Boundary formation and maintenance in tissue development

Nature Reviews Genetics

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 43-55

  Dahmann, Christian ^a,b   Oates, Andrew C ^b   Brand, Michael ^a  

^a DRESDEN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Germany)

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

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EPHRIN;

CELL ADHESION; CELL FUNCTION; CELL PROLIFERATION; CELL SHAPE; DEVELOPMENT; EMBRYONIC STEM CELL; EXTRACELLULAR MATRIX; INTRACELLULAR SIGNALING; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; TISSUE DEVELOPMENT;

ANIMALS; BODY PATTERNING; DROSOPHILA; EPHRINS; EPITHELIUM;

EID: 78650360161     PISSN: 14710056     EISSN: 14710064     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nrg2902     Document Type: Review

References (119)

1. Wolpert, L. Positional information and the spatial pattern of cellular differentiation. J. Theor. Biol. 25, 1-47 (1969).
2. Meinhardt, H. Cell determination boundaries as organizing regions for secondary embryonic fields. Dev. Biol. 96, 375-385 (1983).
3. Fraser, S., Keynes, R. & Lumsden, A. Segmentation in the chick embryo hindbrain is defined by cell lineage restrictions. Nature 344, 431-435 (1990).
4. Garcia-Bellido, A., Ripoll, P. & Morata, G. Developmental compartmentalisation of the wing disk of Drosophila. Nature New Biol. 245, 251-253 (1973).
5. Julich, D., Mould, A. P., Koper, E. & Holley, S. A. Control of extracellular matrix assembly along tissue boundaries via Integrin and Eph-ephrin signaling. Development 136, 2913-2921 (2009).
6. Kemp, H. A., Cooke, J. E. & Moens, C. B. EphA4 and EfnB2a maintain rhombomere coherence by independently regulating intercalation of progenitor cells in the zebrafish neural keel. Dev. Biol. 327, 313-326 (2009).
7. Landsberg, K. P. et al. Increased cell bond tension governs cell sorting at the Drosophila anteroposterior compartment boundary. Curr. Biol. 19, 1950-1955 (2009).
8. Monier, B., Pelissier-Monier, A., Brand, A. H. & Sanson, B. An actomyosin-based barrier inhibits cell mixing at compartmental boundaries in Drosophila embryos. Nature Cell Biol. 12, 60-65 (2010).
9. Lawrence, P. A. A clonal analysis of segment development in Oncopeltus (Hemiptera). J. Embryol. Exp. Morphol. 30, 681-699 (1973).
10. Kornberg, T., Siden, I., O'Farrell, P. & Simon, M. The engrailed locus of Drosophila: in situ localization of transcripts reveals compartment-specific expression. Cell 40, 45-53 (1985).
11. Mann, R. S. & Morata, G. The developmental and molecular biology of genes that subdivide the body of Drosophila. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 16, 243-271 (2000).
12. Franklin, V. et al. Regionalisation of the endoderm progenitors and morphogenesis of the gut portals of the mouse embryo. Mech. Dev. 125, 587-600 (2008).
13. Tremblay, K. D. & Zaret, K. S. Distinct populations of endoderm cells converge to generate the embryonic liver bud and ventral foregut tissues. Dev. Biol. 280, 87-99 (2005).
14. Kulesa, P. M. & Fraser, S. E. Cell dynamics during somite boundary formation revealed by time-lapse analysis. Science 298, 991-995 (2002).
15. Dequeant, M. L. & Pourquie, O. Segmental patterning of the vertebrate embryonic axis. Nature Rev. Genet. 9, 370-382 (2008).
16. Oginuma, M., Niwa, Y., Chapman, D. L. & Saga, Y. Mesp2 and Tbx6 cooperatively create periodic patterns coupled with the clock machinery during mouse somitogenesis. Development 135, 2555-2562 (2008).
