Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Information for Authors
    • Fees
    • Journal Clubs
    • eLetters
    • Submit
    • Special Collections
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
    • Editorial Board
    • ECR Advisory Board
    • Journal Staff
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
    • Accessibility
  • SUBSCRIBE

User menu

  • Log out
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Neuroscience
  • Log out
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Neuroscience

Advanced Search

Submit a Manuscript
  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Information for Authors
    • Fees
    • Journal Clubs
    • eLetters
    • Submit
    • Special Collections
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
    • Editorial Board
    • ECR Advisory Board
    • Journal Staff
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
    • Accessibility
  • SUBSCRIBE
PreviousNext
Development/Plasticity/Repair

Analysis of Cerebellar Development in math1 Null Embryos and Chimeras

Patricia Jensen, Richard Smeyne and Dan Goldowitz
Journal of Neuroscience 3 March 2004, 24 (9) 2202-2211; https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3427-03.2004
Patricia Jensen
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Richard Smeyne
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Dan Goldowitz
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  •   Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1.

    Analysis of the math1β-Gal/β-Gal cerebellum. Sagittal view of math1β-Gal/β-Gal (A, C, E) and +/+ (B, D, F) cerebella stained with cresyl violet. A, C, E, The EGL is absent in all math1β-Gal/β-Gal cerebella. However, at E13.5, there is no apparent size difference between the math1β-Gal/β-Gal (A) and +/+ (B) cerebellum. By E15, the math1β-Gal/β-Gal cerebellum (C) and rhombic lip (RL) is noticeably smaller than the +/+ littermate (D). By P0, the difference in cerebellar size is even more pronounced because of the absence of foliation in the math1β-Gal/β-Gal cerebellum (E) compared with the +/+ littermate (F). Scale bar, 200 μm.

  •   Figure 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2.

    Normal cell proliferation and absence of cell death in the E15.5 math1β-Gal/β-Gal rhombic lip. Sagittal view of E15.5 math1β-Gal/β-Gal (A, C, E, F) and E15.5 +/+ (B, D) rhombic lip, with the ventricular zone (VZ) at the top left of each image. A, B, Cresyl violet-stained sections demonstrating the presence of mitotic figures (white arrows) in both the math1β-Gal/β-Gal (A) and +/+ (B) rhombic lip. In B, the arrow also demarcates the interior face (left) and the exterior face (right) of the rhombic lip. In C and D, BrdU was injected at E12.5. The presence of BrdU-positive cells (black arrows) confirms that there is active proliferation in both the math1β-Gal/β-Gal (C) and +/+ (D) rhombic lip. E, F, TUNEL assay for apoptotic cell death reveals no cell death in the math1β-Gal/β-Gal rhombic lip (E) compared with the TUNEL-positive cells (arrowheads) in the DNase-treated positive control (F). Scale bar, 30 μm.

  •   Figure 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3.

    Math1/lacZ-positive cells in the early embryonic math1β-Gal/β-Gal cerebellum. Sagittal view of E10.5 (A) and E13.5 (B, C) math1β-Gal/β-Gal cerebellum reacted for β-gal activity. A, At E10.5, Math1/lacZ-positive blue cells (arrows) are seen throughout the rhombic lip (RL). B, At E13.5, Math1/lacZ-positive blue cells are seen within the rhombic lip (RL) and migrating from the RL in a rostral direction in the superficial cerebellum (arrows). In C, Math1/lacZ-positive blue cells (arrows) appear to be migrating inward from the migratory stream in the superficial aspect of the cerebellum. Scale bar: A, C, 50 μm; B, 157.5 μm.

  •   Figure 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 4.

    math1β-Gal/β-Gal ↔ +/+ chimeras demonstrate an abnormal EGL with associated abnormalities in foliation. Sagittal view of P0 +/+ (A) and math1β-Gal/β-Gal <-> +/+ (B, C) lateral cerebella and P5 +/+ (D) and math1β-Gal/β-Gal <->+/+ (E, F) medial cerebella stained with cresyl violet. B, C, E, F, In all chimeric cerebella, there are regions of the EGL that are severely disrupted or absent (arrows and arrowheads). Where there are gaps in the EGL, foliation is disrupted compared with wild-type cerebella in A and D. Where there are large gaps in the EGL, as seen in B (arrows), foliation is absent. In some cases, where the EGL is present near the base of a folia (B, E, arrowheads), there is hyperextension of that folia (asterisk). The dark lining of the cerebellum in B and C, which has acellular areas opposite the arrows, is attributable to India ink used to highlight the gross cerebellar abnormalities in the unsectioned brain. Scale bar: A-C, 150 μm; D-F, 300 μm.

  •   Figure 5.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 5.

