Ventral axial organs regulate expression of myotomal Fgf-8 that influences rib development

Fgf-8 encodes a secreted signaling molecule mediating key roles in embryonic patterning. This study analyzes the expression pattern, regulation, and function of this growth factor in the paraxial mesoderm of the avian embryo. In the mature somite, expression of Fgf-8 is restricted to a subpopulation of myotome cells, comprising most, but not all, epaxial and hypaxial muscle precursors. Following ablation of the notochord and floor plate, Fgf-8 expression is not activated in the somites, in either the epaxial or the hypaxial domain, while ablation of the dorsal neural tube does not affect Fgf-8 expression in paraxial mesoderm. Contrary to the view that hypaxial muscle precursors are independent of regulatory influences from axial structures, these findings provide the first evidence for a regulatory influence of ventral, but not dorsal axial structures on the hypaxial muscle domain. Sonic hedgehog can substitute for the ventral neural tube and notochord in the initiation of Fgf-8 expression in the myotome. It is also shown that Fgf-8 protein leads to an increase in sclerotomal cell proliferation and enhances rib cartilage development in mature somites, whereas inhibition of Fgf signaling by SU 5402 causes deletions in developing ribs. These observations demonstrate: (1) a regulatory influence of the ventral axial organs on the hypaxial muscle compartment; (2) regulation of epaxial and hypaxial expression of Fgf-8 by Sonic hedgehog; and (3) independent regulation of Fgf-8 and MyoD in the hypaxial myotome by ventral axial organs. It is postulated that the notochord and ventral neural tube influence hypaxial expression of Fgf-8 in the myotome and that, in turn, Fgf-8 has a functional role in rib formation.     

MyoD and Myf-5 define the specification of musculature of distinct embryonic origin.

Mounting evidence supports the notion that Myf-5 and MyoD play unique roles in the development of epaxial (originating in the dorso-medial half of the somite, e.g. back muscles) and hypaxial (originating in the ventro-lateral half of the somite, e.g. limb and body wall muscles) musculature. To further understand how Myf-5 and MyoD genes cooperate during skeletal muscle specification, we examined and compared the expression pattern of MyoD-lacZ (258/2.5lacZ and MD6.0-lacZ) transgenes in wild-type, Myf-5, and MyoD mutant embryos. We found that the delayed onset of muscle differentiation in the branchial arches, tongue, limbs, and diaphragm of MyoD-/- embryos was a consequence of a reduced ability of myogenic precursor cells to progress through their normal developmental program and not because of a defect in migration of muscle progenitor cells into these regions. We also found that myogenic precursor cells for back, intercostal, and abdominal wall musculature in Myf-54-/- embryos failed to undergo normal translocation or differentiation. By contrast, the myogenic precursors of intercostal and abdominal wall musculature in MyoD-/- embryos underwent normal translocation but failed to undergo timely differentiation. In conclusion, these observations strongly support the hypothesis that Myf-5 plays a unique role in the development of muscles arising after translocation of epithelial dermamyotome cells along the medial edge of the somite to the subjacent myotome (e.g., back or epaxial muscle) and that MyoD plays a unique role in the development of muscles arising from migratory precursor cells (e.g., limb and branchial arch muscles, tongue, and diaphragm). In addition, the expression pattern of MyoD-lacZ transgenes in the intercostal and abdominal wall muscles of Myf-5-/- and MyoD-/- embryos suggests that appropriate development of these muscles is dependent on both genes and, therefore, these muscles have a dual embryonic origin (epaxial and hypaxial).     

The role of the notochord for epaxial myotome formation in the mouse.

The vertebrate somite is the source of all trunk skeletal muscles. Myogenesis in avian embryos is thought to depend on signals from notochord and neural tube for the epaxial muscles, and signals from lateral mesoderm and surface ectoderm for the hypaxial muscles. However, this hypothesis has to be tested because in mouse mutants lacking a notochord the presence of a fused myotome beneath the neural tube has been reported. We have compared the expression pattern of myogenic markers and markers for the hypaxial muscle precursors in the mutants Brachyury curtailed, truncate, Danforth's short tail and Pintail. In regions lacking notochord and sclerotome, we found small, ventrally located domains of Myf5 and MyoD expression, concomitant with ventrally expanded Pax3 signals and upregulated expression of the hypaxial marker Lbx1, suggesting that only the hypaxial program is active. We therefore hypothesise that in mammals, as in birds, the formation of the epaxial musculature depends on the presence of notochord derived signals.     

