 |
Previous Article | Next Article 
The Journal of Neuroscience, February 1, 2002, 22(3):639-643
MINI REVIEW
Neurogenesis in Embryos and in Adult Neural Stem Cells
Chris
Kintner
The Salk Institute for Biological Studies, San Diego, California
92186
 |
ARTICLE |
How the
differentiated cell types that comprise the
vertebrate CNS are generated during development is one of the
central questions in developmental neurobiology. Considerable progress recently made in addressing this question has led to a rudimentary understanding of the molecular mechanisms that enable cells to acquire
a neural fate in embryos. The purpose of this review is to discuss how
the molecular mechanisms promoting neurogenesis in embryos might
compare to those used in adult neural stem cells. To make this
comparison, a focus will be placed on the nature of the progenitor cell
populations and how these progenitors are instructed to become
differentiated cell types.
From ectoderm to a neuroepithelium: default differentiation?
The adult vertebrate CNS has traditionally been subdivided into
four major cell types: the neurons, the myelin-forming
oligodendrocytes, the astrocytes, and the ependymal lining of the
central lumen. All of these cell types are generated during development
from a common source, the neuroepithelial cells that arise in early embryos in the form of the neural tube. The developmental events leading up to the formation of neuroepithelial cells involve inductive events that underlie axis determination. Significantly, neuroepithelial cells seem to form from cells that avoid a variety of instructive signals that induce non-neural fates, including the bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs), which induce epidermal differentiation around the
start of gastrulation (Wilson and Edlund, 2001 ) (Fig.
1A). As a result,
neuroepithelial cells probably represent a default, ground state,
perhaps explaining both their ability to generate a variety of cell
types, and the ease with which they form in culture from embryonic stem
cells (Tropepe et al., 2001 ).

View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 1.
Diagram showing the embryonic origins of the
progenitor cells in the developing CNS and some of the factors that
promote the differentiation of these progenitors into neural cell
types. See text for details.
|
|
The neuroepithelial cells within the neural tube give rise to
differentiated neural cell types, producing neurons first, and glia at
later stages. During neurogenesis, neurons are produced from almost all
regions of the neuroepithelium except for a few specialized areas such
as the optic stalk. It is unlikely, however, that neurogenesis
represents a default pathway of differentiation, because both the onset
and period of neurogenesis among neuroepithelial cells varies greatly
depending on their location along the neuraxis. Moreover, given the
diversity of neurons that comprise any given region of the CNS, one
might expect a corresponding diversity of genetic programs that promote
neuronal differentiation. However, the current view is that a core
genetic program involving basic helix-loop-helix (bHLH) transcription
factors is required for the differentiation of neuroepithelial cells
into neurons, regardless of where and when they form. What seems to
vary is how these bHLH proteins are activated within neuroepithelial
cells at different points of the neuraxes by patterning genes. To
illustrate this point, the following discussion will focus on the
spinal cord where perhaps the most is known about how neuroepithelial
cells are patterned, and how this patterning subsequently promotes
neurogenesis, thus leading to the generation of specific classes of neurons.
Neurogenesis in the spinal cord
Patterning of the developing spinal cord begins at neural plate
stages of development via inductive interactions that create organizing
centers at the dorsal and ventral poles of the neural tube (Fig.
1B, Floor plate, Roof plate) (Jessell, 2000 ). These specialized neuroepithelial cells generate signals that induce, often
in a concentration-dependent manner, the expression of patterning genes
in neighboring neuroepithelial cells (Fig. 1C). In the
spinal cord, these patterning genes encode homeodomain transcription factors, and their expression patterns divide the cells in the neuroepithelium into different zones along the dorsoventral axis of the
neural tube (Lee and Pfaff, 2001 ). These patterning genes are thought
to specify neuronal subtype identity and, in addition, when and for how
long neurons of a particular type will be generated during
neurogenesis. This latter function likely depends on interactions between the patterning genes and a family of bHLH transcription factors
referred to collectively as the proneural proteins.
