4.1 Article

Regulation of trunk neural crest delamination by EF1 and Sip1 in the chicken embryo

Journal

DEVELOPMENT GROWTH & DIFFERENTIATION
Volume 58, Issue 2, Pages 205-214

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/dgd.12256

Keywords

chicken neural crest; shRNA-mediated knockdown; Sox10; Zfhx1 transcription factors

Funding

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan [22247035, 26251024, 25440106]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [26461539, 22247035, 26251024, 25440106, 15K14527] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The vertebrate Zfhx1 transcription factor family comprises EF1 and Sip1, which bind to CACCT-containing sequences and act as transcriptional repressors. It has been a longstanding question whether these transcription factors share the same regulatory functions invivo. It has been shown that neural crest (NC) delamination depends on the Sip1 activity at the cranial level in mouse and chicken embryos, and it remained unclear how NC delamination is regulated at the trunk level. We observed that the expression of EF1 and Sip1 overlaps in many tissues in chicken embryos, including NC cells at the trunk level. To clarify the above questions, we separately knocked down EF1 and Sip1 or in combination in NC cells by electroporation of vectors expressing short hairpin RNAs (shRNAs) against respective mRNAs on the dorsal side of neural tubes that generate NC cells. In all cases, the migrating NC cell population was significantly reduced, paralleled by the decreased expression of EF1 or Sip1 targeted by shRNAs. Expression of Sox10, the major transcription factor that regulates NC development, was also decreased by the shRNAs against EF1 or Sip1. We conclude that the trunk NC delamination is regulated by both EF1 and Sip1 in an analogous manner, and that these transcription factors can share equivalent regulatory functions in embryonic tissues.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available