A single Wnt can simultaneously activate different pathways with distinct and independent outcomes and reciprocal regulation in human articular chondrocytes.

ObjectiveBoth excessive and insufficient activation of WNT signalling results in cartilage breakdown and osteoarthritis. WNT16 is upregulated in the articular cartilage following injury and in osteoarthritis. Here, we investigate the function of WNT16 in osteoarthritis and the downstream molecular mechanisms.MethodsOsteoarthritis was induced by destabilisation of the medial meniscus in wild-type and WNT16-deficient mice. Molecular mechanisms and downstream effects were studied in vitro and in vivo in primary cartilage progenitor cells and primary chondrocytes. The pathway downstream of WNT16 was studied in primary chondrocytes and using the axis duplication assay in Xenopus.ResultsWNT16-deficient mice developed more severe osteoarthritis with reduced expression of lubricin and increased chondrocyte apoptosis. WNT16 supported the phenotype of cartilage superficial-zone progenitor cells and lubricin expression. Increased osteoarthritis in WNT16-deficient mice was associated with excessive activation of canonical WNT signalling. In vitro, high doses of WNT16 weakly activated canonical WNT signalling, but, in co-stimulation experiments, WNT16 reduced the capacity of WNT3a to activate the canonical WNT pathway. In vivo, WNT16 rescued the WNT8-induced primary axis duplication in Xenopus embryos.ConclusionsIn osteoarthritis, WNT16 maintains a balanced canonical WNT signalling and prevents detrimental excessive activation, thereby supporting the homeostasis of progenitor cells.

Hyphal development in the dimorphic pathogenic fungus Candida albicans is thought to facilitate the primary invasion of surface epithelia during superficial infections. When mycelia were grown on Nuclepore membrane filters that were placed over serum-containing agar, the hyphae grew over the membrane surface and through the pores thereby crossing to the other side of the membrane. Hyphae that did not contact the lip of a pore did not enter it. The response was likely to be due to contact guidance (thigmotropism) and not chemotropism towards the nutrients since hyphae growing on the underside of the membrane also entered the pores then grew away from the underlying nutrient agar. The response therefore seems to be due to sensation of the substrate topography, and tropic movement in relation to changes in contour. This behaviour may enable the hyphae to penetrate epithelia at microscopic wound sites, membrane invaginations and other foci where the integrity of the epithelium is weak.