Forcing neural progenitor cells to cycle is insufficient to alter cell-fate decision and timing of neuronal differentiation in the spinal cord
Open Access
- 13 February 2008
- journal article
- Published by Springer Nature in Neural Development
- Vol. 3 (1) , 4
- https://doi.org/10.1186/1749-8104-3-4
Abstract
Background: During the development of the nervous system, neural progenitor cells can either stay in the pool of proliferating undifferentiated cells or exit the cell cycle and differentiate. Two main factors will determine the fate of a neural progenitor cell: its position within the neuroepithelium and the time at which the cell initiates differentiation. In this paper we investigated the importance of the timing of cell cycle exit on cell-fate decision by forcing neural progenitors to cycle and studying the consequences on specification and differentiation programs. Results: As a model, we chose the spinal progenitors of motor neurons (pMNs), which switch cell-fate from motor neurons to oligodendrocytes with time. To keep pMNs in the cell cycle, we forced the expression of G1-phase regulators, the D-type cyclins. We observed that keeping neural progenitor cells cycling is not sufficient to retain them in the progenitor domain (ventricular zone); transgenic cells instead migrate to the differentiating field (mantle zone) regardless of cell cycle exit. Cycling cells located in the mantle zone do not retain markers of neural progenitor cells such as Sox2 or Olig2 but upregulate transcription factors involved in motor neuron specification, including MNR2 and Islet1/2. These cycling cells also progress through neuronal differentiation to axonal extension. We also observed mitotic cells displaying all the features of differentiating motor neurons, including axonal projection via the ventral root. However, the rapid decrease observed in the proliferation rate of the transgenic motor neuron population suggests that they undergo only a limited number of divisions. Finally, quantification of the incidence of the phenotype in young and more mature neuroepithelium has allowed us to propose that once the transcriptional program assigning neural progenitor cells to a subtype of neurons is set up, transgenic cells progress in their program of differentiation regardless of cell cycle exit. Conclusion: Our findings indicate that maintaining neural progenitor cells in proliferation is insufficient to prevent differentiation or alter cell-fate choice. Furthermore, our results indicate that the programs of neuronal specification and differentiation are controlled independently of cell cycle exit.Keywords
This publication has 39 references indexed in Scilit:
- Selective cortical interneuron and GABA deficits in cyclin D2-null miceDevelopment, 2007
- Maintenance of motor neuron progenitors in Xenopus requires a novel localized cyclinEMBO Reports, 2007
- Hedgehog signaling and the retina: insights into the mechanisms controlling the proliferative properties of neural precursorsGenes & Development, 2006
- A cell-autonomous requirement for Cip/Kip cyclin-kinase inhibitors in regulating neuronal cell cycle exit but not differentiation in the developing spinal cordDevelopmental Biology, 2006
- An inhibition of cyclin-dependent kinases that lengthens, but does not arrest, neuroepithelial cell cycle induces premature neurogenesisJournal of Cell Science, 2003
- Directed Differentiation of Embryonic Stem Cells into Motor NeuronsCell, 2002
- Proneural genes and the specification of neural cell typesNature Reviews Neuroscience, 2002
- Cleavage orientation and the asymmetric inheritance of notchl immunoreactivity in mammalian neurogenesisCell, 1995
- A series of normal stages in the development of the chick embryoDevelopmental Dynamics, 1992
- Mice deficient for Rb are nonviable and show defects in neurogenesis and haematopoiesisNature, 1992