Ganglion cells are required for normal progenitor- cell proliferation but not cell-fate determination or patterning in the developing mouse retina

The vertebrate retina develops from an amorphous sheet of dividing retinal progenitor cells (RPCs) through a sequential process that culminates in an exquisitely patterned neural tissue. A current model for retinal development posits that sequential cell-type differentiation is the result of changes in the intrinsic competence state of multipotent RPCs as they advance in time and that the intrinsic changes are influenced by continuous changes in the extracellular environment. Although several studies support the proposition that newly differentiated cells alter the extrinsic state of the developing retina, it is still far from clear what role they play in modifying the extracellular environment and in influencing the properties of RPCs. Here, we specifically ablate retinal ganglion cells (RGCs) as they differentiate, and we determine the impact of RGC absence on retinal development. We find that RGCs are not essential for changing the competence of RPCs, but they are necessary for maintaining sufficient numbers of RPCs by regulating cell proliferation via growth factors. Intrinsic rather than extrinsic factors are likely to play the critical roles in determining retinal cell fate.     

Step-wise specification of retinal stem cells during normal embryogenesis

The specification of embryonic cells to produce the retina begins at early embryonic stages as a multi-step process that gradually restricts fate potentials. First, a subset of embryonic cells becomes competent to form retina by their lack of expression of endo-mesoderm-specifying genes. From these cells, a more restricted subset is biased to form retina by virtue of their close proximity to sources of bone morphogenetic protein antagonists during neural induction. During gastrulation, the definitive RSCs (retinal stem cells) are specified as the eye field by interactions with underlying mesoderm and the expression of a network of retina-specifying genes. As the eye field is transformed into the optic vesicle and optic cup, a heterogeneous population of RPCs (retinal progenitor cells) forms to give rise to the different domains of the retina: the optic stalk, retinal pigmented epithelium and neural retina. Further diversity of RPCs appears to occur under the influences of cell-cell interactions, cytokines and combinations of regulatory genes, leading to the differentiation of a multitude of different retinal cell types. This review examines what is known about each sequential step in retinal specification during normal vertebrate development, and how that knowledge will be important to understand how RSCs might be manipulated for regenerative therapies to treat retinal diseases.     

Cell-intrinsic regulators of proliferation in vertebrate retinal progenitors

The proliferative expansion of retinal progenitor cells (RPCs) is a fundamental mechanism of growth during vertebrate retinal development. Over the past couple of years, significant progress has been made in identifying genes expressed in RPCs that are essential for their proliferation, and the molecular mechanisms are beginning to be resolved. In this review, we highlight recent studies that have identified regulatory components of the RPC cell cycle machinery and implicate a set of homeobox genes as key regulators of proliferative expansion in the retina.     

Single cell analysis of mesoderm formation in the Xenopus embryo

We have examined the developmental specification of individual cells in the Xenopus blastula using a new in vitro culture system. Regional differences are apparent at the mid-blastula stage when animal hemisphere cells form only ectodermal cell types, while many clones from below the pigment boundary contain mesodermal cell types. A number of clones give rise to more than one differentiated cell type indicating that the initial steps of mesoderm induction are potentially reversible. Animal hemisphere cells can be induced to form mesoderm by fibroblast growth factor (FGF). Different cell types predominate at different FGF concentrations and the neighbours in this sequence are also the pairs of cell types most usually associated in mixed clones derived from the marginal zone. We propose that the specification of individual cells depends upon both the concentration of inducing factor and on stochastic intracellular events.     

Axonal transmission in the retina introduces a small dispersion of relative timing in the ganglion cell population response

Background

Visual stimuli elicit action potentials in tens of different retinal ganglion cells. Each ganglion cell type responds with a different latency to a given stimulus, thus transforming the high-dimensional input into a temporal neural code. The timing of the first spikes between different retinal projection neurons cells may further change along axonal transmission. The purpose of this study is to investigate if intraretinal conduction velocity leads to a synchronization or dispersion of the population signal leaving the eye.

Methodology/Principal Findings

We ‘imaged’ the initiation and transmission of light-evoked action potentials along individual axons in the rabbit retina at micron-scale resolution using a high-density multi-transistor array. We measured unimodal conduction velocity distributions (1.3±0.3 m/sec, mean ± SD) for axonal populations at all retinal eccentricities with the exception of the central part that contains myelinated axons. The velocity variance within each piece of retina is caused by ganglion cell types that show narrower and slightly different average velocity tuning. Ganglion cells of the same type respond with similar latency to spatially homogenous stimuli and conduct with similar velocity. For ganglion cells of different type intraretinal conduction velocity and response latency to flashed stimuli are negatively correlated, indicating that differences in first spike timing increase (up to 10 msec). Similarly, the analysis of pair-wise correlated activity in response to white-noise stimuli reveals that conduction velocity and response latency are negatively correlated.

Conclusion/Significance

Intraretinal conduction does not change the relative spike timing between ganglion cells of the same type but increases spike timing differences among ganglion cells of different type. The fastest retinal ganglion cells therefore act as indicators of new stimuli for postsynaptic neurons. The intraretinal dispersion of the population activity will not be compensated by variability in extraretinal conduction times, estimated from data in the literature.     