Proneural proteins as obligatory factors in
neuronal differentiation
The vertebrate proneural bHLH genes fall into two families based
on homology to bHLH genes required for neural cell differentiation in
Drosophila; those related to the Drosophila
Achaete-Scute genes such as Mash1, and
those related to Drosophila atonal, such as the
neurogenins, the NeuroD-like, and the
ATH genes (Brunet and Ghysen, 1999 ). As
transcriptional activators, these proteins have been proposed to have
multiple functions during neurogenesis, including a role in neuronal
subtype specification. However, the most relevant function
to this discussion is their proposed role in promoting the
differentiation of neural precursor cells into neurons during embryonic
development (Fig. 1D).
Proneural bHLH proteins are likely to be the critical factor in causing
the neuroepithelial cells to become neurons, which they do by exiting
the cell cycle, delaminating out of the epithelium, and activating the
expression of a large panel of genes indicative of generic neuronal
differentiation. At the point where cells in the neuroepithelium make
this decision, a region just outside of the ventricular zone, they
express one or several of the proneural bHLH genes: the exact gene
expressed varies depending on time and place. When eliminated by
targeted mutation, loss of specific proneural bHLH genes results in
specific deletion of neuronal elements (Schwab et al., 2000 ; Olson et
al., 2001 ; Wang et al., 2001 ). However, the loss of neurons is likely
to be much more severe when multiple members are simultaneously
eliminated, a result of genetic redundancy as also found for the
proneural bHLH genes in Drosophila (Scardigli et al., 2001 ).
From the loss-of-function analysis, it is clear that the neural bHLH
proteins are required for neuronal differentiation in specific cases,
but because of functional redundancy it is not straightforward
experimentally to ask whether all neuronal differentiation is driven by
proneural gene action. However, we also know that the proneural
proteins are potent inducers of neuronal differentiation when
ectopically expressed (Lee et al., 1995 ). In addition, all neurons
express a generic set of neuronal genes that are activated by the
proneural bHLH proteins in ectopic expression experiments. Finally,
proneural proteins seem to be key in promoting cell cycle exit, an
event shared by all neurons when they undergo terminal differentiation (Farah et al., 2000 ). Thus, a reasonable assumption is that the proneural proteins are responsible for promoting neuronal
differentiation, regardless of when and where a neuron forms in the CNS.
The proneural bHLH cascade in neuronal determination
One can view the activation of proneural bHLH genes as setting in
motion an irreversible set of events that result in terminal neuronal
differentiation. As a consequence, one would like to know how these
neuronal switch genes are activated within the neuroepithelial cells
during neurogenesis in the embryo, or for that matter within neural
stem cells when neurogenesis occurs in the adult. Indeed, this question
may have several answers, and the one that applies to embryos may be
different from that for the adult. To explain why this might be the
case, one needs to consider in detail how the bHLH genes that promote
neuronal differentiation are activated in neurogenic epithelium. In all cases examined thus far, the key factor seems to be a bHLH cascade that
mediates both neuronal determination and differentiation. The
distinction between determination and differentiation is an important
one and dates back to a model first proposed by Weintraub (1993) in his
analysis of bHLH proteins that promote myogenesis.
In the Weintraub (1993) model, mesodermal cells are converted into
dividing muscle precursors, the myoblasts, via the action of myogenic
bHLH proteins such as MyoD (Weintraub, 1993 ). Because the myoblast
"state" is largely maintained by MyoD expression, and MyoD
maintains its expression by autoactivation, this state is easily
reversible by simply disrupting the positive feedback loop between MyoD
and its own transcription. Indeed, if MyoD activity is inhibited in
myoblasts, they apparently convert back to a multipotential mesodermal
cell. Alternatively, myoblasts are converted into muscle cells when the
level and/or activity of MyoD is sufficiently high to activate
downstream target genes, including bHLH proteins such as myogenin,
which results in exit from the cell cycle, and terminal differentiation. This model explains a distinction that embryologists have long made between the determination of myogenic cells, a state
inherently plastic and easily reversible particularly in culture, and
terminal differentiation, a less reversible state that leads to muscle.
