Dynamic control of head mesoderm patterning

The embryonic head mesoderm gives rise to cranial muscle and contributes to the skull and heart. Prior to differentiation, the tissue is regionalised by the means of molecular markers. We show that this pattern is established in three discrete phases, all depending on extrinsic cues. Assaying for direct and first-wave indirect responses, we found that the process is controlled by dynamic combinatorial as well as antagonistic action of retinoic acid (RA), Bmp and Fgf signalling. In phase 1, the initial anteroposterior (a-p) subdivision of the head mesoderm is laid down in response to falling RA levels and activation of Fgf signalling. In phase 2, Bmp and Fgf signalling reinforce the a-p boundary and refine anterior marker gene expression. In phase 3, spreading Fgf signalling drives the a-p expansion of MyoR and Tbx1 expression along the pharynx, with RA limiting the expansion of MyoR. This establishes the mature head mesoderm pattern with markers distinguishing between the prospective extra-ocular and jaw skeletal muscles, the branchiomeric muscles and the cells for the outflow tract of the heart.     

Neural tube derived signals and Fgf8 act antagonistically to specify eye versus mandibular arch muscles

Recent knockout experiments in the mouse generated amazing craniofacial skeletal muscle phenotypes. Yet none of the genes could be placed into a molecular network, because the programme to control the development of muscles in the head is not known. Here we show that antagonistic signals from the neural tube and the branchial arches specify extraocular versus branchiomeric muscles. Moreover, we identified Fgf8 as the branchial arch derived signal. However, this molecule has an additional function in supporting the proliferative state of myoblasts, suppressing their differentiation, while a further branchial arch derived signal, namely Bmp7, is an overall negative regulator of head myogenesis.     

Sonic hedgehog in the pharyngeal endoderm controls arch pattern via regulation of Fgf8 in head ectoderm

Fgf8 signalling is known to play an important role during patterning of the first pharyngeal arch, setting up the oral region of the head and then defining the rostral and proximal domains of the arch. The mechanisms that regulate the restricted expression of Fgf8 in the ectoderm of the developing first arch, however, are not well understood. It has become apparent that pharyngeal endoderm plays an important role in regulating craniofacial morphogenesis. Endoderm ablation in the developing chick embryo results in a loss of Fgf8 expression in presumptive first pharyngeal arch ectoderm. Shh is locally expressed in pharyngeal endoderm, adjacent to the Fgf8-expressing ectoderm, and is thus a candidate signal regulating ectodermal Fgf8 expression. We show that in cultured explants of presumptive first pharyngeal arch, loss of Shh signalling results in loss of Fgf8 expression, both at early stages before formation of the first arch, and during arch formation. Moreover, following removal of the endoderm, Shh protein can replace this tissue and restore Fgf8 expression. Overexpression of Shh in the non-oral ectoderm leads to an expansion of Fgf8, affecting the rostral-caudal axis of the developing first arch, and resulting in the formation of ectopic cartilage. Shh from the pharyngeal endoderm thus regulates Fgf8 in the ectoderm and the role of the endoderm in pharyngeal arch patterning may thus be indirectly mediated by the ectoderm.     

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.     

Temporospatial cell interactions regulating mandibular and maxillary arch patterning