Candidate molecular mechanisms for establishing cell identity in the developing retina

In the developing nervous system, individual neurons must occupy appropriate positions within circuits. This requires that these neurons recognize and form connections with specific pre- and postsynaptic partners. Cellular recognition is also required for the spacing of cell bodies and the arborization of dendrites, factors that determine the inputs onto a given neuron. These issues are particularly evident in the retina, where different types of neurons are evenly spaced relative to other cells of the same type. This establishes a reiterated columnar circuitry resembling the insect retina. Establishing these mosaic patterns requires that cells of a given type (homotypic cells) be able to sense their neighbors. Therefore, both synaptic specificity and mosaic spacing require cellular identifiers. In synaptic specificity, recognition often occurs between different types of cells in a pre- and postsynaptic pairing. In mosaic spacing, recognition is often occurring between different cells of the same type, orhomotypic self-recognition. Dendritic arborization can require recognition of different neurites of the same cell, or isoneuronal self-recognition. The retina is an extremely amenable system for studying the molecular identifiers that drive these various forms of recognition. The different neuronal types in the retina are well defined, and the genetic tools for marking cell types are increasingly available. In this review we will summarize retinal anatomy and describe cell types in the retina and how they are defined. We will then describe the requirements of a recognition code and discuss newly emerging candidate molecular mechanisms for recognition that may meet these requirements.     

Beta-catenin is essential for lamination but not neurogenesis in mouse retinal development

During vertebrate retinal development, the seven retinal cell types differentiate sequentially from a single population of retinal progenitor cells (RPCs) and organize themselves into a distinct laminar structure. The purpose of this study was to determine whether beta-catenin, which functions both as a nuclear effector for the canonical Wnt signaling pathway and as a regulator of cell adhesion, is required for retinal neurogenesis or lamination. We used the Cre-loxP system to either eliminate beta-catenin or to express a constitutively active form during retinal neurogenesis. Eliminating beta-catenin did not affect cell differentiation, but did result in the loss of the radial arrangement of RPCs and caused abnormal migration of differentiated neurons. As a result, the laminar structure was massively disrupted in beta-catenin-null retinas, although all retinal cell types still formed. In contrast to other neural tissues, eliminating beta-catenin did not significantly reduce the proliferation rate of RPCs; likewise, activating beta-catenin ectopically in RPCs did not result in overproliferation, but loss of neural retinal identity. These results indicate that beta-catenin is essential during retinal neurogenesis as a regulator of cell adhesion but not as a nuclear effector of the canonical Wnt signaling pathway. The results further imply that retinal lamination and retinal cell differentiation are genetically separable processes.     

Cellular determination in the Xenopus retina is independent of lineage and birth date

Xenopus embryos injected with tritiated thymidine throughout the stages of embryonic retinal neurogenesis showed that more than 95% of the embryonic retinal cells are born within a 25 hr period. While there are shallow central to peripheral, dorsal to ventral, and interlaminar gradients of neurogenesis in these eyes, throughout most of this 25 hr period, postmitotic cells are being added to all sectors and layers. Small clones of differentiated retinal neurons and glia derived from single neuroepithelial cells injected with HRP. These clones were elongated radially. They were also composed of many different combinations of cell types, suggesting a mechanism whereby determination is arbitrarily and independently assigned to postmitotic cells. Such a model, when tested statistically, fits our data very well. We present a scheme for cellular determination in the Xenopus retina in which a coherent group of clonally related cells stretch out radially as lamination begins. This brings different cells into different microenvironments. Local interactions in these microenvironments then lead the cells toward specific fates.     

Rewiring the retinal ganglion cell gene regulatory network: Neurod1 promotes retinal ganglion cell fate in the absence of Math5

Retinal progenitor cells (RPCs) express basic helix-loop-helix (bHLH) factors in a strikingly mosaic spatiotemporal pattern, which is thought to contribute to the establishment of individual retinal cell identity. Here, we ask whether this tightly regulated pattern is essential for the orderly differentiation of the early retinal cell types and whether different bHLH genes have distinct functions that are adapted for each RPC. To address these issues, we replaced one bHLH gene with another. Math5 is a bHLH gene that is essential for establishing retinal ganglion cell (RGC) fate. We analyzed the retinas of mice in which Math5 was replaced with Neurod1 or Math3, bHLH genes that are expressed in another RPC and are required to establish amacrine cell fate. In the absence of Math5, Math5Neurod1-KI was able to specify RGCs, activate RGC genes and restore the optic nerve, although not as effectively as Math5. By contrast, Math5Math3-KI was much less effective than Math5Neurod1-KI in replacing Math5. In addition, expression of Neurod1 and Math3 from the Math5Neurod1-KI/Math3-KI allele did not result in enhanced amacrine cell production. These results were unexpected because they indicated that bHLH genes, which are currently thought to have evolved highly specialized functions, are nonetheless able to adjust their functions by interpreting the local positional information that is programmed into the RPC lineages. We conclude that, although Neurod1 and Math3 have evolved specialized functions for establishing amacrine cell fate, they are nevertheless capable of alternative functions when expressed in foreign environments.