In a similar manner, the proneural bHLH genes that promote neuronal
differentiation are likely to be activated by other proneural bHLH
proteins that are expressed in neurogenic epithelium and act as
neuronal determination genes (Fig. 1D, green
shading). Experiments show that when their activity is
sufficiently high in neuroepithelial cells, these bHLH proteins
activate the expression of downstream differentiation bHLH genes, which
then act to promote exit from the cell cycle and neuronal
differentiation (Ma et al., 1996 ). Conversely, other experiments show
that when the activity and expression of the determinative bHLH genes
is inhibited, neuroepithelial cells seem to revert back to a ground
state where they have the option to divide and perhaps become a neuron
at a later time, or serve as the source of progenitor cells for various
glia. Indeed, regulation of the determinative bHLH proteins seems to be
a critical event for maintaining a proper balance between the need to
generate cells that undergo terminal neuronal differentiation and the
need to retain neuroepithelial cells in a progenitor mode, thus
creating the progenitor cells for later-born neurons or for glia (Nieto et al., 2001 ). This balance allows for protracted neurogenesis and the
proliferation of neuronal progenitor cells, a prerequisite for the use
of neuronal birth date as an important mechanism for neuronal subtype
specification (Perron and Harris, 2000 ). The Notch signaling pathway is
well established as one means for maintaining this balance by
inhibiting the activity of the proneural proteins (Fig.
1D), but one imagines that other mechanisms are also
used in this respect (Lewis, 1998 ; Lyden et al., 1999 ). Artificially elevating the activity of bHLH proteins seems to short-circuit the
process, resulting in enhanced neuronal differentiation, but at the
expense of a depleted precursor pool.
Neural patterning and the control of neurogenesis
Although we do not yet know whether all regions of neurogenic
epithelium use a bHLH cascade to mediate neuronal determination, we do
know that neural patterning genes activate the bHLH cascade in cases
where neurogenesis has been studied in detail within the developing
spinal cord. In ventral spinal cord, the first neurons to be generated
are motor neurons, and their generation is correlated with the early
expression of a determinative bHLH protein, Ngn2, within a narrow
ventral domain of neuroepithelium. This region of the neuroepithelium
is patterned by the expression of a key transcription factor, called
Olig2, induced within the ventral neuroepithelium by hedgehog signaling
(Fig. 1C). Significantly, one function of Olig2 in the
generation of motor neurons is to induce Ngn2 expression,
thus setting in motion the bHLH cascade (Mizuguchi et al., 2001 ;
Novitch et al., 2001 ). When ectopically expressed in the embryonic
spinal cord, Olig2 induces ectopic motor neuron differentiation, and
does so in part by inducing ectopic and precocious expression of
Ngn2. Significantly, ectopic Olig2 expression
seems to recapitulate the normal balance between determination and
differentiation discussed above, because only a fraction of the
Olig2 expressing cells go on to form motorneurons over a
given period of time. As expected, expressing high levels of
Ngn2 along with Olig2 short circuits the
determination phase, resulting in a very high level of motor neuron
differentiation among the transgenic cells.
A similar link has also been made between patterning genes and bHLH
cascades that operates in the dorsal neuroepithelium of the spinal cord
to promote the generation of certain classes of dorsal interneurons
(Gowan et al., 2001 ). In this case, neighboring domains of
neuroepithelium producing these different classes of interneurons
appear to do so, in part, by promoting the expression of distinct
members of the proneural bHLH family. Genetic evidence suggests that
these distinct neurogenic domains of neuroepithelial cells are formed
by matching a given patterning transcription factor and a given
proneural bHLH protein required for neuronal determination. If correct,
this interpretation supports the view that patterning genes are key
factors in activating a core bHLH cascade within neuroepithelial cells
at each point along the neuraxis. The diversity in programs of
neurogenesis that occur along the neuraxis presumably arises therefore
by the way different patterning genes engage the bHLH cascade.
