Ectoderm to mesoderm lineage switching during axolotl tail regeneration

Science

Volumn 298, Issue 5600, 2002, Pages 1993-1996

  Echeverri, Karen ^a   Tanaka, Elly M ^a  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE OF MOLECULAR CELL BIOLOGY AND GENETICS   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CARTILAGE; MUSCLE;

TAIL REGENERATION;

CELLS;

BIOLOGY; REGENERATION;

AMBYSTOMA; AMPHIBIA; ARTICLE; CELL LINEAGE; CELL MIGRATION; ECTODERM; ENVIRONMENT; LIMB; MESODERM; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REGENERATION; SPINAL CORD; STEM CELL; TAIL; TISSUE REPAIR; TISSUE TYPES;

AMBYSTOMA; ANIMALS; CELL DIFFERENTIATION; CELL LINEAGE; CELL MOVEMENT; CHONDROCYTES; ECTODERM; GLIAL FIBRILLARY ACIDIC PROTEIN; GREEN FLUORESCENT PROTEINS; LUMINESCENT PROTEINS; MESODERM; MUSCLE CELLS; NEUROGLIA; NEURONS; REGENERATION; SPINAL CORD; STEM CELLS; TAIL;

AMBYSTOMA; AMBYSTOMA MEXICANUM; AMPHIBIA;

EID: 0037032827     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.1077804     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. C. R. R. Bjornson et al., Science 283, 534 (1999).
2. O. Brustle et al., Science 285, 754 (1999).
3. D. Clarke et al., Science 288, 1660 (2000).
4. R. L. Rietze et al., Nature 412, 736 (2001).
5. J. Toma et al., Nature Cell Biol. 3, 778 (2001).
6. D. J. Anderson, F. H. Gage, I. L. Weissman, Nature Med. 7, 393 (2001).
7. C. M. Morshead et al., Nature Med. 8, 268 (2002).
8. R. Galli et al., Nature Neurosci. 3, 986 (2000).
9. C. C. Shih et al., Blood 98, 2412 (2001).
10. N. Terada et al., Nature 416, 542 (2002).
11. Q. L. Ying et al., Nature 416, 545 (2002).
12. J. D. Clarke, R. Alexander, N. Holder, Neurosci. Lett. 89, 1 (1988).
13. E. A. Chernoff, Int. J. Dev. Biol. 40, 823 (1996).
14. N. Holder, J. D. Clarke, Trends Neurosci. 11, 94 (1988).
15. K. Echeverri, D. W. Clarke, E. M. Tanaka, Dev. Biol. 236, 151 (2001).
16. K. Muneoka, W. F. Fox, S. V. Bryant, Dev. Biol. 116, 256 (1986).
17. H. Holtzer, S. Holtzer, G. Avery, J. Morphol. 96, 145 (1955).
18. E. D. Hay, D. A. Fischman, Dev. Biol. 3, 26 (1961).
19. J. Geraudie et al., Am. J. Anat. 183, 359 (1988).
20. A. Benraiss et al., Dev. Genes Evol. 209, 363 (1999).
21. S. Noctor et al., J. Neurosci. 22, 3161 (2002).
22. K. Echeverri, E. M. Tanaka, unpublished data.
23. C. Notte et al., Glia 33, 72 (2001).
24. R. Koster, S. Fraser, Dev. Biol. 233, 329 (2001).
25. In this system, the GFAP promoter drives expression of the Gal4-VP16 gene and GFP is driven by the Gal4UAS. Inclusion of the Gal4-VP16 enhancer system ensured that GFP persisted, even if cells tumed off the GFAP promoter and transdifferentiated, because of high levels of the Gal4-VP16 protein initially produced.
26. J. Arsanto et al., J. Exp. Zool. 264, 273 (1992).
27. In most examples, the labeled cells migrated out to a certain point in the regenerate and then started dividing 2 to 4 days postamputation. In many examples, during spinal cord regeneration we observed one GFAP-positive radial glial cell giving rise to 8 to 10 progeny.
28. We thank R. Koster and M. Matyash for the kind gifts of plasmids. We are grateful to H. Andreas for dedicated axolotl care and to F. Buchholz, J. Clarke, and A. Hyman for critical reading of the manuscript. This work was funded by grant TA 274/1-1 from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft.