4.1 Article

Identification of a novel transcriptional corepressor, Corl2, as a cerebellar Purkinje cell-selective marker

期刊

GENE EXPRESSION PATTERNS
卷 8, 期 6, 页码 418-423

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.gep.2008.04.004

关键词

Corl2; Purkinje cell; cerebellum; GABAergic neuron; transcriptional corepressor; neuronal identity; mouse

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The developmental origin of cerebellar Purkinje cells (PCs) has not been precisely mapped and the genetic program of the specification of this neuronal subtype is largely unknown. Here, we report the isolation of a novel mouse gene encoding a transcriptional corepressor, Corl2, and its expression pattern. Corl2 expression was restricted to the central nervous system in both adult and embryonic stages. In situ hybridization and immunohistochemistry using a polyclonal antibody against Corl2 revealed that Corl2 is selectively expressed at high levels in the developing cerebellum, ventral metencephalon and myelencephalon at E12.5. In these brain regions, neural progenitors did not express Corl2 during the proliferative state but started to express it shortly after exit from the cell cycle. In the cerebellum, Corl2 was specifically expressed in PCs at the adult stage, and consistently, most Corl2(+) cells expressed PC markers, such as ROR alpha and calbindin, at the late embryonic stage. At E12.5, when PCs are emerging, GABAergic neurons generated from the dorsal part of the Ptf1a(+) progenitor domain selectively expressed Corl2. Importantly, Corl2(+) cells in the cerebellum did not express the GABAergic interneuron marker Pax2 at any of the developmental stages. Collectively, these results strongly suggest that Corl2 is a specific marker for PCs in the cerebellum from their emergence until the adult stage. Furthermore, this marker was useful for unmasking the precise Origin of PCs and delineating the domain map within the ventricular zone that generates cerebellar GABAergic neurons. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据