Converting neuroepithelial cells into glia
Neuroepithelial cells initially form neurons, but gradually switch
over and produce different forms of glia. Rather than arising from
separate populations of progenitor cells, the glial precursors are
likely to be the neuroepithelial cells that were kept back from
neuronal differentiation during the determinative phase of neurogenesis. One fate open to these cells is to form oligodendrocyte precursors (OPCs) that arise within a very restricted domain of the
neural tube along the dorsoventral axis. As is the case with neurogenesis, a distinct genetic program has recently emerged as
critical in promoting the differentiation of neuroepithelial cells into
OPC, regardless of position along the neuraxis (Sun et al., 2001 ; Zhou
et al., 2001 ). Surprisingly, this genetic program requires
Olig2, the gene required for promoting motor neuron
differentiation at early stages. However, once this process is
complete, Olig2 expression in the neuroepithelium begins to
overlap with that of another patterning gene called Nkx2.2. Genetic
studies suggest that when this overlap occurs, the neuroepithelium
gives rise to OPCs, which subsequently delaminate out of the
neuroepithelium, disperse within the white matter, and undergo a
terminal differentiation program of myelination. A speculative analogy
is that Olig2 and Nkx2.2 act as a genetic switch during the
determination of OPCs, much the same way that proneural bHLH proteins
determine neuronal precursors, as described above. This may account for
the plasticity of OPCs in culture, because by analogy with determined
neuronal precursors, factors that inhibit the action of Olig2 and
Nkx2.2 will revert these cells back to the neuroepithelial ground
state, whereas those that promote their activity will result in
terminal oligodendrocyte differentiation into myelinating cells. The
plasticity of these determined states seems to explain, for example,
why they can be easily overcome by other determination factors.
Misexpression of the proneural proteins in neuroepithelial cells
inhibits OPC formation by activating neuronal determination;
conversely, inhibition of proneural gene function by Olig2 and Nkx2.2
may be a factor in promoting the formation of OPCs (Sun et al., 2001 ;
Zhou et al., 2001 ).
In contrast with OPCs, the genetic programs required for
generating other forms of glia in the CNS are less clear, and in some
cases may involve default pathways of differentiation that are
available to neuroepithelial cells that have not formed neurons or
oligodendrocytes (Fig. 1E). Radial glia cells
found throughout the embryonic nervous system or the Müller glial
cells found in the retina have been classified as distinct
differentiated cell types, but in fact are remarkably similar to
neuroepithelial cells by a number of criteria: the most important one
being that they remain part of the neuroepithelium. The formation of
these cells is stimulated when neurogenesis is inhibited by Notch,
suggesting to some investigators that their relationship with
neuroepithelial cells may be quite direct (Gaiano et al., 2000 ).
Default differentiation may also apply to the astrocytes, a catch-all
term for what appears to be a fairly plastic and heterogeneous
population of cells. How these cells arise from the neuroepithelium is
not entirely clear, but one emerging theme is that inhibiting
neurogenesis or oligodendrocyte differentiation seems to stimulate
their formation, like that of radial glia. For example, inhibition of
proneural bHLH function via the Notch pathway is a potent means of
"inducing" astrocyte differentiation (Tanigaki et al., 2001 ).
Similarly, developing neuroepithelium gives rise precociously to
astrocytes when proneural genes are eliminated by mutation (Nieto et
al., 2001 ). In this sense, the embryonic origins of astrocytes are analogous to those of embryonic fibroblasts within the mesodermal lineage: a cell type distinguished more by the fact that it has not
differentiated into a more specialized cell such as muscle, fat,
cartilage, or bone cells, rather than the fact that it requires a
distinct program of differentiation. Finally, a population of neuroepithelial cells left over after neurogenesis and gliogenesis form
the ependyma, the epithelial lining of the central canal (Fig.
1G). As direct remnants of the embryonic neuroepithelial cells, they are in the best position to retain the "code" of
transcription factor gene expression that was used embryonically to
pattern neurogenesis within this epithelium.
Is neurogenesis in embryos mechanistically similar to that in
the adult?
How related is neurogenesis in embryos to that occurring in the
adult? Several points of comparison are worth discussing, based on what
is known about neurogenesis in embryos, although the answer to this
question is obviously a problem for the future. One point is that the
source of new neurons in the adult is unlikely to be a direct
counterpart to the neuroepithelial cells that generate neurons in the
embryo. The obvious requirement that stem cells divide makes such
terminally differentiated cells such as neurons or oligodendrocytes
unlikely sources of neural stem cells. Cell types retained within the
neuroepithelium of the adult nervous system, such as ependyma or the
so-called radial glia cells, are more likely sources based on their
similarity to embryonic neuroepithelial cells from which they are
closely derived (Alvarez-Buylla et al., 2001 ; Tamamaki et al., 2001 ).