Notch pathway: from development to regeneration of skeletal muscle

In vertebrates, skeletal muscle is derived from mesodermal structures called somites. Myogenic progenitor cells that form skeletal muscles of the trunk and limbs are derived from the dermomyotome, the dorsal region of the somite. These cells enter the myogenic program by activating a set of four myogenic regulatory factors. During embryonic and fetal growth, muscle progenitor cells provide the source for muscle growth. Around birth, the muscle progenitor enters quiescence, and adopts a satellite cell position on muscle fibers, providing a pool of adult muscle stem cells. They are essential for the growth and regeneration of muscles. Among the mechanisms that control the maintenance of satellite cells properties, the Notch pathway plays a crucial role. In facts, this pathway is implicated from the early steps of somitogenesis and the development of skeletal muscles in the embryo. Furthermore, during ageing, Notch activity decreases which results in decreased muscle regeneration. Thus, the Notch pathway is a key regulator of muscle plasticity.     

Sonic hedgehog is a survival factor for hypaxial muscles during mouse development

Sonic hedgehog (Shh) has been proposed to function as an inductive and trophic signal that controls development of epaxial musculature in vertebrate embryos. In contrast, development of hypaxial muscles was assumed to occur independently of Shh. We here show that formation of limb muscles was severely affected in two different mouse strains with inactivating mutations of the Shh gene. The limb muscle defect became apparent relatively late and initial stages of hypaxial muscle development were unaffected or only slightly delayed. Micromass cultures and cultures of tissue fragments derived from limbs under different conditions with or without the overlaying ectoderm indicated that Shh is required for the maintenance of the expression of myogenic regulatory factors (MRFs) and, consecutively, for the formation of differentiated limb muscle myotubes. We propose that Shh acts as a survival and proliferation factor for myogenic precursor cells during hypaxial muscle development. Detection of a reduced but significant level of Myf5 expression in the epaxial compartment of somites of Shh homozygous mutant embryos at E9.5 indicated that Shh might be dispensable for the initiation of myogenesis both in hypaxial and epaxial muscles. Our data suggest that Shh acts similarly in both somitic compartments as a survival and proliferation factor and not as a primary inducer of myogenesis.     

The epaxial-hypaxial subdivision of the avian somite

In all jaw-bearing vertebrates, three-dimensional mobility relies on segregated, separately innervated epaxial and hypaxial skeletal muscles. In amniotes, these muscles form from the morphologically continuous dermomyotome and myotome, whose epaxial-hypaxial subdivision and hence the formation of distinct epaxial-hypaxial muscles is not understood. Here we show that En1 expression labels a central subdomain of the avian dermomyotome, medially abutting the expression domain of the lead-lateral or hypaxial marker Sim1. En1 expression is maintained when cells from the En1-positive dermomyotome enter the myotome and dermatome, thereby superimposing the En1-Sim1 expression boundary onto the developing musculature and dermis. En1 cells originate from the dorsomedial edge of the somite. Their development is under positive control by notochord and floor plate (Shh), dorsal neural tube (Wnt1) and surface ectoderm (Wnt1-like signalling activity) but negatively regulated by the lateral plate mesoderm (BMP4). This dependence on epaxial signals and suppression by hypaxial signals places En1 into the epaxial somitic programme. Consequently, the En1-Sim1 expression boundary marks the epaxial-hypaxial dermomyotomal or myotomal boundary. In cell aggregation assays, En1- and Sim1-expressing cells sort out, suggesting that the En1-Sim1 expression boundary may represent a true compartment boundary, foreshadowing the epaxial-hypaxial segregation of muscle.     

Characterization of the early development of specific hypaxial muscles from the ventrolateral myotome.