17. Lawrence, P. A., Green, S. M. & Johnston, P. Compartmentalization and growth of the Drosophila abdomen. J. Embryol. Exp. Morphol. 43, 233-245 (1978).
18. Morata, G. & Lawrence, P. A. Anterior and posterior compartments in the head of Drosophila. Nature 274, 473-474 (1978).
19. Steiner, E. Establishment of compartments in the developing leg imaginal discs of Drosophila melanogaster. Rouxs Arch. Dev. Biol. 180, 9-30 (1976).
20. Struhl, G. Developmental compartments in the proboscis of Drosophila. Nature 270, 723-725 (1977).
21. Jimenez-Guri, E. et al. Clonal analysis in mice underlines the importance of rhombomeric boundaries in cell movement restriction during hindbrain segmentation. PLoS ONE 5, e10112 (2010).
22. Langenberg, T. & Brand, M. Lineage restriction maintains a stable organizer cell population at the zebrafish midbrain-hindbrain boundary. Development 132, 3209-3216 (2005).
23. Zervas, M., Millet, S., Ahn, S. & Joyner, A. L. Cell behaviors and genetic lineages of the mesencephalon and rhombomere 1. Neuron 43, 345-357 (2004).
24. Altabef, M., Clarke, J. D. & Tickle, C. Dorso-ventral ectodermal compartments and origin of apical ectodermal ridge in developing chick limb. Development 124, 4547-4556 (1997).
25. Arques, C. G., Doohan, R., Sharpe, J. & Torres, M. Cell tracing reveals a dorsoventral lineage restriction plane in the mouse limb bud mesenchyme. Development 134, 3713-3722 (2007).
26. Pearse, R. V., Scherz, P. J., Campbell, J. K. & Tabin, C. J. A cellular lineage analysis of the chick limb bud. Dev. Biol. 310, 388-400 (2007).
27. Qiu, Q., Chen, H. & Johnson, R. L. Lmx1b-expressing cells in the mouse limb bud define a dorsal mesenchymal lineage compartment. Genesis 47, 224-233 (2009).
28. Smith, D. M. & Tabin, C. J. Clonally related cells are restricted to organ boundaries early in the development of the chicken gut to form compartment boundaries. Dev. Biol. 227, 422-431 (2000).
29. Inoue, T. et al. Role of cadherins in maintaining the compartment boundary between the cortex and striatum during development. Development 128, 561-569 (2001).
30. Zeltser, L. M., Larsen, C. W. & Lumsden, A. A new developmental compartment in the forebrain regulated by Lunatic fringe. Nature Neurosci. 4, 683-684 (2001).
31. Garcia-Bellido, A. Genetic control of wing disc development in Drosophila. Ciba Found. Symp. 0, 161-182 (1975).
32. Coleman, K. G., Poole, S. J., Weir, M. P., Soeller, W. C. & Kornberg, T. The invected gene of Drosophila: sequence analysis and expression studies reveal a close kinship to the engrailed gene. Genes Dev. 1, 19-28 (1987).
33. Garcia-Bellido, A. & Santamaria, P. Developmental analysis of the wing disc in the mutant engrailed of Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 72, 87-104 (1972).
34. Blair, S. S., Brower, D. L., Thomas, J. B. & Zavortink, M. The role of apterous in the control of dorsoventral compartmentalization and PS integrin gene expression in the developing wing of Drosophila. Development 120, 1805-1815 (1994).
35. Von Baer, K. E. Über die Entwicklungsgeschichte der Thiere (Königsberg, 1828).
36. Orr, H. Contribution to the embryology of the lizard. J. Morphol. 1, 311-372 (1887).
37. Vaage, S. The segmentation of the primitive neural tube in chick embryos (Gallus domesticus). A morphological, histochemical and autoradiographical investigation. Ergeb. Anat. Entwicklungsgesch. 41, 3-87 (1969).
38. Keynes, R. & Lumsden, A. Segmentation and the origin of regional diversity in the vertebrate central nervous system. Neuron 4, 1-9 (1990).