Indeed, as direct remnants of the embryonic neuroepithelium, these
cells conceivably retain or continue to respond to the patterning
signals that promote neurogenesis in the embryo. Again, a critical
issue for these cells is whether they are capable of the cell division
required of stem cells. Finally, another potential source is
astrocytes, based on fact that they continue to undergo cell division
and the idea that their differentiation is primarily a default pathway,
leaving open the possibility that if the appropriate genes are
activated, (i.e., the bHLH cascade), they can be coaxed into neuronal
differentiation. Thus, the neurons generated in the adult may have
several sources, some of which are close to but not directly equivalent
to the embryonic neuroepithelium.
A second point of comparison is the whether the bHLH cascade, so
critical to neurogenesis in the embryo, is also required in the adult.
For reasons discussed above, a reasonable assumption is that it will
be, because at present, alternative mechanisms for generating neurons
do not currently exist. If this assumption is correct, then how might
the bHLH cascade be activated during adult neurogenesis, and is this
mechanism different or the same as that used in embryos? In embryos, a
key factor in generating diverse patterns of neurogenesis that occur in
the various regions of the developing CNS is the interactions that
occur between bHLH cascade and the myriad of transcription factors that
pattern the embryonic neuroepithelium. These interactions are critical
both for neuronal cell determination and differentiation. Thus, one key
question is whether the bHLH cascade is used in adult stem cells
using this same mechanism, indicating that the patterning genes
expressed in embryonic neuroepithelium will also be expressed by adult
stem cells. The alternative scenario is that the constellation of
patterning genes that are normally used in the embryo for promoting neurogenesis are absent in adult stem cells, which instead use an
alternative means to activate the bHLH cascade. One possibility, for
example, is that adult stem cells generate neurons by mechanisms that
activate the differentiation proneural genes directly, thus bypassing
the determination bHLH proteins. If this latter scenario is
true, adult neural stem cells may be more specialized and only generate
a limited range of neuronal subtypes because they are unable to
activate the bHLH cascade in the same diverse ways used by embryonic cells.
Based on what we know about neurogenesis in embryos, one would like to
know how the bHLH cascade is used by adult neural stem cells and how
this mechanism compares to that used in embryos. This comparison may
not only provide additional insights into how neurogenesis is mediated
in the adult, but perhaps suggest strategies that might can be used to
increase the neurogenic potential of neural stem cells in terms of
their ability to undergo neuronal determination and differentiation.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
Correspondence should be addressed to Chris Kintner at the
above address. E-mail: kintner{at}salk.edu.
 |
REFERENCES |
-
Alvarez-Buylla A,
Garcia-Verdugo JM,
Tramontin AD
(2001)
A unified hypothesis on the lineage of neural stem cells.
Nat Rev Neurosci
2:287-293[ISI][Medline].
-
Brunet JF,
Ghysen A
(1999)
Deconstructing cell determination: proneural genes and neuronal identity.
Bioessays
21:313-318[Medline].
-
Farah MH,
Olson JM,
Sucic HB,
Hume RI,
Tapscott SJ,
Turner DL
(2000)
Generation of neurons by transient expression of neural bHLH proteins in mammalian cells.
Development
127:693-702[Abstract].
-
Gaiano N,
Nye JS,
Fishell G
(2000)
Radial glial identity is promoted by Notch1 signaling in the murine forebrain.
Neuron
26:395-404[ISI][Medline].
-
Gowan K,
Helms AW,
Hunsaker TL,
Collisson T,
Ebert PJ,
Odom R,
Johnson JE
(2001)
Crossinhibitory activities of Ngn1 and Math1 allow specification of distinct dorsal interneurons.
Neuron
31:219-232[ISI][Medline].
-
Jessell TM
(2000)
Neuronal specification in the spinal cord: inductive signals and transcriptional codes.
Nat Rev Genet
1:20-29[ISI][Medline].
-
Lee JE,
Hollenberg SM,
Snider L,
Turner DL,
Lipnick N,
Weintraub H
(1995)
Conversion of Xenopus ectoderm into neurons by NeuroD, a basic helix-loop-helix protein.
Science
268:836-844[Abstract/Free Full Text].
-
Lee SK,
Pfaff SL
(2001)
Transcriptional networks regulating neuronal identity in the developing spinal cord.
Nat Neurosci
4:1183-1191.
-
Lewis J
(1998)
Notch signalling and the control of cell fate choices in vertebrates.
