DOCSLIB.ORG

Restricted Expression of Fgf16 Within the Developing Chick Inner Ear

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Restricted Expression of Fgf16 Within the Developing Chick Inner Ear DEVELOPMENTAL DYNAMICS 235:2276–2281, 2006 PATTERNS & PHENOTYPES Restricted Expression of Fgf16 Within the Developing Chick Inner Ear Susan C. Chapman,1* Qin Cai,1 Steven B. Bleyl,2 and Gary C. Schoenwolf1 Fibroblast growth factor (FGF) signaling is required for otic placode induction and patterning of the developing inner ear. We have cloned the chick ortholog of Fgf16 and analyzed its expression pattern in the early chick embryo. Expression is restricted to the otic placode and developing inner ear through all the stages examined. By the closed otocyst stage, expression has resolved to anterior and posterior domains that partially overlap with those of bone morphogenetic protein 4 (Bmp4), a marker of the developing sensory patches, the cristae of the anterior and posterior semicircular canals. Platelet-derived growth factor alpha (PDGFA), another growth factor with restricted otic expression, also overlaps with Fgf16 expression. The restricted expression pattern of Fgf16 suggests a role for FGF signaling in the patterning of the sensory cristae, together with BMP signaling. Developmental Dynamics 235:2276–2281, 2006. © 2006 Wiley-Liss, Inc. Key words: Fgf; inner ear; chick; otic development; patterning Accepted 17 May 2006 INTRODUCTION pattern by in situ hybridization within ditory cochlea, including the auditory the early embryo, finding specific ex- sensory organ (basilar papilla) and Inner ear patterning involves a com- pression only within the otic placode seven vestibular organs (sensory patch- plex, interrelated series of signaling and developing inner ear. The inner ear es): one lagena (organ of Corti), two events that include members of the fi- originates from the otic placode, an ec- maculae (sacculus, utriculus), one mac- broblast growth factor (FGF) family of secreted signaling factors (Noramly and todermal thickening adjacent to rhom- ula neglecta and three cristae ampullae Grainger, 2002; Wright and Mansour, bomeres 5 and 6, which becomes appar- (superior, posterior, and lateral; Wu 2003). FGFs have important roles in ent at Hamburger and Hamilton stage and Oh, 1996). proliferation, migration, and differenti- (HH) 9 (Hamburger and Hamilton, Fgf16 orthologues have been identi- ation (Ornitz and Itoh, 2001), especially 1951). By HH11 the placode begins to fied in human and rat (Miyake et al., in directional signaling across epitheli- invaginate, forming the otic pit/cup. 1998), mouse (Sontag and Cattini, al–mesenchymal boundaries (Hogan, The rims of the otic cup make contact, 2003), and zebrafish and chimpanzee 1999), reminiscent of the situation forming the closed otocyst at around (Katoh and Katoh, 2005), with Ensembl within the developing chick inner ear, HH16, with the endolymphatic duct reporting further orthologues in Canis where mesodermal FGF19 in synergy and sac arising from a dorsomedial pro- familiaris, Monodelphis domestica, and with WNT8c signals from the hindbrain jection of the otocyst, visible by HH21 Xenopus tropicalis, among others (Bir- are sufficient for otic placode induction (Barald and Kelley, 2004). Further com- ney et al., 2006). Fgf16 is a member of (Ladher et al., 2000). We have cloned plex developmental steps lead to emer- the FGF subfamily consisting of Fgf9/ chick Fgf16 and analyzed its expression gence of the vestibular system and au- 16/20, none of which possess the stan- 1University of Utah, School of Medicine, Department of Neurobiology and Anatomy, and Children’s Health Research Center, Salt Lake City, Utah 2University of Utah, Department of Pediatrics, Division of Medical Genetics, Salt Lake City, Utah Grant sponsor: NIH; Grant numbers: DC04185; DK066445; 1 K08 HL084559-01; Grant sponsor: American Heart Association. *Correspondence to: Susan C. Chapman, University of Utah, School of Medicine, Department of Neurobiology and Anatomy, and Children’s Health