39. Mellitzer, G., Xu, Q. & Wilkinson, D. G. Eph receptors and ephrins restrict cell intermingling and communication. Nature 400, 77-81 (1999).
40. Xu, Q., Mellitzer, G., Robinson, V. & Wilkinson, D. G. In vivo cell sorting in complementary segmental domains mediated by Eph receptors and ephrins. Nature 399, 267-271 (1999).
41. Kiecker, C. & Lumsden, A. Compartments and their boundaries in vertebrate brain development. Nature Rev. Neurosci. 6, 553-564 (2005).
42. Alexander, T., Nolte, C. & Krumlauf, R. Hox genes and segmentation of the hindbrain and axial skeleton. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 25, 431-456 (2009).
43. Keynes, R. J. & Stern, C. D. Segmentation in the vertebrate nervous system. Nature 310, 786-789 (1984).
44. Takahashi, Y. et al. Mesp2 initiates somite segmentation through the Notch signalling pathway. Nature Genet. 25, 390-396 (2000).
45. Saga, Y., Hata, N., Koseki, H. & Taketo, M. M. Mesp2: a novel mouse gene expressed in the presegmented mesoderm and essential for segmentation initiation. Genes Dev. 11, 1827-1839 (1997).
46. Nakajima, Y., Morimoto, M., Takahashi, Y., Koseki, H. & Saga, Y. Identification of Epha4 enhancer required for segmental expression and the regulation by Mesp2. Development 133, 2517-2525 (2006).
47. Schroter, C. & Oates, A. C. Segment number and axial identity in a segmentation clock period mutant. Curr. Biol. 20, 1254-1258 (2010).
48. Cooke, J. The problem of periodic patterns in embryos. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 295, 509-524 (1981).
49. Morimoto, M., Takahashi, Y., Endo, M. & Saga, Y. The Mesp2 transcription factor establishes segmental borders by suppressing Notch activity. Nature 435, 354-359 (2005).
50. Takahashi, Y., Inoue, T., Gossler, A. & Saga, Y. Feedback loops comprising Dll1, Dll3 and Mesp2, and differential involvement of Psen1 are essential for rostrocaudal patterning of somites. Development 130, 4259-4268 (2003).
51. Takahashi, Y., Yasuhiko, Y., Kitajima, S., Kanno, J. & Saga, Y. Appropriate suppression of Notch signaling by Mesp factors is essential for stripe pattern formation leading to segment boundary formation. Dev. Biol. 304, 593-603 (2007).
52. Yasuhiko, Y. et al. Tbx6-mediated Notch signaling controls somite-specific Mesp2 expression. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 103, 3651-3656 (2006).
53. Yasuhiko, Y. et al. Functional importance of evolutionally conserved Tbx6 binding sites in the presomitic mesoderm-specific enhancer of Mesp2. Development 135, 3511-3519 (2008).
54. Kawamura, A. et al. Groucho-associated transcriptional repressor ripply1 is required for proper transition from the presomitic mesoderm to somites. Dev. Cell 9, 735-744 (2005).
55. Kawamura, A., Koshida, S. & Takada, S. Activator-to-repressor conversion of T-box transcription factors by the Ripply family of Groucho/TLE-associated mediators. Mol. Cell. Biol. 28, 3236-3244 (2008).
56. Moreno, T. A., Jappelli, R., Izpisua Belmonte, J. C. & Kintner, C. Retinoic acid regulation of the Mesp-Ripply feedback loop during vertebrate segmental patterning. Dev. Biol. 315, 317-330 (2008).
57. Morimoto, M. et al. The negative regulation of Mesp2 by mouse Ripply2 is required to establish the rostro-caudal patterning within a somite. Development 134, 1561-1569 (2007).
58. Takahashi, J. et al. Analysis of Ripply1/2-deficient mouse embryos reveals a mechanism underlying the rostro-caudal patterning within a somite. Dev. Biol. 342, 134-145 (2010).