We have previously found that the myotome is formed by a first wave of pioneer cells generated along the medial epithelial somite and a second wave emanating from the dorsomedial lip (DML), rostral and caudal edges of the dermomyotome (Kahane, N., Cinnamon, Y. and Kalcheim, C. (1998a) Mech. Dev. 74, 59-73; Kahane, N., Cinnamon, Y. and Kalcheim, C. (1998b) Development 125, 4259-4271). In this study, we have addressed the development and precise fate of the ventrolateral lip (VLL) in non-limb regions of the axis. To this end, fluorescent vital dyes were iontophoretically injected in the center of the VLL and the translocation of labeled cells was followed by confocal microscopy. VLL-derived cells colonized the ventrolateral portion of the myotome. This occurred following an early longitudinal cell translocation along the medial boundary until reaching the rostral or caudal dermomyotome lips from which fibers emerged into the myotome. Thus, the behavior of VLL cells parallels that of their DML counterparts which colonize the opposite, dorsomedial portion of the myotome. To precisely understand the way the myotome expands, we addressed the early generation of hypaxial intercostal muscles. We found that intercostal muscles were formed by VLL-derived fibers that intermingled with fibers emerging from the ventrolateral aspect of both rostral and caudal edges of the dermomyotome. Notably, hypaxial intercostal muscles also contained pioneer myofibers (first wave) showing for the first time that lateral myotome-derived muscles contain a fundamental component of fibers generated in the medial domain of the somite. In addition, we show that during myotome growth and evolution into muscle, second-wave myofibers progressively intercalate between the pioneer fibers, suggesting a constant mode of myotomal expansion in its dorsomedial to ventrolateral extent. This further suggests that specific hypaxial muscles develop following a consistent ventral expansion of a 'compound myotome' into the somatopleure.     

New insights into skeletal muscle development and growth in teleost fishes

Recent research has significantly broadened our understanding of how the teleost somite is patterned to achieve embryonic and postembryonic myogenesis. Medial (adaxial) cells and posterior cells of the early epithelial somite generate embryonic superficial slow and deep fast muscle fibers, respectively, whereas anterior somitic cells move laterally to form an external cell layer of undifferentiated Pax7-positive myogenic precursors surrounding the embryonic myotome. In late embryo and in larvae, some of the cells contained in the external cell layer incorporate into the myotome and differentiate into new muscle fibers, thus contributing to medio-lateral expansion of the myotome. This supports the suggestion that the teleost external cell layer is homologous to the amniote dermomyotome. Some of the signalling molecules that promote lateral movement or regulate the myogenic differentiation of external cell precursors have been identified and include stromal cell-derived factor 1 (Sdf1), hedgehog proteins, and fibroblast growth factor 8 (Fgf8). Recent studies have shed light on gene activations that underlie the differentiation and maturation of slow and fast muscle fibers, pointing out that both adaxially derived embryonic slow fibers and slow fibers formed during the myotome expansion of larvae initially and transiently bear features of the fast fiber phenotype.     

Interactions between muscle fibers and segment boundaries in zebrafish

The most obvious segmental structures in the vertebrate embryo are somites: transient structures that give rise to vertebrae and much of the musculature. In zebrafish, most somitic cells give rise to long muscle fibers that are anchored to intersegmental boundaries. Therefore, this boundary is analogous to the mammalian tendon in that it transduces muscle-generated force to the skeletal system. We have investigated interactions between somite boundaries and muscle fibers. We define three stages of segment boundary formation. The first stage is the formation of the initial epithelial somite boundary. The second "transition" stage involves both the elongation of initially round muscle precursor cells and somite boundary maturation. The third stage is myotome boundary formation, where the boundary becomes rich in extracellular matrix and all muscle precursor cells have elongated to form long muscle fibers. It is known that formation of the initial epithelial somite boundary requires Notch signaling; vertebrate Notch pathway mutants show severe defects in somitogenesis. However, many zebrafish Notch pathway mutants are homozygous viable suggesting that segmentation of their larval and adult body plans at least partially recovers. We show that epithelial somite boundary formation and slow-twitch muscle morphogenesis are initially disrupted in after eight (aei) mutant embryos (which lack function of the Notch ligand, DeltaD); however, myotome boundaries form later ("recover") in a Hedgehog-dependent fashion. Inhibition of Hedgehog-induced slow muscle induction in aei/deltaD and deadly seven (des)/notch1a mutant embryos suggests that slow muscle is necessary for myotome boundary recovery in the absence of initial epithelial somite boundary formation. Because we have previously demonstrated that slow muscle migration triggers fast muscle cell elongation in zebrafish, we hypothesize that migrating slow muscle facilitates myotome boundary formation in aei/deltaD mutant embryos by patterning coordinated fast muscle cell elongation. In addition, we utilized genetic mosaic analysis to show that somite boundaries also function to limit the extent to which fast muscle cells can elongate. Combined, our results indicate that multiple interactions between somite boundaries and muscle fibers mediate zebrafish segmentation.     