Semin Cell Dev Biol
9:583-589[ISI][Medline].
-
Lyden D,
Young AZ,
Zagzag D,
Yan W,
Gerald W,
O'Reilly R,
Bader BL,
Hynes RO,
Zhuang Y,
Manova K,
Benezra R
(1999)
Id1 and Id3 are required for neurogenesis, angiogenesis and vascularization of tumour xenografts.
Nature
401:670-677[Medline].
-
Ma Q,
Kintner C,
Anderson DJ
(1996)
Identification of neurogenin, a vertebrate neuronal determination gene.
Cell
87:43-52[ISI][Medline].
-
Mizuguchi R,
Sugimori M,
Takebayashi H,
Kosako H,
Nagao M,
Yoshida S,
Nabeshima Y,
Shimamura K,
Nakafuku M
(2001)
Combinatorial roles of olig2 and neurogenin2 in the coordinated induction of pan-neuronal and subtype-specific properties of motoneurons.
Neuron
31:757-771[ISI][Medline].
-
Nieto M,
Schuurmans C,
Brz O,
Guillemot F
(2001)
Neural bHLH genes control the neuronal versus glial fate decision in cortical progenitors.
Neuron
29:401-413[ISI][Medline].
-
Novitch BG,
Chen AI,
Jessell TM
(2001)
Coordinate regulation of motor neuron subtype identity and pan-neuronal properties by the bHLH repressor Olig2.
Neuron
31:773-789[ISI][Medline].
-
Olson JM, Asakura A, Snider L, Hawkes R, Strand A, Stoeck J, Hallahan
A, Pritchard J, Tapscott SJ (2001) NeuroD2 is necessary for
development, survival of central nervous system neurons Dev Biol
234:174-187.
-
Perron M,
Harris WA
(2000)
Determination of vertebrate retinal progenitor cell fate by the Notch pathway and basic helix-loop-helix transcription factors.
Cell Mol Life Sci
57:215-223[ISI][Medline].
-
Scardigli R,
Schuurmans C,
Gradwohl G,
Guillemot F
(2001)
Crossregulation between Neurogenin2 and pathways specifying neuronal identity in the spinal cord.
Neuron
31:203-217[ISI][Medline].
-
Schwab MH,
Bartholomae A,
Heimrich B,
Feldmeyer D,
Druffel-Augustin S,
Goebbels S,
Naya FJ,
Zhao S,
Frotscher M,
Tsai MJ,
Nave KA
(2000)
Neuronal basic helix-loop-helix proteins (NEX and BETA2/Neuro D) regulate terminal granule cell differentiation in the hippocampus.
J Neurosci
20:3714-3724[Abstract/Free Full Text].
-
Sun T,
Echelard Y,
Lu R,
Yuk D,
Kaing S,
Stiles CD,
Rowitch DH
(2001)
Olig bHLH proteins interact with homeodomain proteins to regulate cell fate acquisition in progenitors of the ventral neural tube.
Curr Biol
11:1413-1420[Medline].
-
Tamamaki N,
Nakamura K,
Okamoto K,
Kaneko T
(2001)
Radial glia is a progenitor of neocortical neurons in the developing cerebral cortex.
Neurosci Res
41:51-60[ISI][Medline].
-
Tanigaki K,
Nogaki F,
Takahashi J,
Tashiro K,
Kurooka H,
Honjo T
(2001)
Notch1, Notch3 instructively restrict bFGF-responsive multipotent neural progenitor cells to an astroglial fate.
Neuron
29:45-55[ISI][Medline].
-
Tropepe V,
Hitoshi S,
Sirard C,
Mak TW,
Rossant J,
van der Kooy D
(2001)
Direct neural fate specification from embryonic stem cells: a primitive mammalian neural stem cell stage acquired through a default mechanism.
Neuron
30:65-78[ISI][Medline].
-
Wang SW,
Kim BS,
Ding K,
Wang H,
Sun D,
Johnson RL,
Klein WH,
Gan L
(2001)
Requirement for math5 in the development of retinal ganglion cells.
Genes Dev
15:24-29[Abstract/Free Full Text].
-
Weintraub H
(1993)
The MyoD family and myogenesis: redundancy, networks, and thresholds.