59. Oginuma, M. et al. The oscillation of Notch activation, but not its boundary, is required for somite border formation and rostral-caudal patterning within a somite. Development 137, 1515-1522 (2010).
60. Oates, A. C., Gorfinkiel, N., Gonzalez-Gaitan, M. & Heisenberg, C. P. Quantitative approaches in developmental biology. Nature Rev. Genet. 10, 517-530 (2009).
61. Oates, A. C., Rohde, L. A. & Ho, R. K. Generation of segment polarity in the paraxial mesoderm of the zebrafish through a T-box-dependent inductive event. Dev. Biol. 283, 204-214 (2005).
62. Moreno, T. A. & Kintner, C. Regulation of segmental patterning by retinoic acid signaling during Xenopus somitogenesis. Dev. Cell 6, 205-218 (2004).
63. Nikaido, M. et al. Tbx24, encoding a T-box protein, is mutated in the zebrafish somite-segmentation mutant fused somites. Nature Genet. 31, 195-199 (2002).
64. Palmeirim, I., Dubrulle, J., Henrique, D., Ish-Horowicz, D. & Pourquie, O. Uncoupling segmentation and somitogenesis in the chick presomitic mesoderm. Dev. Genet. 23, 77-85 (1998).
65. Burgess, R., Rawls, A., Brown, D., Bradley, A. & Olson, E. N. Requirement of the paraxis gene for somite formation and musculoskeletal patterning. Nature 384, 570-573 (1996).
66. Nomura-Kitabayashi, A. et al. Hypomorphic Mesp allele distinguishes establishment of rostrocaudal polarity and segment border formation in somitogenesis. Development 129, 2473-2481 (2002).
67. Blair, S. S. & Ralston, A. Smoothened-mediated Hedgehog signalling is required for the maintenance of the anterior-posterior lineage restriction in the developing wing of Drosophila. Development 124, 4053-4063 (1997).
68. Dahmann, C. & Basler, K. Opposing transcriptional outputs of Hedgehog signaling and engrailed control compartmental cell sorting at the Drosophila A/P boundary. Cell 100, 411-422 (2000).
69. Rodriguez, I. & Basler, K. Control of compartmental affinity boundaries by hedgehog. Nature 389, 614-618 (1997).
70. Shen, J. & Dahmann, C. The role of Dpp signaling in maintaining the Drosophila anteroposterior compartment boundary. Dev. Biol. 279, 31-43 (2005).
71. Micchelli, C. A. & Blair, S. S. Dorsoventral lineage restriction in wing imaginal discs requires Notch. Nature 401, 473-476 (1999).
72. Rauskolb, C., Correia, T. & Irvine, K. D. Fringe-dependent separation of dorsal and ventral cells in the Drosophila wing. Nature 401, 476-480 (1999).
73. Cooke, J. E., Kemp, H. A. & Moens, C. B. EphA4 is required for cell adhesion and rhombomere-boundary formation in the zebrafish. Curr. Biol. 15, 536-542 (2005).
74. Durbin, L. et al. Eph signaling is required for segmentation and differentiation of the somites. Genes Dev. 12, 3096-3109 (1998).
75. Nieto, M. A., Gilardi-Hebenstreit, P., Charnay, P. & Wilkinson, D. G. A receptor protein tyrosine kinase implicated in the segmental patterning of the hindbrain and mesoderm. Development 11 6, 1137-1150 (1992).
76. Sajjadi, F. G. & Pasquale, E. B. Five novel avian Eph-related tyrosine kinases are differentially expressed. Oncogene 8, 1807-1813 (1993).
77. Scales, J. B., Winning, R. S., Renaud, C. S., Shea, L. J. & Sargent, T. D. Novel members of the eph receptor tyrosine kinase subfamily expressed during Xenopus development. Oncogene 11, 1745-1752 (1995).
78. Durbin, L. et al. Anteroposterior patterning is required within segments for somite boundary formation in developing zebrafish. Development 127, 1703-1713 (2000).
79. Barrios, A. et al. Eph/Ephrin signaling regulates the mesenchymal-to-epithelial transition of the paraxial mesoderm during somite morphogenesis. Curr. Biol. 13, 1571-1582 (2003).
