Temporal requirement of<i>Hoxa2</i>in cranial neural crest skeletal morphogenesis

Santagati, Fabio; Minoux, Maryline; Ren, Shuyue; Rijli, Filippo M.

doi:10.1242/dev.02078

Cited by 119 publications

(133 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

122

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the mouse model, it has been demonstrated elegantly that CNC cells retain a remarkable degree of plasticity, even after their migration into the branchial arch (Zhao et al, 2006). The second arch CNC cells have a cell-autonomous requirement for the Hoxa2 gene for their intrinsic patterning program (Santagati et al, 2005). In vitro studies have also begun to address the plasticity of postmigratory CNC cells (Zhao et al, 2006).…”

Section: Concerted Action Of Growth and Transcription Factors In Detementioning

confidence: 99%

Recent advances in craniofacial morphogenesis

Chai

Maxson

2006

Developmental Dynamics

527

503

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Craniofacial malformations are involved in three fourths of all congenital birth defects in humans, affecting the development of head, face, or neck. Tremendous progress in the study of craniofacial development has been made that places this field at the forefront of biomedical research. A concerted effort among evolutionary and developmental biologists, human geneticists, and tissue engineers has revealed important information on the molecular mechanisms that are crucial for the patterning and formation of craniofacial structures. Here, we highlight recent advances in our understanding of evo-devo as it relates to craniofacial morphogenesis, fate determination of cranial neural crest cells, and specific signaling pathways in regulating tissue-tissue interactions during patterning of craniofacial apparatus and the morphogenesis of tooth, mandible, and palate. Together, these findings will be beneficial for the understanding, treatment, and prevention of human congenital malformations and establish the foundation for craniofacial tissue regeneration. Developmental Dynamics 235:2353-2375, 2006.

show abstract

Section: Concerted Action Of Growth and Transcription Factors In Detementioning

confidence: 99%

Recent advances in craniofacial morphogenesis

Chai

Maxson

2006

Developmental Dynamics

527

503

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Manipulation of branchial arch crest populations, either by transplantation (Noden, 1983a;Gross and Hanken, 2005) or genetic alteration (Trainor and Krumlauf, 2001;Santagati et al, 2005;Baltzinger et al, 2005), results in a patterned alteration in the organization of muscles that mimics the changes in skeletal organization (reviewed in Noden and Trainor, 2005). Despite the regional differences in pre-tendon signals, there must be extensive overlap in the consortium of signals controlling muscle morphogenesis in the head and trunk, as transplanted mesoderms cells are fully able to respond to cues in either location.…”

Section: Morphogenesis Of Head Musclesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The differentiation and morphogenesis of craniofacial muscles

Noden

Francis‐West

2006

Developmental Dynamics

349

358

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Unraveling the complex tissue interactions necessary to generate the structural and functional diversity present among craniofacial muscles is challenging. These muscles initiate their development within a mesenchymal population bounded by the brain, pharyngeal endoderm, surface ectoderm, and neural crest cells. This set of spatial relations, and in particular the segmental properties of these adjacent tissues, are unique to the head. Additionally, the lack of early epithelialization in head mesoderm necessitates strategies for generating discrete myogenic foci that may differ from those operating in the trunk. Molecular data indeed indicate dissimilar methods of regulation, yet transplantation studies suggest that some head and trunk myogenic populations are interchangeable. The first goal of this review is to present key features of these diversities, identifying and comparing tissue and molecular interactions regulating myogenesis in the head and trunk. Our second focus is on the diverse morphogenetic movements exhibited by craniofacial muscles. Precursors of tongue muscles partly mimic migrations of appendicular myoblasts, whereas myoblasts destined to form extraocular muscles condense within paraxial mesoderm, then as large cohorts they cross the mesoderm:neural crest interface en route to periocular regions. Branchial muscle precursors exhibit yet another strategy, establishing contacts with neural crest populations before branchial arch formation and maintaining these relations through subsequent stages of morphogenesis. With many of the prerequisite stepping-stones in our knowledge of craniofacial myogenesis now in place, discovering the cellular and molecular interactions necessary to initiate and sustain the differentiation and morphogenesis of these neglected craniofacial muscles is now an attainable goal.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, as Moz is required for the maintenance of Hox2 expression in postmigratory CNC, but not for Hox expression in premigratory CNC, our moz -CNC into wild-type mosaics demonstrate a late skeletal patterning function for Hox2 expression in postmigratory CNC. Recent experiments in mouse, in which Hoxa2 function was eliminated specifically in postmigratory CNC, demonstrate that the late CNC-specific function of Hox2 genes in skeletal patterning is conserved from fish to mammals (Santagati et al, 2005).…”

Section: Hox Genes Are Cnc-intrinsic Regulators Of Facial Skeletal Pamentioning

confidence: 99%

Moz-dependent Hox expression controls segment-specific fate maps of skeletal precursors in the face

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Development of the facial skeleton depends on interactions between intrinsic factors in the skeletal precursors and extrinsic signals in the facial environment. Hox genes have been proposed to act cell-intrinsically in skeletogenic cranial neural crest cells (CNC) for skeletal pattern. However, Hox genes are also expressed in other facial tissues, such as the ectoderm and endoderm, suggesting that Hox genes could also regulate extrinsic signalling from non-CNC tissues. Here we study moz mutant zebrafish in which hoxa2b and hoxb2a expression is lost and the support skeleton of the second pharyngeal segment is transformed into a duplicate of the first-segment-derived jaw skeleton. By performing tissue mosaic experiments between moz -and wild-type embryos, we show that Moz and Hox genes function in CNC, but not in the ectoderm or endoderm, to specify the support skeleton. How then does Hox expression within CNC specify a support skeleton at the cellular level? Our fate map analysis of skeletal precursors reveals that Moz specifies a second-segment fate map in part by regulating the interaction of CNC with the first endodermal pouch (p1). Removal of p1, either by laser ablation or in the itga5 b926 mutant, reveals that p1 epithelium is required for development of the wild-type support but not the moz -duplicate jaw-like skeleton. We present a model in which Moz-dependent Hox expression in CNC shapes the normal support skeleton by instructing second-segment CNC to undergo skeletogenesis in response to local extrinsic signals.

show abstract

Temporal requirement ofHoxa2in cranial neural crest skeletal morphogenesis

Cited by 119 publications

References 60 publications

Recent advances in craniofacial morphogenesis

Recent advances in craniofacial morphogenesis

The differentiation and morphogenesis of craniofacial muscles

Moz-dependent Hox expression controls segment-specific fate maps of skeletal precursors in the face

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About