Research Center, 2R066 SOM, 30 North 1900 East, Salt Lake City, UT 84132-3401. E-mail: [email protected] DOI 10.1002/dvdy.20872 Published online 19 June 2006 in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). © 2006 Wiley-Liss, Inc. FGF16 EXPRESSION 2277 Fig. 1. Predicted amino acid sequence comparison of chick fibroblast growth factor (FGF) 16 with human FGF16 and mouse FGF16. The colon indicates identical amino acid residues of the compared sequences. The 187/207 residues are identical to human (90.3%), and 185/207 are identical to mouse (89.3%). Mouse and human are 99.0% identical, with a two amino acid difference. dard cleavable signal sequence. How- 2003). Otic expression was restricted head mesoderm, neural crest, surface ever, all are secreted due to a to a single region, the dorsolateral ectoderm, or branchial endoderm. combination of a unique N-terminal re- region of the posterior otocyst. Our gion and a central hydrophobic region, extensive analysis of the chick Fgf16 containing the EFISIA motif, encoding expression pattern demonstrates RESULTS AND DISCUSSION for a nonclassical mode of secretion that, in early developmental stages, Cloning of Chick Fgf16 (Miyakawa and Imamura, 2003; Popo- Fgf16 is detected solely in the otic vici et al., 2004). Although several FGF region, with no other expression in Using the known mouse Fgf16 se- receptors have been identified in the de- the developing embryo. Dynamic ex- quence, we identified a chick ex- veloping inner ear (Wright et al., 2003), pression within the otic placode was pressed sequence tag (EST) ortholog previously only FGF receptor 4 refined, until at the otocyst stage, that contained a partial chick Fgf16 (FGFR4) had been shown to bind to two defined spots of expression are fragment lacking the 5Ј end. We FGF16 in vitro (Konishi et al., 2000). detected in the patches of cells fated cloned the full-length 624-bp coding FGF receptor affinity for FGF16 has to become the anterior and posterior sequence of chick Fgf16 using 5Ј-rapid now been determined in a mammalian sensory cristae. Chick hindbrain ro- amplification of cDNA ends (RACE) cell culture system. FGF16 preferen- tation experiments suggest that sig- GeneRacer Kit (Invitrogen). The pre- tially binds to the c splice form recep- nals from the hindbrain are respon- dicted chick 207 amino acid sequence tors with affinity from strongest to sible for dorsoventral patterning of is 90.3% and 89.4% identical to that of weakest, 3c Ͼ 2c Ͼ 1c Ͼ 3b Ͼ 4, and no the inner ear but not anterior–poste- human and mouse FGF16 (Miyake et activity toward FGFR1b or FGFR2b al., 1998), respectively (Fig. 1). A frag- (Zhang et al., 2006). rior patterning (Bok et al., 2005). ment of the full-length sequence in- Expression of Fgf16 has been re- Thus, as yet unidentified intrinsic sig- cluding a portion of the 3Ј-untrans- ported previously in late embryonic nals and/or extrinsic signals originat- and adult cardiac tissues and embry- ing from tissues other than the hind- lated region was used to make an in onic brown adipocytes of mice and brain are required for anterior– situ hybridization probe, eliminating rats (Miyake et al., 1998; Konishi et posterior patterning. Based on the the possibility of cross-hybridization al., 2000; Sontag and Cattini, 2003; restricted expression pattern of Fgf16, to other Fgf family members. Analysis Lavine et al., 2005). In an evaluation we hypothesize that FGF16 is an in- of the sequence within the respective of 18 mouse Fgf gene expression pat- trinsic signal involved in patterning genomes reveals that both the mouse terns, Fgf16 was identified as a the anterior and posterior sensory and the human FGF16 genes are lo- marker within the murine otic pla- cristae. This hypothesis does not ex- cated on the X chromosome, whereas code, developing otic vesicle, pharyn- clude an extrinsic signal upstream of FGF16 in the Gallus genome is lo- geal endoderm, branchial arches, FGF16 arising from tissue surround- cated on chromosome 4. The signifi- and olfactory placode (Wright et al., ing the developing inner ear, such as cance of this difference is not clear. 