4.2 Article

New fiber formation in the interstitial spaces of rat skeletal muscle during postnatal growth

期刊

JOURNAL OF HISTOCHEMISTRY & CYTOCHEMISTRY
卷 50, 期 8, 页码 1097-1111

出版社

HISTOCHEMICAL SOC INC
DOI: 10.1177/002215540205000812

关键词

skeletal muscle; myogenic cell; de novo fiber; interstitial space; MyoD; myogenin; M-cadherin; developmental MHC; hyperplasia; growing rat

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The purpose of this study was to determine whether fiber hyperplasia occurs in the rat plantaris muscle during postnatal weeks 3-20. Total muscle fiber number, obtained via the nitric acid digestion method, increased by 28% during the early postnatal rapid growth phase (3-10 weeks), whereas the number of branched fibers was consistently low. Whole-muscle mitotic activity and amino acid uptake levels showed an inverse relationship to the increase in total fiber number. The expression of MyoD mRNA (RT-PCR) levels decreased from 3 to 20 weeks of age, as did the detection of anti-BrdU- and MyoD-positive cells in histological sections. Immunohistochemical staining patterns for MyoD, myogenin, or developmental myosin heavy chain on sections stained for laminin (identification of the basal lamina) and electron micrographs clearly indicate that de novo fiber formation occurred in the interstitial spaces. Myogenic cells in the interstitial spaces were negative for the reliable specific satellite cell marker M-cadherin. In contrast, CD34 (an established marker for hematopoietic stem cells)-positive cells were located only in the interstitial spaces, and their frequency and location were similar to those of MyoD- and/or myogenin-positive cells. These findings are consistent with fiber hyperplasia occurring in the interstitial spaces of the rat plantaris muscle during the rapid postnatal growth phase. Furthermore, these data suggest that the new fibers may be formed from myogenic cells in the interstitial spaces of skeletal muscle and may express CD34 that is distinct from satellite cells.

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

4.2
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