The cellular origin of the instructive information for hard tissue patterning of the jaws has been the subject of a long-standing controversy. Are the cranial neural crest cells prepatterned or does the epithelium pattern a developmentally uncommitted population of ectomesenchymal cells? In order to understand more about how orofacial patterning is controlled we have investigated the temporal signalling interactions and responses between epithelium and mesenchymal cells in the mandibular and maxillary primordia. We show that within the mandibular arch, homeobox genes that are expressed in different proximodistal spatial domains corresponding to presumptive molar and incisor ectomesenchymal cells are induced by signals from the oral epithelium. In mouse, prior to E10, all ectomesenchyme cells in the mandibular arch are equally responsive to epithelial signals such as Fgf8, indicating that there is no pre-specification of these cells into different populations and suggesting that patterning of the hard tissues of the mandible is instructed by the epithelium. By E10.5, ectomesenchymal cell gene expression domains are still dependent on epithelial signals but have become fixed and ectopic expression cannot be induced. At E11 expression becomes independent of epithelial signals such that removal of the epithelium does not affect spatial ectomesenchymal expression. Significantly, however, the response of ectomesenchyme cells to epithelial regulatory signals was found to be different in the mandibular and maxillary primordium. Thus, whereas both mandibular and maxillary arch epithelia could induce Dlx2 and Dlx5 expression in the mandible and Dlx2 expression in the maxilla, neither could induce Dlx5 expression in the maxilla. Reciprocal cell transplantations between mandibular and maxillary arch ectomesenchymal cells revealed intrinsic differences between these populations of cranial neural crest-derived cells. Research in odontogenesis has shown that the oral epithelium of the mandibular and maxillary primordia has unique instructive signaling properties required to direct odontogenesis, which are not found in other branchial arch epithelia. As a consequence, development of jaw-specific skeletal structures may require some prespecification of maxillary ectomesenchyme to restrict the instructive influence of the epithelial signals and allow development of maxillary structures distinct from mandibular structures.     

The contribution of Islet1-expressing splanchnic mesoderm cells to distinct branchiomeric muscles reveals significant heterogeneity in head muscle development

During embryogenesis, paraxial mesoderm cells contribute skeletal muscle progenitors, whereas cardiac progenitors originate in the lateral splanchnic mesoderm (SpM). Here we focus on a subset of the SpM that contributes to the anterior or secondary heart field (AHF/SHF), and lies adjacent to the cranial paraxial mesoderm (CPM), the precursors for the head musculature. Molecular analyses in chick embryos delineated the boundaries between the CPM, undifferentiated SpM progenitors of the AHF/SHF, and differentiating cardiac cells. We then revealed the regionalization of branchial arch mesoderm: CPM cells contribute to the proximal region of the myogenic core, which gives rise to the mandibular adductor muscle. SpM cells contribute to the myogenic cells in the distal region of the branchial arch that later form the intermandibular muscle. Gene expression analyses of these branchiomeric muscles in chick uncovered a distinct molecular signature for both CPM- and SpM-derived muscles. Islet1 (Isl1) is expressed in the SpM/AHF and branchial arch in both chick and mouse embryos. Lineage studies using Isl1-Cre mice revealed the significant contribution of Isl1(+) cells to ventral/distal branchiomeric (stylohyoid, mylohyoid and digastric) and laryngeal muscles. By contrast, the Isl1 lineage contributes to mastication muscles (masseter, pterygoid and temporalis) to a lesser extent, with virtually no contribution to intrinsic and extrinsic tongue muscles or extraocular muscles. In addition, in vivo activation of the Wnt/beta-catenin pathway in chick embryos resulted in marked inhibition of Isl1, whereas inhibition of this pathway increased Isl1 expression. Our findings demonstrate, for the first time, the contribution of Isl1(+) SpM cells to a subset of branchiomeric skeletal muscles.     

FGF8 can activate Gbx2 and transform regions of the rostral mouse brain into a hindbrain fate.

