Budgett's frog (Lepidobatrachus laevis): A new amphibian embryo for developmental biology

Developmental Biology

Volumn 405, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 291-303

  Amin, Nirav M ^a   Womble, Mandy ^a   Ledon Rettig, Cristina ^b   Hull, Margaret ^a   Dickinson, Amanda ^c   Nascone Yoder, Nanette ^a  

^a NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Amphibian; Embryo; Lepidobatrachus; Scaling; Stages; Xenopus

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANIMAL CELL; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL MODEL; ANURA; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY; DEVELOPMENTAL STAGE; EMBRYO; EMBRYO DEVELOPMENT; EXPLANT; FEMALE; GASTRULATION; HEAT TOLERANCE; LEPIDOBATRACHUS LAEVIS; LIMB REGENERATION; MALE; NEURULATION; NONHUMAN; OOCYTE; OOCYTE CLEAVAGE; ORGANOGENESIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TADPOLE; AMPHIBIA; ANIMAL; CELL LINEAGE; EMBRYOLOGY; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; MORPHOGENESIS; PHYSIOLOGY; REGENERATION; SPECIES DIFFERENCE; XENOPUS LAEVIS;

AMPHIBIA; ANURA; LEPIDOBATRACHUS; LEPIDOBATRACHUS LAEVIS; VERTEBRATA;

AMPHIBIANS; ANIMALS; ANURA; CELL LINEAGE; DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY; EMBRYONIC DEVELOPMENT; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; MODELS, ANIMAL; MORPHOGENESIS; ORGANOGENESIS; REGENERATION; SPECIES SPECIFICITY; XENOPUS LAEVIS;

EID: 84939260031     PISSN: 00121606     EISSN: 1095564X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ydbio.2015.06.007     Document Type: Article

References (79)

