Positional heterogeneity of interaction between fragments of avian limb bud in organ culture

We have previously succeeded in culturing whole leg bud from stage 21-23 chick embryos and observed a leg structure with typical cartilage pattern in vitro. In the present study, we have attempted the organ culture of the fragmented leg bud and investigated its capacity to form cartilage. Leg buds from stages 17-21 chick embryos were dissected into four pieces in the anteroposterior sequence (named 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively) and cultured on a membrane filter in a medium consisting of Ham's F-12, chick serum, and chick embryo extract. After 6 days in culture, two central fragments (2 and 3) developed into large cartilaginous masses, while anterior (1) and posterior (4) fragments formed few or small cartilaginous masses. In addition, when these less chondrogenic fragments were combined, pinned together, and cultured, large cartilaginous masses were formed from 1 + 4 combinations but not from 1 + 1 or 4 + 4 combinations. These observations were analyzed quantitatively by measurement of 35SO4 incorporation into the sulfated glycosaminoglycan (S-GAG) and of final DNA content per explant, and by histological reconstruction of the chick-quail chimera explant. The results showed that (a) the 1 + 4 combination resulted in higher S-GAG synthesis and final DNA content than the 1 + 1 or 4 + 4 combinations in stage 18 and 21 leg buds (P less than 5%); (b) removal of ectoderm from the leg bud inhibited the increase observed for the 1 + 4 combination; c) in chick-quail chimera explants the cartilage formed from the 1 + 4 combination was largely of fragment 1 origin. These results demonstrate, first, the presence of a difference in chondrogenic capacity along the anteroposterior axis in the leg bud and, second, the occurrence of an interaction between anterior and posterior fragments which mimics the effects of grafting a zone of polarizing activity (ZPA). The mechanism of ZPA function is still unknown but the ectoderm may play some role. Some roles for ectoderm in ZPA function and differences in mesodermal responsiveness to ZPA factor(s) are suggested.