Cell
75:1241-1244[ISI][Medline].
-
Wilson SI,
Edlund T
(2001)
Neural induction: toward a unifying mechanism.
Nat Neurosci
4:1161-1168.
-
Zhou Q,
Choi G,
Anderson DJ
(2001)
The bHLH transcription factor Olig2 promotes oligodendrocyte differentiation in collaboration with Nkx2.2.
Neuron
31:791-807[ISI][Medline].
Copyright © 2002 Society for Neuroscience 0270-6474/02/223639-05$05.00/0
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. Iulianella, M. Sharma, M. Durnin, G. B. Vanden Heuvel, and P. A. Trainor
Cux2 (Cutl2) integrates neural progenitor development with cell-cycle progression during spinal cord neurogenesis
Development,
February 15, 2008;
135(4):
729 - 741.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. Bergsland, M. Werme, M. Malewicz, T. Perlmann, and J. Muhr
The establishment of neuronal properties is controlled by Sox4 and Sox11
Genes & Dev.,
December 15, 2006;
20(24):
3475 - 3486.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. Rao and S. Sockanathan
Transmembrane Protein GDE2 Induces Motor Neuron Differentiation in Vivo
Science,
September 30, 2005;
309(5744):
2212 - 2215.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
V. Nguyen, A. L. Chokas, B. Stecca, and A. R. i Altaba
Cooperative requirement of the Gli proteins in neurogenesis
Development,
July 15, 2005;
132(14):
3267 - 3279.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. M. Angelastro, J. L. Mason, T. N. Ignatova, V. G. Kukekov, G. B. Stengren, J. E. Goldman, and L. A. Greene
Downregulation of Activating Transcription Factor 5 Is Required for Differentiation of Neural Progenitor Cells into Astrocytes
J. Neurosci.,
April 13, 2005;
25(15):
3889 - 3899.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
K. J. Liu and R. M. Harland
Inhibition of neurogenesis by SRp38, a neuroD-regulated RNA-binding protein
Development,
April 1, 2005;
132(7):
1511 - 1523.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. Seo, G. A. Richardson, and K. L. Kroll
The SWI/SNF chromatin remodeling protein Brg1 is required for vertebrate neurogenesis and mediates transactivation of Ngn and NeuroD
Development,
January 1, 2005;
132(1):
105 - 115.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
W. Sun, A. Winseck, S. Vinsant, O.-h. Park, H. Kim, and R. W. Oppenheim
Programmed Cell Death of Adult-Generated Hippocampal Neurons Is Mediated by the Proapoptotic Gene Bax
J. Neurosci.,
December 8, 2004;
24(49):
11205 - 11213.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
U. Sattler, M. Samochocki, A. Maelicke, and C. Zechel
The Expression Level of the Orphan Nuclear Receptor GCNF (Germ Cell Nuclear Factor) Is Critical for Neuronal Differentiation
Mol. Endocrinol.,
November 1, 2004;
18(11):
2714 - 2726.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
L. S. Campos, D. P. Leone, J. B. Relvas, C. Brakebusch, R. Fassler, U. Suter, and C. ffrench-Constant
{beta}1 integrins activate a MAPK signalling pathway in neural stem cells that contributes to their maintenance
Development,
July 15, 2004;
131(14):
3433 - 3444.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
H. Pi, S.-K. Huang, C.-Y. Tang, Y. H. Sun, and C.-T. Chien
phyllopod is a target gene of proneural proteins in Drosophila external sensory organ development
PNAS,
June 1, 2004;
101(22):
8378 - 8383.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. Dihne, C. Bernreuther, M. Sibbe, W. Paulus, and M. Schachner
A New Role for the Cell Adhesion Molecule L1 in Neural Precursor Cell Proliferation, Differentiation, and Transmitter-Specific Subtype Generation
J. Neurosci.,
July 23, 2003;
23(16):
6638 - 6650.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. M. Angelastro, T. N. Ignatova, V. G. Kukekov, D. A. Steindler, G. B. Stengren, C. Mendelsohn, and L. A. Greene
Regulated Expression of ATF5 Is Required for the Progression of Neural Progenitor Cells to Neurons
J. Neurosci.,
June 1, 2003;
23(11):
4590 - 4600.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
|