2278 CHAPMAN ET AL. Restricted Expression of Fgf16 Within the Developing Inner Ear Analysis of the gene expression pattern of Fgf16 was undertaken by whole- mount in situ hybridization (ISH), us- ing embryos from prestreak stages, HH1 to HH20 (Hamburger and Hamil- ton, 1951). The earliest stage with de- tectable expression was HH8/9 in an anterior-to-posterior stripe of dorsally expressing non-neural ectoderm adja- cent to the hindbrain, corresponding to the dorsal part of the future otic placode (Fig. 2A,B). At HH8 (3–5 somites), non- neural ectoderm rostral to the first somite is presumptive otic placode and is marked by Pax2 expression at the four to five somite stage (Groves and Bronner-Fraser, 2000). By HH9 (six to eight somites), the ectoderm has thick- ened and an overt otic placode is dis- cernible (Fig. 2B). Fgf16 expression, thus, is first detectable at the cusp of otic placode formation. Expression was detected exclusively in otic tissue at all stages examined. By HH12, expression was restricted to the dorsomedial lip of the invaginating otic placode (Fig. 2C,D). This expression expanded ven- trally at HH13, with a weaker domain extending ventrally from the original dorsomedial expression domain (Fig. 2E,F). By HH16, the lips of the otic cup have fused to form the otocyst and two distinct, equally strong expression zones were observed in dorsal view: an anterior–medial and separate postero- lateral domains (Fig. 2G). Transverse sections of the embryo confirm strong staining in both the anterior (Fig. 2H) and posterior zones (not shown). Dy- namic changes within the expression Fig. 2. A–X: Fibroblast growth factor (Fgf) 16 mRNA expression analysis. A,C,E,G: Dorsal views domains occur between stages HH16– of whole-mount embryos from Hamburger and Hamilton stage (HH) 9–16 with anterior to the top 20. From the two initially strong do- of the page. B,D,F,H: Transverse gelatin sections (50 ␮m) through the more anterior part of the mains, the anterior–medial domain expression domain.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Fgf17b and FGF18 Have Different Midbrain Regulatory Properties from Fgf8b Or Activated FGF Receptors Aimin Liu1,2, James Y
    Research article 6175 FGF17b and FGF18 have different midbrain regulatory properties from FGF8b or activated FGF receptors Aimin Liu1,2, James Y. H. Li2, Carrie Bromleigh2, Zhimin Lao2, Lee A. Niswander1 and Alexandra L. Joyner2,* 1Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Developmental Biology Program, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10021, USA 2Howard Hughes Medical Institute and Skirball Institute of Biomolecular Medicine, Departments of Cell Biology, and Physiology and Neuroscience, NYU School of Medicine, New York, NY 10016, USA *Author for correspondence (e-mail: [email protected]) Accepted 28 August 2003 Development 130, 6175-6185 Published by The Company of Biologists 2003 doi:10.1242/dev.00845 Summary Early patterning of the vertebrate midbrain and region in the midbrain, correlating with cerebellum cerebellum is regulated by a mid/hindbrain organizer that development. By contrast, FGF17b and FGF18 mimic produces three fibroblast growth factors (FGF8, FGF17 FGF8a by causing expansion of the midbrain and and FGF18). The mechanism by which each FGF upregulating midbrain gene expression. This result is contributes to patterning the midbrain, and induces a consistent with Fgf17 and Fgf18 being expressed in the cerebellum in rhombomere 1 (r1) is not clear. We and midbrain and not just in r1 as Fgf8 is. Third, analysis of others have found that FGF8b can transform the midbrain gene expression in mouse brain explants with beads soaked into a cerebellum fate, whereas FGF8a can promote in FGF8b or FGF17b showed that the distinct activities of midbrain development. In this study we used a chick FGF17b and FGF8b are not due to differences in the electroporation assay and in vitro mouse brain explant amount of FGF17b protein produced in vivo.