1. Amaya E., Musci T.J., Kirschner M.W. Expression of a dominant negative mutant of the FGF receptor disrupts mesoderm formation in Xenopus embryos. Cell 1991, 66:257-270.
2. Amin N.M., Greco T.M., Kuchenbrod L.M., Rigney M.M., Chung M.I., Wallingford J.B., Cristea I.M., Conlon F.L. Proteomic profiling of cardiac tissue by isolation of nuclei tagged in specific cell types (INTACT). Development 2014, 141:962-973.
3. AmphibiaWeb, 2014. Information on amphibian biology and conservation. Berkeley, California, AmphibiaWeb. 12-15-2014. Ref Type: Electronic Citation.
4. Azevedo A.S., Grotek B., Jacinto A., Weidinger G., Saude L. The regenerative capacity of the zebrafish caudal fin is not affected by repeated amputations. PLoS One. 2011, 6:e22820.
5. Beck C.W. Studying regeneration in Xenopus. Methods Mol. Biol. 2012, 917:525-539.
6. Blitz I.L., Biesinger J., Xie X., Cho K.W. Biallelic genome modification in F(0) Xenopus tropicalis embryos using the CRISPR/Cas system. Genesis 2013, 51:827-834.
7. Bloom S., Ledon-Rettig C., Infante C., Everly A., Hanken J., Nascone-Yoder N. Developmental origins of a novel gut morphology in frogs. Evol. Dev. 2013, 15:213-223.
8. Brieher W.M., Gumbiner B.M. Regulation of C-cadherin function during activin induced morphogenesis of Xenopus animal caps. J. Cell Biol. 1994, 126:519-527.
9. Brockes J.P., Kumar A. Plasticity and reprogramming of differentiated cells in amphibian regeneration. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2002, 3:566-574.
10. Budgett J.S. Notes on the batrachians of the Paraguayan Chaco, with observations upon their breeding habits and development, especially with regard to Phyllomedusa hypochondrialis, Cope. Also a description of a new genus. Q. J. Microsc. Sci. 1899, 305-333.
11. Calboli F.C., Fisher M.C., Garner T.W., Jehle R. The need for jumpstarting amphibian genome projects. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2011, 26:378-379.
12. Callery E.M. There's more than one frog in the pond: a survey of the Amphibia and their contributions to developmental biology. Semin. Cell Dev. Biol. 2006, 17:80-92.
13. Carroll E.J. Thermal tolerance and heat shock protein synthesis during development in the anuran Lepidobatrachus laevis. Dev. Growth Differ. 1996, 38:9-14.
14. Carroll E.J., Seneviratne A.M., Ruibal R. Gastric Pepsin in an Anuran Larva. Dev. Growth Differ. 1991, 33:499-507.
15. Collazo A., Keller R. Early development of Ensatina eschscholtzii: an amphibian with a large, yolky egg. Evodevo 2010, 1:6.
16. del Pino E.M., Avila M.E., Perez O.D., Benitez M.S., Alarcon I., Noboa V., Moya I.M. Development of the dendrobatid frog Colostethus machalilla. Int. J. Dev. Biol. 2004, 48:663-670.
17. del Pino E.M., Loor-Vela S. The pattern of early cleavage of the marsupial frog Gastrotheca riobambae. Development. 1990, 110:781-789.
18. del Pino E.M., Venegas-Ferrin M., Romero-Carvajal A., Montenegro-Larrea P., Saenz-Ponce N., Moya I.M., Alarcon I., Sudou N., Yamamoto S., Taira M. A comparative analysis of frog early development. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2007, 104:11882-11888.
19. Dent J.N. Limb regeneration in larvae and metamorphosing individuals of the South African clawed toad. J. Morphol. 1962, 110:61-77.
20. Dush M.K., McIver A.L., Parr M.A., Young D.D., Fisher J., Newman D.R., Sannes P.L., Hauck M.L., Deiters A., Nascone-Yoder N. Heterotaxin: a TGF-beta signaling inhibitor identified in a multi-phenotype profiling screen in Xenopus embryos. Chem. Biol. 2011, 18:252-263.
21. Elinson R.P., Beckham Y. Development in frogs with large eggs and the origin of amniotes. Zoology (Jena) 2002, 105:105-117.
22. Fabrezi M. Morphological evolution of Ceratophryinae (Anura, Neobatrachia). J. Zool. Syst. Evol. Res. 2006, 44:153-166.
23. Fabrezi M., Lobo F. Hyoid skeleton, its related muscles, and morphological novelties in the frog Lepidobatrachus (anura, ceratophryidae). Anat. Rec. (Hoboken.) 2009, 292:1700-1712.
24. Faivovich J., Nicoli L., Blotto B.L., Pereyra M.O., Baldo D., Barrionuevo J.S., Fabrezi M., Wild E.R., Haddad C.F.B. Big, bad, and beautiful: phylogenetic relationships of the horned frogs (Anura: Ceratophryidae). S. Am. J. Herpetol. 2014, 9:207-227.
25. Fei J.F., Schuez M., Tazaki A., Taniguchi Y., Roensch K., Tanaka E.M. CRISPR-mediated genomic deletion of Sox2 in the axolotl shows a requirement in spinal cord neural stem cell amplification during tail regeneration. Stem Cell Rep. 2014, 3:444-459.
26. Flowers G.P., Timberlake A.T., McLean K.C., Monaghan J.R., Crews C.M. Highly efficient targeted mutagenesis in axolotl using Cas9 RNA-guided nuclease. Development 2014, 141:2165-2171.
27. Goode R.P. The regeneration of limbs in adult anurans. J. Embryol. Exp. Morphol. 1967, 18:259-267.