Sonic hedgehog controls epaxial muscle determination through Myf5 activation.

Sonic hedgehog (Shh), produced by the notochord and floor plate, is proposed to function as an inductive and trophic signal that controls somite and neural tube patterning and differentiation. To investigate Shh functions during somite myogenesis in the mouse embryo, we have analyzed the expression of the myogenic determination genes, Myf5 and MyoD, and other regulatory genes in somites of Shh null embryos and in explants of presomitic mesoderm from wild-type and Myf5 null embryos. Our findings establish that Shh has an essential inductive function in the early activation of the myogenic determination genes, Myf5 and MyoD, in the epaxial somite cells that give rise to the progenitors of the deep back muscles. Shh is not required for the activation of Myf5 and MyoD at any of the other sites of myogenesis in the mouse embryo, including the hypaxial dermomyotomal cells that give rise to the abdominal and body wall muscles, or the myogenic progenitor cells that form the limb and head muscles. Shh also functions in somites to establish and maintain the medio-lateral boundaries of epaxial and hypaxial gene expression. Myf5, and not MyoD, is the target of Shh signaling in the epaxial dermomyotome, as MyoD activation by recombinant Shh protein in presomitic mesoderm explants is defective in Myf5 null embryos. In further support of the inductive function of Shh in epaxial myogenesis, we show that Shh is not essential for the survival or the proliferation of epaxial myogenic progenitors. However, Shh is required specifically for the survival of sclerotomal cells in the ventral somite as well as for the survival of ventral and dorsal neural tube cells. We conclude, therefore, that Shh has multiple functions in the somite, including inductive functions in the activation of Myf5, leading to the determination of epaxial dermomyotomal cells to myogenesis, as well as trophic functions in the maintenance of cell survival in the sclerotome and adjacent neural tube.     

Myf5 and MyoD activation define independent myogenic compartments during embryonic development

Gene targeting has indicated that Myf5 and MyoD are required for myogenic determination because skeletal myoblasts and myofibers are missing in mouse embryos lacking both Myf5 and MyoD. To investigate the fate of Myf5:MyoD-deficient myogenic precursor cells during embryogenesis, we examined the sites of epaxial, hypaxial, and cephalic myogenesis at different developmental stages. In newborn mice, excessive amounts of adipose tissue were found in the place of muscles whose progenitor cells have undergone long-range migrations as mesenchymal cells. Analysis of the expression pattern of Myogenin-lacZ transgene and muscle proteins revealed that myogenic precursor cells were not able to acquire a myogenic fate in the trunk (myotome) nor at sites of MyoD induction in the limb buds. Importantly, the Myf5-dependent precursors, as defined by Myf5(nlacZ)-expression, deficient for both Myf5 and MyoD, were observed early in development to assume nonmuscle fates (e.g., cartilage) and, later in development, to extensively proliferate without cell death. Their fate appeared to significantly differ from the fate of MyoD-dependent precursors, as defined by 258/-2.5lacZ-expression (-20 kb enhancer of MyoD), of which a significant proportion failed to proliferate and underwent apoptosis. Taken together, these data strongly suggest that Myf5 and MyoD regulatory elements respond differentially in different compartments.