4.6 Article

Early Phenotypic Asymmetry of Sister Oligodendrocyte Progenitor Cells After Mitosis and Its Modulation by Aging and Extrinsic Factors

期刊

GLIA
卷 63, 期 2, 页码 271-286

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/glia.22750

关键词

NG2 cells; asymmetry; division; maturation

资金

  1. Italian Ministry for University and Research [MIUR, PRIN 20107MSMA4]
  2. Cariplo Foundation [2012 0546]
  3. Fondazione Italiana Sclerosi Multipla [FISM2010/R1, FISM2013/R1]
  4. Giuseppe Levi Foundation
  5. Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei
  6. Umberto Veronesi Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Oligodendrocyte progenitor cells (OPCs) persist in the adult central nervous system and guarantee oligodendrocyte turnover throughout life. It remains obscure how OPCs avoid exhaustion during adulthood. Similar to stem cells, OPCs could self-maintain by undergoing asymmetric divisions generating a mixed progeny either keeping a progenitor phenotype or proceeding to differentiation. To address this issue, we examined the distribution of stage-specific markers in sister OPCs during mitosis and later after cell birth, and assessed its correlation with distinct short-term fates. In both the adult and juvenile cerebral cortex a fraction of dividing OPCs gives rise to sister cells with diverse immunophenotypic profiles and short-term behaviors. Such heterogeneity appears as cells exit cytokinesis, but does not derive from the asymmetric segregation of molecules such as NG2 or PDGFRa expressed in the mother cell. Rather, rapid downregulation of OPC markers and upregulation of molecules associated with lineage progression contributes to generate early sister OPC asymmetry. Analyses during aging and upon exposure to physiological (i.e., increased motor activity) and pathological (i.e., trauma or demyelination) stimuli showed that both intrinsic and environmental factors contribute to determine the fraction of symmetric and asymmetric OPC pairs and the phenotype of the OPC progeny as soon as cells exit mitosis. GLIA 2015;63:271-286

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

4.6
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