ureteric bud (fgfr1(UB-/-)) results in no apparent renal abnormalities. In contrast, fgfr2(UB-/-) mice have very aberrant ureteric bud branching, thin ureteric bud stalks, and fewer ureteric bud tips. Fgfr2(UB-/-) ureteric bud tips also demonstrate inappropriate regions of apoptosis and reduced proliferation. The nephrogenic mesenchymal lineage in fg/r2(UB-/-) mice develops normal-appearing glomeruli and tubules, and only slightly fewer nephrons than controls. In contrast, fgfr2(UB-/-) kidneys have abnormally thickened subcapsular cortical stromal mesenchyme. Ultimately, fgfr2(UB-/-) adult kidneys are small and abnormally shaped or are hydronephrotic. Finally 7 there are no additional abnormalities in the fgfr1/2(UB-/-) kidneys versus the fgfr(UB-/-) kidneys. In conclusion, FGFR2, but not FGFR1, appears crucial for ureteric bud branching morphogenesis and stromal mesenchyme patterning. (C) 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.4
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