80. Sato, Y., Yasuda, K. & Takahashi, Y. Morphological boundary forms by a novel inductive event mediated by Lunatic fringe and Notch during somitic segmentation. Development 129, 3633-3644 (2002).
81. Tanaka, M. & Tickle, C. Tbx18 and boundary formation in chick somite and wing development. Dev. Biol. 268, 470-480 (2004).
82. Nakaya, Y., Kuroda, S., Katagiri, Y. T., Kaibuchi, K. & Takahashi, Y. Mesenchymal-epithelial transition during somitic segmentation is regulated by differential roles of Cdc42 and Rac1. Dev. Cell 7, 425-438 (2004).
83. Watanabe, T. et al. Tet-on inducible system combined with in ovo electroporation dissects multiple roles of genes in somitogenesis of chicken embryos. Dev. Biol. 305, 625-636 (2007).
84. Watanabe, T., Sato, Y., Saito, D., Tadokoro, R. & Takahashi, Y. EphrinB2 coordinates the formation of a morphological boundary and cell epithelialization during somite segmentation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 7467-7472 (2009).
85. Gibson, M. C., Patel, A. B., Nagpal, R. & Perrimon, N. The emergence of geometric order in proliferating metazoan epithelia. Nature 442, 1038-1041 (2006).
86. Farhadifar, R., Roper, J. C., Aigouy, B., Eaton, S. & Julicher, F. The influence of cell mechanics, cell-cell interactions, and proliferation on epithelial packing. Curr. Biol. 17, 2095-2104 (2007).
87. O'Brochta, D. A. & Bryant, P. J. A zone of non-proliferating cells at a lineage restriction boundary in Drosophila. Nature 313, 138-141 (1985).
88. Major, R. J. & Irvine, K. D. Influence of Notch on dorsoventral compartmentalization and actin organization in the Drosophila wing. Development 132, 3823-3833 (2005).
89. Blair, S. S. Mechanisms of compartment formation: evidence that non-proliferating cells do not play a critical role in defining the D/V lineage restriction in the developing wing of Drosophila. Development 11 9, 339-351 (1993).
90. Guthrie, S., Butcher, M. & Lumsden, A. Patterns of cell division and interkinetic nuclear migration in the chick embryo hindbrain. J. Neurobiol. 22, 742-754 (1991).
91. Lumsden, A. & Keynes, R. Segmental patterns of neuronal development in the chick hindbrain. Nature 337, 424-428 (1989).
92. Heyman, I., Kent, A. & Lumsden, A. Cellular morphology and extracellular space at rhombomere boundaries in the chick embryo hindbrain. Dev. Dyn. 198, 241-253 (1993).
93. Stellabotte, F., Dobbs-McAuliffe, B., Fernandez, D. A., Feng, X. & Devoto, S. H. Dynamic somite cell rearrangements lead to distinct waves of myotome growth. Development 134, 1253-1257 (2007).
94. Daggett, D. F., Domingo, C. R., Currie, P. D. & Amacher, S. L. Control of morphogenetic cell movements in the early zebrafish myotome. Dev. Biol. 309, 169-179 (2007).
95. Hollway, G. E. et al. Whole-somite rotation generates muscle progenitor cell compartments in the developing zebrafish embryo. Dev. Cell 12, 207-219 (2007).
96. Henry, C. A., Hall, L. A., Burr Hille, M., Solnica-Krezel, L. & Cooper, M. S. Somites in zebrafish doubly mutant for knypek and trilobite form without internal mesenchymal cells or compaction. Curr. Biol. 10, 1063-1066 (2000).
97. Julich, D., Geisler, R. & Holley, S. A. Integrinα5 and δ/notch signaling have complementary spatiotemporal requirements during zebrafish somitogenesis. Dev. Cell 8, 575-586 (2005).
98. Koshida, S. et al. Integrinα5-dependent fibronectin accumulation for maintenance of somite boundaries in zebrafish embryos. Dev. Cell 8, 587-598 (2005).
99. Kragtorp, K. A. & Miller, J. R. Integrin α5 is required for somite rotation and boundary formation in Xenopus. D ev. Dyn. 236, 2713-2720 (2007).