    [Show full text]
  • Structural and Functional Properties of Platelet-Derived Growth Factor and Stem Cell Factor Receptors
    Downloaded from http://cshperspectives.cshlp.org/ on September 28, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press Structural and Functional Properties of Platelet-Derived Growth Factor and Stem Cell Factor Receptors Carl-Henrik Heldin and Johan Lennartsson Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, Uppsala University, SE-751 24 Uppsala, Sweden Correspondence: [email protected] The receptors for platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF) and stem cell factor (SCF) are members of the type III class of PTK receptors, which are characterized by five Ig-like domains extracellularly and a split kinase domain intracellularly. The receptors are activated by ligand-induced dimerization, leading to autophosphorylation on specific tyrosine resi- dues. Thereby the kinase activities of the receptors are activated and docking sites for down- stream SH2 domain signal transduction molecules are created; activation of these pathways promotes cell growth, survival, and migration. These receptors mediate important signals during the embryonal development, and control tissue homeostasis in the adult. Their over- activity is seen in malignancies and other diseases involving excessive cell proliferation, such as atherosclerosis and fibrotic diseases. In cancer, mutations of PDGF and SCF receptors— including gene fusions, point mutations, and amplifications—drive subpopulations of cer- tain malignancies, such as gastrointestinal stromal tumors, chronic myelomonocytic leuke- mia, hypereosinophilic syndrome, glioblastoma, acute myeloid leukemia, mastocytosis, and melanoma. he type III tyrosine kinase receptor family with kinases, and a less well-conserved carboxy- Tconsists of platelet-derived growth factor terminal tail. The ligands for these receptors are (PDGF) receptor a and b, stem cell factor all dimeric molecules, and on binding they in- (SCF) receptor (Kit), colony-stimulating fac- duce receptor dimerization.
    [Show full text]
  • Fgf8 Is Mutated in Zebrafish Acerebellar
    Development 125, 2381-2395 (1998) 2381 Printed in Great Britain © The Company of Biologists Limited 1998 DEV1265 Fgf8 is mutated in zebrafish acerebellar (ace) mutants and is required for maintenance of midbrain-hindbrain boundary development and somitogenesis Frank Reifers1, Heike Böhli1, Emily C. Walsh2, Phillip H. Crossley2, Didier Y. R. Stainier2 and Michael Brand1,* 1Department of Neurobiology, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 364, D-69120 Heidelberg, Germany 2Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143-0554, USA *Author for correspondence (e-mail: [email protected]) Accepted 2 April; published on WWW 3 June 1998 SUMMARY We describe the isolation of zebrafish Fgf8 and its gastrulation, and that Fgf8 functions later during expression during gastrulation, somitogenesis, fin bud and somitogenesis to polarize the midbrain. Fgf8 is also early brain development. By demonstrating genetic linkage expressed in a dorsoventral gradient during gastrulation and by analysing the structure of the Fgf8 gene, we show and ectopically expressed Fgf8 can dorsalize embryos. that acerebellar is a zebrafish Fgf8 mutation that may Nevertheless, acerebellar mutants show only mild inactivate Fgf8 function. Homozygous acerebellar embryos dorsoventral patterning defects. Also, in spite of the lack a cerebellum and the midbrain-hindbrain boundary prominent role suggested for Fgf8 in limb development, the organizer. Fgf8 function is required to maintain, but not pectoral fins are largely unaffected in the mutants. Fgf8 is initiate, expression of Pax2.1 and other marker genes in this therefore required in development of several important area. We show that Fgf8 and Pax2.1 are activated in signaling centers in the zebrafish embryo, but may be adjacent domains that only later become overlapping, and redundant or dispensable for others.
    [Show full text]
  • ARTICLES Fibroblast Growth Factors 1, 2, 17, and 19 Are The
    0031-3998/07/6103-0267 PEDIATRIC RESEARCH Vol. 61, No. 3, 2007 Copyright © 2007 International Pediatric Research Foundation, Inc. Printed in U.S.A. ARTICLES Fibroblast Growth Factors 1, 2, 17, and 19 Are the Predominant FGF Ligands Expressed in Human Fetal Growth Plate Cartilage PAVEL KREJCI, DEBORAH KRAKOW, PERTCHOUI B. MEKIKIAN, AND WILLIAM R. WILCOX Medical Genetics Institute [P.K., D.K., P.B.M., W.R.W.], Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California 90048; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology [D.K.] and Department of Pediatrics [W.R.W.], UCLA School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California 90095 ABSTRACT: Fibroblast growth factors (FGF) regulate bone growth, (G380R) or TD (K650E) mutations (4–6). When expressed at but their expression in human cartilage is unclear. Here, we deter- physiologic levels, FGFR3-G380R required, like its wild-type mined the expression of entire FGF family in human fetal growth counterpart, ligand for activation (7). Similarly, in vitro cul- plate cartilage. Using reverse transcriptase PCR, the transcripts for tivated human TD chondrocytes as well as chondrocytes FGF1, 2, 5, 8–14, 16–19, and 21 were found. However, only FGF1, isolated from Fgfr3-K644M mice had an identical time course 2, 17, and 19 were detectable at the protein level. By immunohisto- of Fgfr3 activation compared with wild-type chondrocytes and chemistry, FGF17 and 19 were uniformly expressed within the showed no receptor activation in the absence of ligand (8,9). growth plate. In contrast, FGF1 was found only in proliferating and hypertrophic chondrocytes whereas FGF2 localized predominantly to Despite the importance of the FGF ligand for activation of the resting and proliferating cartilage.