28. Gosner K.L. A simplified table for staging anuran embryos and larvae. Herpetologica 1960, 16:183-190.
29. Guo X., Zhang T., Hu Z., Zhang Y., Shi Z., Wang Q., Cui Y., Wang F., Zhao H., Chen Y. Efficient RNA/Cas9-mediated genome editing in Xenopus tropicalis. Development 2014, 141:707-714.
30. Hall B.K. Evolutionary Developmental Biology 1992, Chapman & Hall, London.
31. Hamlet M.R., Yergeau D.A., Kuliyev E., Takeda M., Taira M., Kawakami K., Mead P.E. Tol2 transposon-mediated transgenesis in Xenopus tropicalis. Genesis 2006, 44:438-445.
32. Hanken J. Model systems versus outgroups-alternative approaches to the study of head development and evolution. Am. Zool. 1993, 33:448-456.
33. Hellsten U., Harland R.M., Gilchrist M.J., Hendrix D., Jurka J., Kapitonov V., Ovcharenko I., Putnam N.H., Shu S., Taher L., et al. The genome of the Western clawed frog Xenopus tropicalis. Science 2010, 328:633-636.
34. Hopwood N.D., Gurdon J.B. Activation of muscle genes without myogenesis by ectopic expression of MyoD in frog embryo cells. Nature 1990, 347:197-200.
35. Khattak S., Murawala P., Andreas H., Kappert V., Schuez M., Sandoval-Guzman T., Crawford K., Tanaka E.M. Optimized axolotl (Ambystoma mexicanum) husbandry, breeding, metamorphosis, transgenesis and tamoxifen-mediated recombination. Nat. Protoc. 2014, 9:529-540.
36. Khokha M.K., Chung C., Bustamante E.L., Gaw L.W., Trott K.A., Yeh J., Lim N., Lin J.C., Taverner N., Amaya E., et al. Techniques and probes for the study of Xenopus tropicalis development. Dev. Dyn. 2002, 225:499-510.
37. Kroll K.L., Amaya E. Transgenic Xenopus embryos from sperm nuclear transplantations reveal FGF signaling requirements during gastrulation. Development 1996, 122:3173-3183.
38. Ledon-Rettig C.C., Pfennig D.W. Emerging model systems in eco-evo-devo: the environmentally responsive spadefoot toad. Evol. Dev. 2011, 13:391-400.
39. Lei Y., Guo X., Liu Y., Cao Y., Deng Y., Chen X., Cheng C.H., Dawid I.B., Chen Y., Zhao H. Efficient targeted gene disruption in Xenopus embryos using engineered transcription activator-like effector nucleases (TALENs). Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2012, 109:17484-17489.
40. Liu Y., Luo D., Lei Y., Hu W., Zhao H., Cheng C.H. A highly effective TALEN-mediated approach for targeted gene disruption in Xenopus tropicalis and zebrafish. Methods 2014, 14:41-43.
41. Logan M., Mohun T. Induction of cardiac muscle differentiation in isolated animal pole explants of Xenopus laevis embryos. Development 1993, 118:865-875.
42. Moody S.A. Fates of the blastomeres of the 16-cell stage Xenopus embryo. Dev. Biol. 1987, 119:560-578.
43. Moody S.A. Fates of the blastomeres of the 32-cell-stage Xenopus embryo. Dev. Biol. 1987, 122:300-319.
44. Moya I.M., Alarcon I., del Pino E.M. Gastrulation of Gastrotheca riobambae in comparison with other frogs. Dev. Biol. 2007, 304:467-478.
45. Nakajima K., Yaoita Y. Comparison of TALEN scaffolds in Xenopus tropicalis. Biol. Open 2013, 2:1364-1370.
46. Nakayama T., Fish M.B., Fisher M., Oomen-Hajagos J., Thomsen G.H., Grainger R.M. Simple and efficient CRISPR/Cas9-mediated targeted mutagenesis in Xenopus tropicalis. Genesis 2013, 51:835-843.
47. Nieuwkoop, P.D., Faber, J., 1994. Normal table of Xenopus laevis (Daudin): a systematical & chronological survey of the development from the fertilized egg till the end of metamorphosis, Amsterdam.
48. Ogino H., McConnell W.B., Grainger R.M. High-throughput transgenesis in Xenopus using I-SceI meganuclease. Nat. Protoc. 2006, 1:1703-1710.
49. Parker H.W. Reports of an expedition to Brazil and Paraguay in 1926-7, supported by the trustees of the Percy Sladen memorial fund and the executive committee of the Carnegie trust for Scotland. Amphibia and Reptilia. J. Proc. Linn. Soc. Zool. 1931, 285-289.
50. Perez O.D., Lai N.B., Buckley D., del Pino E.M., Wake M.H. The morphology of prehatching embryos of Caecilia orientalis (Amphibia: Gymnophiona: Caeciliidae). J. Morphol. 2009, 270:1492-1502.
51. Ramsdell A.F., Bernanke J.M., Trusk T.C. Left-right lineage analysis of the embryonic Xenopus heart reveals a novel framework linking congenital cardiac defects and laterality disease. Development 2006, 133:1399-1410.
52. Rao N., Song F., Jhamb D., Wang M., Milner D.J., Price N.M., Belecky-Adams T.L., Palakal M.J., Cameron J.A., Li B., Chen X., Stocum D.L. Proteomic analysis of fibroblastema formation in regenerating hind limbs of Xenopus laevis froglets and comparison to axolotl. BMC Dev. Biol. 2014, 14-32.
53. Reed R.A., Womble M.A., Dush M.K., Tull R.R., Bloom S.K., Morckel A.R., Devlin E.W., Nascone-Yoder N.M. Morphogenesis of the primitive gut tube is generated by Rho/ROCK/myosin II-mediated endoderm rearrangements. Dev. Dyn 2009, 238:3111-3125.