100. Martins, G. G. et al. Dynamic 3D cell rearrangements guided by a fibronectin matrix underlie somitogenesis. PLoS ONE 4, e7429 (2009).
101. Rifes, P. et al. Redefining the role of ectoderm in somitogenesis: a player in the formation of the fibronectin matrix of presomitic mesoderm. Development 134, 3155-3165 (2007).
102. Georges-Labouesse, E. N., George, E. L., Rayburn, H. & Hynes, R. O. Mesodermal development in mouse embryos mutant for fibronectin. D ev. Dyn. 207, 145-156 (1996).
103. Steinberg, M. S. Reconstruction of tissues by dissociated cells. Some morphogenetic tissue movements and the sorting out of embryonic cells may have a common explanation. Science 141, 401-408 (1963).
104. Godt, D. & Tepass, U. Drosophila oocyte localization is mediated by differential cadherin-based adhesion. Nature 395, 387-391 (1998).
105. Gonzalez-Reyes, A. & St. Johnston, D. Patterning of the follicle cell epithelium along the anterior-posterior axis during Drosophila oogenesis. Development 125, 2837-2846 (1998).
106. Nose, A., Nagafuchi, A. & Takeichi, M. Expressed recombinant cadherins mediate cell sorting in model systems. Cell 54, 993-1001 (1988).
107. Shinza-Kameda, M., Takasu, E., Sakurai, K., Hayashi, S. & Nose, A. Regulation of layer-specific targeting by reciprocal expression of a cell adhesion molecule, capricious. Neuron 49, 205-213 (2006).
108. Milan, M., Weihe, U., Perez, L. & Cohen, S. M. The LRR proteins capricious and Tartan mediate cell interactions during DV boundary formation in the Drosophila wing. Cell 106, 785-794 (2001).
109. Mao, Y., Kerr, M. & Freeman, M. Modulation of Drosophila retinal epithelial integrity by the adhesion proteins capricious and tartan. PLoS ONE 3, e1827 (2008).
110. Harris, A. K. Is cell sorting caused by differences in the work of intercellular adhesion? A critique of the Steinberg hypothesis. J. Theor. Biol. 61, 267-285 (1976).
111. Brodland, G. W. The differential interfacial tension hypothesis (DITH): a comprehensive theory for the self-rearrangement of embryonic cells and tissues. J. Biomech. Eng. 124, 188-197 (2002).
112. Lecuit, T. & Lenne, P. F. Cell surface mechanics and the control of cell shape, tissue patterns and morphogenesis. Nature Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 8, 633-644 (2007).
113. Major, R. J. & Irvine, K. D. Localization and requirement for Myosin II at the dorsal-ventral compartment boundary of the Drosophila wing. Dev. Dyn. 235, 3051-3058 (2006).
114. Brodland, G. W. & Chen, H. H. The mechanics of heterotypic cell aggregates: insights from computer simulations. J. Biomech. Eng. 122, 402-407 (2000).
115. Rauzi, M., Verant, P., Lecuit, T. & Lenne, P. F. Nature and anisotropy of cortical forces orienting Drosophila tissue morphogenesis. Nature Cell Biol. 10, 1401-1410 (2008).
116. Uehata, M. et al. Calcium sensitization of smooth muscle mediated by a Rho-associated protein kinase in hypertension. Nature 389, 990-994 (1997).
117. Winter, C. G. et al. Drosophila Rho-associated kinase (Drok) links Frizzled-mediated planar cell polarity signaling to the actin cytoskeleton. Cell 105, 81-91 (2001).
118. Simone, R. P. & DiNardo, S. Actomyosin contractility and Discs large contribute to junctional conversion in guiding cell alignment within the Drosophila embryonic epithelium. Development 137, 1385-1394 (2010).
119. Wei, S. Y. et al. Echinoid is a component of adherens junctions that cooperates with DE-Cadherin to mediate cell adhesion. Dev. Cell 8, 493-504 (2005).