    [Show full text]
  • Different Fgfs Have Distinct Roles in Regulating Neurogenesis After Spinal Cord Injury in Zebrafish Yona Goldshmit1,2, Jean Kitty K
    Goldshmit et al. Neural Development (2018) 13:24 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13064-018-0122-9 RESEARCHARTICLE Open Access Different Fgfs have distinct roles in regulating neurogenesis after spinal cord injury in zebrafish Yona Goldshmit1,2, Jean Kitty K. Y. Tang1, Ashley L. Siegel1, Phong D. Nguyen1, Jan Kaslin1, Peter D. Currie1 and Patricia R. Jusuf1,3* Abstract Background: Despite conserved developmental processes and organization of the vertebrate central nervous system, only some vertebrates including zebrafish can efficiently regenerate neural damage including after spinal cord injury. The mammalian spinal cord shows very limited regeneration and neurogenesis, resulting in permanent life-long functional impairment. Therefore, there is an urgent need to identify the cellular and molecular mechanisms that can drive efficient vertebrate neurogenesis following injury. A key pathway implicated in zebrafish neurogenesis is fibroblast growth factor signaling. Methods: In the present study we investigated the roles of distinctfibroblastgrowthfactormembersandtheir receptors in facilitating different aspects of neural development and regeneration at different timepoints following spinal cord injury. After spinal cord injury in adults and during larval development, loss and/or gain of Fgf signaling was combined with immunohistochemistry, in situ hybridization and transgenes marking motor neuron populations in in vivo zebrafish and in vitro mammalian PC12 cell culture models. Results: Fgf3 drives neurogenesis of Islet1 expressing motor neuron subtypes and mediate axonogenesis in cMet expressing motor neuron subtypes. We also demonstrate that the role of Fgf members are not necessarily simple recapitulating development. During development Fgf2, Fgf3 and Fgf8 mediate neurogenesis of Islet1 expressing neurons and neuronal sprouting of both, Islet1 and cMet expressing motor neurons.
    [Show full text]
  • Pathophysiological Roles of FGF Signaling in the Heart
    MINI REVIEW ARTICLE published: 06 September 2013 doi: 10.3389/fphys.2013.00247 Pathophysiological roles of FGF signaling in the heart Nobuyuki Itoh* and Hiroya Ohta Department of Genetic Biochemistry, Kyoto University Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Kyoto, Japan Edited by: Cardiac remodeling progresses to heart failure, which represents a major cause of Marcel van der Heyden, University morbidity and mortality. Cardiomyokines, cardiac secreted proteins, may play roles Medical Center, Netherlands in cardiac remodeling. Fibroblast growth factors (FGFs) are secreted proteins with Reviewed by: diverse functions, mainly in development and metabolism. However, some FGFs play Marcel van der Heyden, University Medical Center, Netherlands pathophysiological roles in cardiac remodeling as cardiomyokines. FGF2 promotes cardiac Christian Faul, University of Miami hypertrophy and fibrosis by activating MAPK signaling through the activation of FGF Miller School of Medicine, USA receptor (FGFR) 1c. In contrast, FGF16 may prevent these by competing with FGF2 for the *Correspondence: binding site of FGFR1c. FGF21 prevents cardiac hypertrophy by activating MAPK signaling Nobuyuki Itoh, Department of through the activation of FGFR1c with β-Klotho as a co-receptor. In contrast, FGF23 Genetic Biochemistry, Kyoto α University Graduate School of induces cardiac hypertrophy by activating calcineurin/NFAT signaling without Klotho. Pharmaceutical Sciences, These FGFs play crucial roles in cardiac remodeling via distinct action mechanisms. These Yoshida-Shimoadachi, Sakyo, findings provide new insights into the pathophysiological roles of FGFs in the heart and Kyoto 606-8501, Japan may provide potential therapeutic strategies for heart failure. e-mail: itohnobu@ pharm.kyoto-u.ac.jp Keywords: FGF, heart, hypertrophy, fibrosis, heart failure, cardiomyokine INTRODUCTION mice and humans, respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Instability Restricts Signaling of Multiple Fibroblast Growth Factors
