4.7 Article

Differential requirements of BMP and Wnt signalling during gastrulation and neurulation define two steps in neural crest induction

期刊

DEVELOPMENT
卷 136, 期 5, 页码 771-779

出版社

COMPANY BIOLOGISTS LTD
DOI: 10.1242/dev.029017

关键词

Neural crest induction; Mesoderm; Wnt; BMP; Slug; Sox2

资金

  1. MRC
  2. BBSRC
  3. MRC [G0801145] Funding Source: UKRI
  4. Medical Research Council [G0801145] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The neural crest is induced by a combination of secreted signals. Although previous models of neural crest induction have proposed a step-wise activation of these signals, the actual spatial and temporal requirement has not been analysed. Through analysing the role of the mesoderm we show for the first time that specification of neural crest requires two temporally and chemically different steps: first, an induction at the gastrula stage dependent on signals arising from the dorsolateral mesoderm; and second, a maintenance step at the neurula stage dependent on signals from tissues adjacent to the neural crest. By performing tissue recombination experiments and using specific inhibitors of different inductive signals, we show that the first inductive step requires Wnt activation and BMP inhibition, whereas the later maintenance step requires activation of both pathways. This change in BMP necessity from BMP inhibition at gastrula to BMP activation at neurula stages is further supported by the dynamic expression of BMP4 and its antagonists, and is confirmed by direct measurements of BMP activity in the neural crest cells. The differential requirements of BMP activity allow us to propose an explanation for apparently discrepant results between chick and frog experiments. The demonstration that Wnt signals are required for neural crest induction by mesoderm solves an additional long-standing controversy. Finally, our results emphasise the importance of considering the order of exposure to signals during an inductive event.

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