Neuro-mesodermal patterns in artificially deformed embryonic explants: A role for mechano-geometry in tissue differentiation

Developmental Dynamics

Volumn 239, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 885-896

  Kornikova, E S ^a   Troshina, T G ^a   Kremnyov, S V ^a   Beloussov, L V ^a  

^a MOSCOW STATE UNIVERSITY   (Russian Federation)

Author keywords

Axial mesoderm; Morphogenetic movements; Neural rudiments; Tissue geometry; Xenopus laevis

Indexed keywords

FLUORESCENT DYE;

ANIMAL CELL; ANIMAL TISSUE; ANTERIOR POSTERIOR AXIS; ARTICLE; CELL MATURATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; EMBRYO; EXPLANT; GEOMETRY; IN SITU HYBRIDIZATION; MESODERM; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TISSUE DIFFERENTIATION; XENOPUS LAEVIS;

ANIMALS; BODY PATTERNING; CELL DIFFERENTIATION; DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY; FLUORESCENT DYES; GENE EXPRESSION REGULATION, DEVELOPMENTAL; IN SITU HYBRIDIZATION; MESODERM; NEURONS; TEMPERATURE; TIME FACTORS; XENOPUS LAEVIS;

XENOPUS LAEVIS;

EID: 77149126369     PISSN: 10588388     EISSN: 10970177     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/dvdy.22238     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Beloussov LV. 2008. Mechanically based generative laws of morphogenesis. Phys Biol 5:015009.
2. Beloussov LV, Grabovsky VI. 2006. Morphomechanics: goals, basic experiments and models. Int J Dev Biol 50:81-92.
3. Beloussov LV, Lakirev AV, Naumidi II, Novoselov VV. 1990. Effects of relaxation of mechanical tensions upon the early morphogenesis of Xenopus laevis embryos. Int J Dev Biol 34:409-419.
4. Beloussov LV, Saveliev SV, Naumidi II, Novoselov VV. 1994. Mechanical stresses in embryonic tissues: patterns, morphogenetic role and involvement in regulatory feedback. Int Rev Cytol 150:1-34.
5. Ben-Zvi D, Ben-Zion S, Fainsod A, Barkai N. 2008. Scaling of the BMP activation gradient in Xenopus embryos. Nature 453:1205-1211.
6. Colas J-F, Schoenwolf GC. 2001. Towards a cellular and molecular understanding of neurulation. Dev Dyn 221:117-145.
7. Engler AJ, Shamik Sen H, Lee Sweeney, Discher DE. 2006. Matrix elasticity directs stem lineage specification. Cell 126:677-689.
8. Farge E. 2003. Mechanical induction of Twist in the Drosophila foregut/stomodeal primordium. Curr Biol 13:1365-1377.
9. Grunz H, Schuren C. Richter K. 1995. The role of vertical and planar signals during the early steps of neural induction. Int J Dev Biol 39:539-543.
10. Harland RM. 1991. In situ hybridization: an improved whole-mount method for Xenopus embryos. Methods Cell Biol 36: 685-695.
11. Heasman J. 2006. Patterning the early Xenopus embryo. Development 133: 1205-1217.
12. Hutson MS, Tokutake Y, Ming-Shien Chang, Bloor JW, Venakides S, Kiehart DP, Edwards GS. 2003. Forces for morphogenesis investigated with laser microsurgery and quantitative modeling. Science 300:145-149.
13. Jacobson AG, Gordon R. 1976. Changes in the shape of developing vertebrate nervous system analyzed experimentally, mathematically and by computer simulation. J Exp Zool 197:191-246.
14. Keller R, Danilchik M. 1988. Regional expression, pattern and timing of convergence and extension during gastrulation of Xenopus laevis. Development 103:193-209.
15. Khokha MK, Yeh J, Grammer TC, Harland RM. 2005. Depletion of three BMP antagonists from Spemann?s organizer leads to catastrophic loss of dorsal structures. Dev Cell 8:401-411.
16. Kornikova ES, Korvin-Pavlovskaya EG, Beloussov LV. 2009. Relocations of cell convergence sites and formation of pharyngula-like shapes in mechanically relaxed Xenopus embryos. Dev Genes Evol 219:1-10.
17. Lamb TM, Knecht AK, Smith WC, Stachel SE, Economides AN, Stahl N, Yancopolous GD, Harland RM. 1993. Neural induction by the secreted polypeptide noggin. Science 262:713-718.
18. Lee J-Y, Harland RM. 2007. Actomyosin contractility and microtubules drive apical constriction in Xenopus bottle cells. Dev Biol 311:40-52.
19. McBeath R, Pirone DM, Nelson CM, Bhadriraju K, Chen CS. 2004. Cell shape, cytoskeletal tension and RhoA regulate stem cell lineage commitment. Dev Cell 6:483-495.
20. Mohun TJ, Brennan S, Dathan N, Fairman S, Gurdon JB. 1984. Cell typespecific activation of actin genes in the early amphibian embryo. Nature 311:716-721.
21. Niehrs C. 2004. Regionally specific induction by the Spemann-Mangold organizer. Nature Rev Genet 5:425-434.
22. Nieuwkoop PD, Faber J. 1956. Normal table of Xenopus laevis (Daudin). Amsterdam: North-Holland Pub. Co.
23. Reversade B, Kuroda H, Lee AM, De Robertis EM. 2005. Deletion of BMP2, BMP4 and BMP7 and Spemann organizer signals induces massive brain formation in Xenopus embryos. Development 132: 3381-3392.
24. Saint-Jeannet JP, Karavanov AA, Dawid JB. 1994. Expression of mesodermal markers in Xenopus laevis Keller explants. Int J Dev Biol 38:605-611.
25. Saxen L, Toivonen S 1963. Primary embryonic induction. London: Logos Press, 271 p.
26. Spemann H 1936. Experimentelle Beitrage zu einer Theorie der Entwicklung. [Experimental Introduction to a Theory of Development.] Berlin: Springer, 296 p.
27. Troshina TG, Beloussov LV. 2009. Mechanodependent cell movements in the axial rudiments of Xenopus gastrulae. Russ J Dev Biol 40:115-120.
28. Van der Waerden BL 1957. Mathematische Statistik. [Mathematical Statistics.] Berlin: Springer, 434 p.
29. Wilson P, Keller R. 1991. Cell rearrangement during gastrulation of Xenopus: direct observation of cultured explants. Development 112:289-300.
30. Yamada T. 1994. Caudalization by the primary organizer: brachyuri, convergent extension and retinoic acid. Development 120:3051-3062.
31. Zaraisky AG. 1991. Self-organization during determination of the size of axial structures in Xenopus laevis embryos. Ontogenez (Russ J Dev Biol) 22: 365-374.
32. Zygar CA, Cook LT, Grainger RM. 1998. Gene activation during early stages of lens induction in Xenopus. Development 125:3509-3519.