    Cell. Mol. Life Sci. DOI 10.1007/s00018-015-1856-8 Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences RESEARCH ARTICLE Instability restricts signaling of multiple fibroblast growth factors Marcela Buchtova • Radka Chaloupkova • Malgorzata Zakrzewska • Iva Vesela • Petra Cela • Jana Barathova • Iva Gudernova • Renata Zajickova • Lukas Trantirek • Jorge Martin • Michal Kostas • Jacek Otlewski • Jiri Damborsky • Alois Kozubik • Antoni Wiedlocha • Pavel Krejci Received: 18 June 2014 / Revised: 7 February 2015 / Accepted: 9 February 2015 Ó Springer Basel 2015 Abstract Fibroblast growth factors (FGFs) deliver ex- failure to activate FGF receptor signal transduction over tracellular signals that govern many developmental and long periods of time, and influence specific cell behavior regenerative processes, but the mechanisms regulating FGF in vitro and in vivo. Stabilization via exogenous heparin signaling remain incompletely understood. Here, we ex- binding, introduction of stabilizing mutations or lowering plored the relationship between intrinsic stability of FGF the cell cultivation temperature rescues signaling of un- proteins and their biological activity for all 18 members of stable FGFs. Thus, the intrinsic ligand instability is an the FGF family. We report that FGF1, FGF3, FGF4, FGF6, important elementary level of regulation in the FGF sig- FGF8, FGF9, FGF10, FGF16, FGF17, FGF18, FGF20, and naling system. FGF22 exist as unstable proteins, which are rapidly de- graded in cell cultivation media. Biological activity of Keywords Fibroblast growth factor Á FGF Á Unstable Á FGF1, FGF3, FGF4, FGF6, FGF8, FGF10, FGF16, FGF17, Proteoglycan Á Regulation and FGF20 is limited by their instability, manifesting as Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00018-015-1856-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
    [Show full text]
  • FGF Signaling Network in the Gastrointestinal Tract (Review)
    163-168 1/6/06 16:12 Page 163 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ONCOLOGY 29: 163-168, 2006 163 FGF signaling network in the gastrointestinal tract (Review) MASUKO KATOH1 and MASARU KATOH2 1M&M Medical BioInformatics, Hongo 113-0033; 2Genetics and Cell Biology Section, National Cancer Center Research Institute, Tokyo 104-0045, Japan Received March 29, 2006; Accepted May 2, 2006 Abstract. Fibroblast growth factor (FGF) signals are trans- Contents duced through FGF receptors (FGFRs) and FRS2/FRS3- SHP2 (PTPN11)-GRB2 docking protein complex to SOS- 1. Introduction RAS-RAF-MAPKK-MAPK signaling cascade and GAB1/ 2. FGF family GAB2-PI3K-PDK-AKT/aPKC signaling cascade. The RAS~ 3. Regulation of FGF signaling by WNT MAPK signaling cascade is implicated in cell growth and 4. FGF signaling network in the stomach differentiation, the PI3K~AKT signaling cascade in cell 5. FGF signaling network in the colon survival and cell fate determination, and the PI3K~aPKC 6. Clinical application of FGF signaling cascade in cell polarity control. FGF18, FGF20 and 7. Clinical application of FGF signaling inhibitors SPRY4 are potent targets of the canonical WNT signaling 8. Perspectives pathway in the gastrointestinal tract. SPRY4 is the FGF signaling inhibitor functioning as negative feedback apparatus for the WNT/FGF-dependent epithelial proliferation. 1. Introduction Recombinant FGF7 and FGF20 proteins are applicable for treatment of chemotherapy/radiation-induced mucosal injury, Fibroblast growth factor (FGF) family proteins play key roles while recombinant FGF2 protein and FGF4 expression vector in growth and survival of stem cells during embryogenesis, are applicable for therapeutic angiogenesis. Helicobacter tissues regeneration, and carcinogenesis (1-4).
    [Show full text]
  • Type of the Paper (Article
    Table S1. Gene expression of pro-angiogenic factors in tumor lymph nodes of Ibtk+/+Eµ-myc and Ibtk+/-Eµ-myc mice. Fold p- Symbol Gene change value 0,007 Akt1 Thymoma viral proto-oncogene 1 1,8967 061 0,929 Ang Angiogenin, ribonuclease, RNase A family, 5 1,1159 481 0,000 Angpt1 Angiopoietin 1 4,3916 117 0,461 Angpt2 Angiopoietin 2 0,7478 625 0,258 Anpep Alanyl (membrane) aminopeptidase 1,1015 737 0,000 Bai1 Brain-specific angiogenesis inhibitor 1 4,0927 202 0,001 Ccl11 Chemokine (C-C motif) ligand 11 3,1381 149 0,000 Ccl2 Chemokine (C-C motif) ligand 2 2,8407 298 0,000 Cdh5 Cadherin 5 2,5849 744 0,000 Col18a1 Collagen, type XVIII, alpha 1 3,8568 388 0,003 Col4a3 Collagen, type IV, alpha 3 2,9031 327 0,000 Csf3 Colony stimulating factor 3 (granulocyte) 4,3332 258 0,693 Ctgf Connective tissue growth factor 1,0195 88 0,000 Cxcl1 Chemokine (C-X-C motif) ligand 1 2,67 21 0,067 Cxcl2 Chemokine (C-X-C motif) ligand 2 0,7507 631 0,000 Cxcl5 Chemokine (C-X-C motif) ligand 5 3,921 328 0,000 Edn1 Endothelin 1 3,9931 042 0,001 Efna1 Ephrin A1 1,6449 601 0,002 Efnb2 Ephrin B2 2,8858 042 0,000 Egf Epidermal growth factor 1,726 51 0,000 Eng Endoglin 0,2309 467 0,000 Epas1 Endothelial PAS domain protein 1 2,8421 764 0,000 Ephb4 Eph receptor B4 3,6334 035 V-erb-b2 erythroblastic leukemia viral oncogene homolog 2, 0,000 Erbb2 3,9377 neuro/glioblastoma derived oncogene homolog (avian) 024 0,000 F2 Coagulation factor II 3,8295 239 1 0,000 F3 Coagulation factor III 4,4195 293 0,002 Fgf1 Fibroblast growth factor 1 2,8198 748 0,000 Fgf2 Fibroblast growth factor
    [Show full text]
  • Single-Cell Transcriptome Sequencing of 18,787 Human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells Identifies Differentially Primed Subpopulations
    Single-cell transcriptome sequencing of 18,787 human induced pluripotent stem cells identifies differentially primed subpopulations Quan H. Nguyen1*, Samuel W. Lukowski1*, Han Sheng Chiu1, Anne Senabouth1, Timothy J. C. Bruxner1, Angelika N. Christ1, Nathan J. Palpant1*, Joseph E. Powell1,2* 1 Institute for Molecular Bioscience, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia 2 Queensland Brain Institute, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia * These authors contributed equally Supplementary Figures and Tables Table S1. Summary statistics for sequencing and mapping data of five samples Mean Median Total Median Percent Remaining Number Total number reads per genes genes UMIs per mapped cells post of cells of reads cell per cell detected cell reads filtering Sample 1 2,779 71,256 3,662 20,356 17,769 198,022,303 62.6 2,426 Sample 2 545 318,909 4,547 18,557 27,341 173,805,798 63.4 424 Sample 3 3,103 56,459 2,944 19,261 11,214 175,193,813 71.8 2,906 Sample 4 9,192 38,637 2,016 21,491 5,963 355,158,219 68.9 8,294 Sample 5 4,863 26,471 2,804 20,235 10,150 128,728,889 67.2 4,737 1 Table S2. Summary of the cell and gene filtering process Procedure Count Cells removed by library size (outside 3 x MAD range)a 0 Cells removed by number detected genes (outside 3 x MAD range) 77 Cells removed by reads mapped to mitochondrial genes (outside 3 x MAD range) 1,559 Cells removed by reads mapped to ribosomal genes (outside 3 x MAD range) 102 Cells removed by reads mapped to mitochondrial genes (> 20 % total reads)b 0 Cells removed by reads mapped to ribosomal genes (> 50 % total reads) 0 Genes removed by number of expressed cells (< 1 % total cells)c 16,674 Remaining cells post filtering 18,787 Remaining genes post filtering 16,064 aMAD stands for median absolute deviation.