The mid/hindbrain junction region, which expresses Fgf8, can act as an organizer to transform caudal forebrain or hindbrain tissue into midbrain or cerebellar structures, respectively. FGF8-soaked beads placed in the chick forebrain can similarly induce ectopic expression of mid/hindbrain genes and development of midbrain structures (Crossley, P. H., Martinez, S. and Martin, G. R. (1996) Nature 380, 66-68). In contrast, ectopic expression of Fgf8a in the mouse midbrain and caudal forebrain using a Wnt1 regulatory element produced no apparent patterning defects in the embryos examined (Lee, S. M., Danielian, P. S., Fritzsch, B. and McMahon, A. P. (1997) Development 124, 959-969). We show here that FGF8b-soaked beads can not only induce expression of the mid/hindbrain genes En1, En2 and Pax5 in mouse embryonic day 9.5 (E9.5) caudal forebrain explants, but also can induce the hindbrain gene Gbx2 and alter the expression of Wnt1 in both midbrain and caudal forebrain explants. We also show that FGF8b-soaked beads can repress Otx2 in midbrain explants. Furthermore, Wnt1-Fgf8b transgenic embryos in which the same Wnt1 regulatory element is used to express Fgf8b, have ectopic expression of En1, En2, Pax5 and Gbx2 in the dorsal hindbrain and spinal cord at E10.5, as well as exencephaly and abnormal spinal cord morphology. More strikingly, Fgf8b expression in more rostral brain regions appears to transform the midbrain and caudal forebrain into an anterior hindbrain fate through expansion of the Gbx2 domain and repression of Otx2 as early as the 7-somite stage. These findings suggest that normal Fgf8 expression in the anterior hindbrain not only functions to maintain development of the entire mid/hindbrain by regulating genes like En1, En2 and Pax5, but also might function to maintain a metencephalic identity by regulating Gbx2 and Otx2 expression.     

Characterisation of the genomic structure of chick Fgf8.

The Fgf8 gene encodes a series of secreted signalling molecules important in the normal development of the face, brain and limbs. The genomic structure of the chick Fgf8 gene has been analysed and compared to the human and mouse sequences. Divergence between the chick, human and mouse genomic structure was observed. Data indicates that the long alternatively spliced form of exon 1b observed in mouse and exon 1c observed in human and mouse do not exist in the chick Fgf8 gene. RT-PCR analysis indicates that chick Fgf8, like its mouse and human counterpart is alternatively spliced. This data along with the genomic structure data indicates that in the chick there are only two isoforms of Fgf8. This is in contrast to the human and mouse, where evidence suggests that there are 4 and 8 isoforms, respectively. Approximately 400 bp of intron 1d is highly conserved between chick, human and mouse genomic sequences. Using TRANSFAC possible conserved regulatory element binding sites within this domain were identified.     

Regionalisation of early head ectoderm is regulated by endoderm and prepatterns the orofacial epithelium

The oral epithelium becomes regionalised proximodistally early in development, and this is reflected by the spatial expression of signalling molecules such as Fgf8 and Bmp4. This regionalisation is responsible for regulating the spatial expression of genes in the underlying mesenchyme. These genes are required for the spatial patterning of bone, cartilage orofacial development and, in mammals, teeth. The mechanism and timing of this important regionalisation during head epithelium development are not known. Using lipophilic dyes to fate map the oral epithelium in chick embryos, we show that the cells that will occupy the epithelium of the distal and the proximal mandible primordium already occupy different spatial locations in the developing head ectoderm prior to the formation of the first pharyngeal arch and neural crest migration. Moreover, the ectoderm cells fated to become proximal oral epithelium express Fgf8 and this expression requires the presence of endoderm. Thus, the first fundamental patterning process in jaw morphogenesis is controlled by the early separation of specific areas of ectoderm that are regulated by ectoderm-endoderm interactions, and does not involve neural crest cells.     

Cloning and expression analysis of Fgf5, 6 and 7 during early chick development

FGFs with similar sequences can play different roles depending on the model organisms examined. Determining these roles requires knowledge of spatio-temporal Fgf gene expression patterns. In this study, we report the cloning of chick Fgf5, 6 and 7, and examine their gene expression patterns by whole mount in situ hybridization. We show that Fgf5's spatio-temporally restricted expression pattern indicates a potentially novel role during inner ear development. Fgf6 and Fgf7, although belonging to different subfamilies with diverged sequences, are expressed in similar patterns within the mesoderm. Alignment of protein sequences and phylogenetic analysis demonstrate that FGF5 and FGF6 are highly conserved between chick, human, mouse and zebrafish. FGF7 is similarly conserved except for the zebrafish, which has considerably diverged.     

