2007
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2007.02.019
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Notch and MAML Signaling Drives Scl-Dependent Interneuron Diversity in the Spinal Cord

Abstract: The ventral spinal cord generates multiple inhibitory and excitatory interneuron subtypes from four cardinal progenitor domains (p0, p1, p2, p3). Here we show that cell-cell interactions mediated by the Notch receptor play a critical evolutionarily conserved role in the generation of excitatory v2aIN and inhibitory v2bIN interneurons. Lineage-tracing experiments show that the v2aIN and v2bIN develop from genetically identical p2 progenitors. The p2 daughter cell fate is controlled by Delta4 activation of Notch… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

9
230
1

Year Published

2007
2007
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 165 publications
(240 citation statements)
references
References 57 publications
9
230
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Notch function is implicated in binary fate choice in many developing systems. In the CNS alone, this is the case for selecting between spinal cord interneuron subtypes (Peng et al, 2007), interneurons/motoneurons (Shin et al, 2007), motoneurons/oligodendrocytes (Park and Appel, 2003), habenular subnuclei (Aizawa et al, 2007), epiphysis photoreceptors/projection neurons (Cau et al, 2008), pituitary secretory cell types (Zhu et al, 2006), or between retinal neuronal subtypes and Mueller glia (Scheer et al, 2001;Bernardos et al, 2005;Jadhav et al, 2006). These fate choices often implicate the maintenance by Notch of a progenitor state as opposed to differentiation, and such a mechanism fits with our results.…”
Section: Distinct Outcomes Of Notch Activitysupporting
confidence: 80%
“…Notch function is implicated in binary fate choice in many developing systems. In the CNS alone, this is the case for selecting between spinal cord interneuron subtypes (Peng et al, 2007), interneurons/motoneurons (Shin et al, 2007), motoneurons/oligodendrocytes (Park and Appel, 2003), habenular subnuclei (Aizawa et al, 2007), epiphysis photoreceptors/projection neurons (Cau et al, 2008), pituitary secretory cell types (Zhu et al, 2006), or between retinal neuronal subtypes and Mueller glia (Scheer et al, 2001;Bernardos et al, 2005;Jadhav et al, 2006). These fate choices often implicate the maintenance by Notch of a progenitor state as opposed to differentiation, and such a mechanism fits with our results.…”
Section: Distinct Outcomes Of Notch Activitysupporting
confidence: 80%
“…It is hypothesized that the long duration or high intensity of Notch activity imposes irreversible changes in gene expression and/or epigenetic status and thus enables progenitor cells competent to adopt an alternative cell fate [22]. This is consistent with recent findings of Notch function in other developmental contexts [25][26][27][28]. Interestingly, it has been shown recently that the conserved first intron region of the Prop1 gene is capable of conferring dorsal expression of a transgene driven by a heterologous promoter, suggesting that this element is critical for the spatial expression of endogenous Prop1 during pituitary development.…”
Section: Temporally Regulated Notch Signaling Is Required For Sequentsupporting
confidence: 86%
“…This mechanism appears to be used by other CNS progenitors to generate neuronal diversity as well. For instance, during spinal cord development, Dll4 acts downstream of Foxn4 to specify the V2b inhibitory interneurons vs. the V2a excitatory interneurons (49,50), whereas Dll1 is required mainly for progenitor maintenance in the V2 domain (48).…”
Section: Dll4 Instead Of Dll1 Mediates Notch Signaling To Suppressmentioning
confidence: 99%