54. Romero-Carvajal A., Saenz-Ponce N., Venegas-Ferrin M., Almeida-Reinoso D., Lee C., Bond J., Ryan M.J., Wallingford J.B., del Pino E.M. Embryogenesis and laboratory maintenance of the foam-nesting tungara frogs, genus Engystomops (=Physalaemus). Dev. Dyn. 2009, 238:1444-1454.
55. Ruibal R., Thomas E. The obligate carnivorous larvae of the frog Lepidobatrachus laevis (Leptodactylidae). Copeia 1988, 3:591-604.
56. Saint-Jeannet J.P., Karavanov A.A., Dawid I.B. Expression of mesoderm markers in Xenopus laevis Keller explants. Int. J. Dev. Biol. 1994, 38:605-611.
57. Sakane Y., Sakuma T., Kashiwagi K., Kashiwagi A., Yamamoto T., Suzuki K.T. Targeted mutagenesis of multiple and paralogous genes in Xenopus laevis using two pairs of transcription activator-like effector nucleases. Dev. Growth Differ. 2014, 56:108-114.
58. Sater A.K., Jacobson A.G. The specification of heart mesoderm occurs during gastrulation in Xenopus laevis. Development 1989, 105:821-830.
59. Sater A.K., Jacobson A.G. The restriction of the heart morphogenetic field in Xenopus laevis. Dev. Biol. 1990, 140:328-336.
60. Scadding S.R. Phylogenic distribution of limb regeneration capacity in adult amphibia. J. Exp. Zool. 1977, 202:57-67.
61. Sive H.L., Grainger R.M., Harland R.M. Early Development of Xenopus laevis 1998, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, New York.
62. Smith J.C., Symes K., Hynes R.O., DeSimone D. Mesoderm induction and the control of gastrulation in Xenopus laevis: the roles of fibronectin and integrins. Development 1990, 108:229-238.
63. Smith W.C., Knecht A.K., Wu M., Harland R.M. Secreted noggin protein mimics the Spemann organizer in dorsalizing Xenopus mesoderm. Nature 1993, 361:547-549.
64. Sobkow L., Epperlein H.H., Herklotz S., Straube W.L., Tanaka E.M. A germline GFP transgenic axolotl and its use to track cell fate: dual origin of the fin mesenchyme during development and the fate of blood cells during regeneration. Dev. Biol. 2006, 290:386-397.
65. Spemann H., Mangold H. Induction of embryonic primordia by implantation of organizers from a different species. Roux's Arch. Entw. Mech. 1924, 100:599-638.
66. Stuart S.N., Chanson J.S., Cox N.A., Young B.E., Rodrigues A.S., Fischman D.L., Waller R.W. Status and trends of amphibian declines and extinctions worldwide. Science 2004, 306:1783-1786.
67. Sun L., Bertke M.M., Champion M.M., Zhu G., Huber P.W., Dovichi N.J. Quantitative proteomics of Xenopus laevis embryos: expression kinetics of nearly 4000 proteins during early development. Sci. Rep. 2014, 4:4365.
68. Suzuki K.T., Isoyama Y., Kashiwagi K., Sakuma T., Ochiai H., Sakamoto N., Furuno N., Kashiwagi A., Yamamoto T. High efficiency TALENs enable F0 functional analysis by targeted gene disruption in Xenopus laevis embryos. Biol. Open 2013, 2:448-452.
69. Tandon P., Showell C., Christine K., Conlon F.L. Morpholino injection in Xenopus. Methods Mol. Biol. 2012, 843:29-46.
70. Tank P.W., Carlson B.M., Connelly T.G. A staging system for forelimb regeneration in the axolotl, Ambystoma mexicanum. J. Morphol. 1976, 150:117-128.
71. Whited J.L., Lehoczky J.A., Tabin C.J. Inducible genetic system for the axolotl. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2012, 109:13662-13667.
72. Wilson P.A., Oster G., Keller R. Cell rearrangement and segmentation in Xenopus: direct observation of cultured explants. Development 1989, 105:155-166.
73. Woodland H.R., Jones E.A. The development of an assay to detect mRNAs that affect early development. Development 1987, 101:925-930.
74. Wuhr M., Freeman R.M., Presler M., Horb M.E., Peshkin L., Gygi S.P., Kirschner M.W. Deep proteomics of the Xenopus laevis egg using an mRNA-derived reference database. Curr. Biol. 2014, 24:1467-1475.
75. Yergeau D.A., Johnson Hamlet M.R., Kuliyev E., Zhu H., Doherty J.R., Archer T.D., Subhawong A.P., Valentine M.B., Kelley C.M., Mead P.E. Transgenesis in Xenopus using the Sleeping Beauty transposon system. Dev. Dyn. 2009, 238:1727-1743.
76. Yokoyama H., Maruoka T., Ochi H., Aruga A., Ohgo S., Ogino H., Tamura K. Different requirement for Wnt/beta-catenin signaling in limb regeneration of larval and adult Xenopus. PLoS One. 2011, 6:e21721.
77. Young H.E., Bailey C.F., Dalley B.K. Gross morphological analysis of limb regeneration in postmetamorphic adult Ambystoma. Anat. Rec. 1983, 206:295-306.
78. Young J.J., Cherone J.M., Doyon Y., Ankoudinova I., Faraji F.M., Lee A.H., Ngo C., Guschin D.Y., Paschon D.E., Miller J.C., et al. Efficient targeted gene disruption in the soma and germ line of the frog Xenopus tropicalis using engineered zinc-finger nucleases. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2011, 108:7052-7057.
79. Ziermann J.M., Infante C., Hanken J., Olsson L. Morphology of the cranial skeleton and musculature in the obligate carnivorous tadpole of Lepidobatrachus laevis (Anura: Ceratophryidae). Acta Zool. 2013, 94:101-112.