FGF10 can induce Fgf8 expression concomitantly with En1 and R-fng expression in chick limb ectoderm, independent of its dorsoventral specification

The limb bud has a thickened epithelium at the dorsal-ventral boundary, the apical ectodermal ridge (AER), which sustains limb outgrowth and patterning. A secreted molecule fibroblast growth factor (FGF)10 is involved in inducing Fgf8 expression in the prospective AER and mutual interaction between mesenchymal FGF10 and FGF8 in the AER is essential for limb outgrowth. A secreted factor Wnt7a and a homeobox protein Lmx1 are involved in the dorsal patterning of the limb, whereas a homeobox protein Engrailed 1 (En1) is involved in the dorsal-ventral patterning as well as AER formation. Radical fringe (R-fng), a vertebrate homolog of Drosophila fringe was also found to elaborate AER formation in chicks. However, little is known about the molecular interactions between these factors during AER formation. The present study clarified the relationship between FGF10, Wnt7a, Lmx1, R-fng and En1 during limb development using a foil-barrier insertion experiment. It was found that a foil-barrier inserted into the chick prospective wing mesenchyme lateral to the mesonephric duct blocks AER induction. This experiment was expanded by implanting Fgf10-expressing cells lateral to the barrier and examined whether FGF10 could rescue the expression of the limb-patterning genes reported in AER formation. It was found that FGF10 is sufficient to induce Fgf8 expression in the ectoderm of the foil-inserted limb bud, concomitantly with R-fng and En1 expression. However, FGF10 could not rescue the expression of the dorsal marker genes, Wnt7a or Lmx1. Thus, it is suggested that epithelial factors of En1 and R-fng can induce Fgf8 expression in the limb ectoderm in cooperation with a mesenchymal factor FGF10. Some factor(s) other than FGF10, possibly from the paraxial structures medial to the limb mesoderm, is responsible for the initial dorsal-ventral specification of the limb bud.     

Ectodermally derived FGF8 defines the maxillomandibular region in the early chick embryo: epithelial-mesenchymal interactions in the specification of the craniofacial ectomesenchyme

The most rostral cephalic crest cells in the chick embryo first populate ubiquitously in the rostroventral head. Before the influx of crest cells, the ventral head ectoderm expresses Fgf8 in two domains that correspond to the future mandibular arch. Bmp4 is expressed rostral and caudal to these domains. The rostral part of the Bmp4 domain develops into the rostral end of the maxillary process that corresponds to the transition between the maxillomandibular and premandibular regions. Thus, the distribution patterns of FGF8 and BMP4 appear to foreshadow the maxillomandibular region in the head ectoderm. In the ectomesenchyme of the pharyngula embryo, expression patterns of some homeobox genes overlap the distribution of their upstream growth factors. Dlx1 and Barx1, the targets of FGF8, are expressed in the mandibular ectomesenchyme, and Msx1, the target of BMP4, in its distal regions. Ectopic applications of FGF8 lead to shifted expression of the target genes as well as repatterning of the craniofacial primordia and of the trigeminal nerve branches. Focal injection of a lipophilic dye, DiI, showed that this shift was at least in part due to the posterior transformation of the original premandibular ectomesenchyme into the mandible, caused by the changed distribution of FGF8 that defines the mandibular region. We conclude that FGF8 in the early ectoderm defines the maxillomandibular region of the prepharyngula embryo, through epithelial-mesenchymal interactions and subsequent upregulation of homeobox genes in the local mesenchyme. BMP4 in the ventral ectoderm appears to limit the anterior expression of Fgf8. Ectopic application of BMP4 consistently diminished part of the mandibular arch.     

Cellular and cis-regulation of En-2 expression in the mandibular arch.

Investigations into early muscle development have focused primarily on somite derived cells. Cranial mesoderm does not undergo somitogenesis, and muscle formation in this region is less well understood. In the present study, we have focused upon the expression of engrailed in mandibular arch myoblasts. We demonstrate that En-2 is expressed in mandibular arch myoblasts of the mouse. The activity of the En-2 enhancer is maintained in several functionally related muscles that arise from the first arch. Through the use of reporter transgenics, we demonstrate that local cell-cell interactions are important in maintaining En-2 expression in the mandibular arch cells. En-2 enhancer activity in the first arch requires a combination of cis-acting sequences that includes a motif which is identical to one found in the Otx2 enhancer and which is sufficient to direct expression in the first arch. These data support the notion that cranial muscle development is regulated by local cell-cell interactions which distinguish distinct anatomical and functional muscle groups.     