    [Show full text]
  • TABLE S1 Complete Overview of Protocols for Induction of Pscs Into
    TABLE S1 Complete overview of protocols for induction of PSCs into renal lineages Ref 2D/ Cell type Protocol Days Growth factors Outcome Other analyses # 3D hiPSC, hESC, Collagen type I tx murine epidydymal fat pads,ex vivo 54 2D 8 Y27632, AA, CHIR, BMP7 IM miPSC, mESC Matrigel with murine fetal kidney hiPSC, hESC, Suspension,han tx murine epidydymal fat pads,ex vivo 54 2D 20 AA, CHIR, BMP7 IM miPSC, mESC ging drop with murine fetal kidney tx murine epidydymal fat pads,ex vivo 55 hiPSC, hESC Matrigel 2D 14 CHIR, TTNPB/AM580, Y27632 IM with murine fetal kidney Injury, tx murine epidydymal fat 57 hiPSC Suspension 2D 28 AA, CHIR, BMP7, TGF-β1, TTNPB, DMH1 NP pads,spinal cord assay Matrigel,membr 58 mNPC, hESC 3D 7 BPM7, FGF9, Heparin, Y27632, CHIR, LDN, BMP4, IGF1, IGF2 NP Clonal expansion ane filter iMatrix,spinal 59 hiPSC 3D 10 LIF, Y27632, FGF2/FGF9, TGF-α, DAPT, CHIR, BMP7 NP Clonal expansion cord assay iMatrix,spinal 59 murine NP 3D 8-19 LIF, Y27632, FGF2/FGF9, TGF- α, DAPT, CHIR, BMP7 NP Clonal expansion cord assay murine NP, Suspension, 60 3D 7-19 BMP7, FGF2, Heparin, Y27632, LIF NP Nephrotoxicity, injury model human NP membrane filter Suspension, Contractility and permeability assay, ex 61 hiPSC 2D 10 AA, BMP7, RA Pod gelatin vivo with murine fetal kidney Matrigel. 62 hiPSC, hESC fibronectin, 2D < 50 FGF2, AA, WNT3A, BMP4, BMP7, RA, FGF2, HGF or RA + VITD3 Pod collagen type I Matrigel, Contractility and uptake assay,ex vivo 63 hiPSC 2D 13 Y27632, CP21R7, BMP4, RA, BMP7, FGF9, VITD3 Pod collagen type I with murine fetal kidney Collagen
    [Show full text]
  • The Roles of Fgfs in the Early Development of Vertebrate Limbs
    Downloaded from genesdev.cshlp.org on September 26, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press REVIEW The roles of FGFs in the early development of vertebrate limbs Gail R. Martin1 Department of Anatomy and Program in Developmental Biology, School of Medicine, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, California 94143–0452 USA ‘‘Fibroblast growth factor’’ (FGF) was first identified 25 tion of two closely related proteins—acidic FGF and ba- years ago as a mitogenic activity in pituitary extracts sic FGF (now designated FGF1 and FGF2, respectively). (Armelin 1973; Gospodarowicz 1974). This modest ob- With the advent of gene isolation techniques it became servation subsequently led to the identification of a large apparent that the Fgf1 and Fgf2 genes are members of a family of proteins that affect cell proliferation, differen- large family, now known to be comprised of at least 17 tiation, survival, and motility (for review, see Basilico genes, Fgf1–Fgf17, in mammals (see Coulier et al. 1997; and Moscatelli 1992; Baird 1994). Recently, evidence has McWhirter et al. 1997; Hoshikawa et al. 1998; Miyake been accumulating that specific members of the FGF 1998). At least five of these genes are expressed in the family function as key intercellular signaling molecules developing limb (see Table 1). The proteins encoded by in embryogenesis (for review, see Goldfarb 1996). Indeed, the 17 different FGF genes range from 155 to 268 amino it may be no exaggeration to say that, in conjunction acid residues in length, and each contains a conserved with the members of a small number of other signaling ‘‘core’’ sequence of ∼120 amino acids that confers a com- molecule families [including WNT (Parr and McMahon mon tertiary structure and the ability to bind heparin or 1994), Hedgehog (HH) (Hammerschmidt et al.
    [Show full text]