Cranial neural crest cells regulate head muscle patterning and differentiation during vertebrate embryogenesis

In the vertebrate head, mesoderm cells fuse together to form a myofiber, which is attached to specific cranial neural crest (CNC)-derived skeletal elements in a highly coordinated manner. Although it has long been recognized that CNC plays a role in the formation of the head musculature, the precise molecular underpinnings of this process remain elusive. In the present study we explored the nature of the crosstalk between CNC and mesoderm cells during head muscle development, employing three models for genetic perturbations of CNC development in mice, as well as experimental ablation of CNC in chick embryos. We demonstrate that although early myogenesis is CNC-independent, the migration, patterning and differentiation of muscle precursors are regulated by CNC. In the absence of CNC cells, accumulated myoblasts are kept in a proliferative state, presumably because of an increase of Fgf8 in adjacent tissues, which leads to abnormalities in both differentiation and subsequent myofiber organization in the head. These results have uncovered a surprising degree of complexity and multiple distinct roles for CNC in the patterning and differentiation of muscles during craniofacial development. We suggest that CNC cells control craniofacial development by regulating positional interactions with mesoderm-derived muscle progenitors that together shape the cranial musculoskeletal architecture in vertebrate embryos.     

Ret signalling integrates a craniofacial muscle module during development

An appropriate organisation of muscles is crucial for their function, yet it is not known how functionally related muscles are coordinated with each other during development. In this study, we show that the development of a subset of functionally related head muscles in the zebrafish is regulated by Ret tyrosine kinase signalling. Three genes in the Ret pathway (gfra3, artemin2 and ret) are required specifically for the development of muscles attaching to the opercular bone (gill cover), but not other adjacent muscles. In animals lacking Ret or Gfra3 function, myogenic gene expression is reduced in forming opercular muscles, but not in non-opercular muscles derived from the same muscle anlagen. These animals have a normal skeleton with small or missing opercular muscles and tightly closed mouths. Myogenic defects correlate with a highly restricted expression of artn2, gfra3 and ret in mesenchymal cells in and around the forming opercular muscles. ret(+) cells become restricted to the forming opercular muscles and a loss of Ret signalling results in reductions of only these, but not adjacent, muscles, revealing a specific role of Ret in a subset of head muscles. We propose that Ret signalling regulates myogenesis in head muscles in a modular manner and that this is achieved by restricting Ret function to a subset of muscle precursors.     

Fgf and Bmp signals repress the expression of Bapx1 in the mandibular mesenchyme and control the position of the developing jaw joint

The development of the jaw joint between the palatoquadrate and proximal part Meckel's cartilage (articular) has recently been shown to involve the gene Bapx1. Bapx1 is expressed in the developing mandibular arch in two distinct caudal, proximal patches, one on either side of the head. These domains coincide later with the position of the developing jaw joint. The mechanisms that result in the restricted expression of Bapx1 in the mandibular arch were investigated, and two signaling factors that act as repressors were identified. Fibroblast growth factors (Fgfs) expressed in the oral epithelium restrict expression of Bapx1 to the caudal half of the mandibular arch, while bone morphogenetic proteins (Bmps) expressed in the distal mandibular arch restrict expression of Bapx1 to the proximal part of the mandible. Application of Fgf8 and Bmp4 beads to the proximal mesenchyme led to loss of Bapx1 expression and later fusion of the quadrate and articular as the jaw joint failed to form. In addition to fusion of the jaw joint, loss of Bapx1 lead to loss of the retroarticular process (RAP), phenocopying the defects seen after Bapx1 function was reduced in the zebrafish. By manipulating these signals, we were able to alter the expression domain of Bapx1, resulting in a new position of the jaw joint.