    Three-dimensional reconstructions of math1β-Gal/β-Gal ↔ +/+ chimeric cerebella. In all of the reconstructions, EGLs containing granule cells are gray, whereas areas without granule cells in the EGL are white. A, In this P0 chimera, the agranular EGL traverses several lobules in the posterior cerebellum, beginning at the midline and ending in the initial segments of the hemisphere. B, In this P5 chimera, the agranular zone of the EGL is located to a circumspect area starting medially in lobule VIII and progressing to the interface of the vermis and hemisphere. Lobule VIII of this brain is abnormally extended in the posterior direction (outlined in white dashed line), and this extension starts at the point that the agranular EGL starts. C, In this P5 chimera, the agranular region is located in the posterior cerebellum, extending laterally along the superior surface of lobule 6. The lobule containing the agranular EGL (white arrow) is shorter than the same lobule in control brains. D, In this P5 cerebellum, three distinct areas of the EGL are agranular. The largest gap (g1) traverses the entire medial to lateral extent of the cerebellum, without gaps. In the medial cerebellum, the agranular area encompasses much of the posterior cerebellum, whereas in the hemisphere the agranular region is more discrete. Two smaller agranular regions were seen in this brain that were oriented in the anterior-to-posterior axis. A, Anterior; P, posterior; M, medial; L, lateral.

  •   Figure 6.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 6.

    math1β-Gal/β-Gal ↔ +/+ chimeras demonstrate severe foliation defects in the P12 and P21 cerebellum. Sagittal view of P12 +/+ (A) and math1β-Gal/β-Gal ↔ +/+ (B, C) medial cerebella and P21 +/+ (D) and math1β-Gal/β-Gal ↔ +/+ (E) lateral cerebella, and coronal view of P21 math1β-Gal/β-Gal ↔ +/+ cerebellum (F) stained with cresyl violet. In all chimeric animals (B, C, E, F), foliation is disrupted compared with wild-type cerebella in A and D. In C, the absence of foliation is associated with the almost complete lack of an IGL. In B and E, folia (arrowheads) appear to have collapsed inward, and in F there is hyperfoliation. In all cases, there is a reduction in the size of the cerebellum compared with the wild type (insets: compare B, C with A; compare E with D). Scale bar: A, D, F, insets, 600 μm; B, C, E, 300 μm.

  •   Figure 10.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 10.

    Purkinje cell lamination defects are present in regions where granule cells are deficient in the math1β-Gal/β-Gal ↔ +/+ cerebellum. Coronal view of a P12 +/+ (A) and math1β-Gal/β-Gal ↔ +/+ (B) cerebellum and sagittal view of a P21 +/+ (C) and math1β-Gal/β-Gal ↔ +/+ (D, E) cerebellum immunostained for the Purkinje cell marker calbindin and counterstained with cresyl violet. In the P12 (A) and P21 (C) +/+ cerebellum, Purkinje cells (arrowheads) are aligned in a single layer between the molecular layer (ML) and the IGL. In all chimeras (B, D, E), the Purkinje cell layer is disrupted where the granule cell layer is disrupted. Where the granule cell layer is absent, Purkinje cells (asterisk) are in unorganized clusters (D, inset). In adjacent regions where the granule cell layer is intact, Purkinje cells (arrowhead) are aligned in a single layer. When the granule cell layer is disrupted in the anterior cerebellum (B, E), Purkinje cells (arrows) migrate into the inferior colliculus (ic). Scale bar: A-E, 400 μm; insets in D, E, 30 μm; inset in B, 15 μm.

  •   Figure 7.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 7.

    math1β-Gal/β-Gal granule cell precursors are not generated in the math1β-Gal/β-Gal ↔ +/+ cerebellum. Coronal view of a P0 math1β-Gal/β-Gal ↔ +/+ (A, B) and math1β-Gal/+ ↔ +/+ (C, D) cerebellum and P12 math1β-Gal/β-Gal ↔ +/+ cerebellum (E) reacted for β-gal activity and counterstained with neutral red. In the high percentage math1β-Gal/β-Gal cerebellum in A and B, there is no discernable EGL present compared with the EGL in a high percentage math1β-Gal/+ chimeric cerebellum in C and D. However, math1β-Gal/β-Gal blue cells (arrows) are seen in the medullary vellum and choroids plexus in A and deep to and within the PCP in B. Math1/lacZ-positive blue cells are found in the same location in the math1β-Gal/+ ↔ +/+ cerebellum in D. In E, the P12 math1β-Gal/β-Gal ↔ +/+ cerebellum, math1β-Gal/β-Gal blue cells (arrowheads) are found within the molecular layer (ML) and adjacent to Purkinje cells. In the IGL in E, large math1β-Gal/β-Gal blue cells (arrows) resembling Golgi type II cells are found among the much smaller +/+ red granule cells. Scale bar: E, 15 μm; B, D, 30 μm; A, C, 180 μm.

  •   Figure 8.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 8.

    Some Math1/LacZ-positive cells in the P12 math1β-Gal/β-Gal ↔ +/+ cerebellum are also GFAP positive. A-D, Sagittal view of the agranular P12 math1β-Gal/β-Gal ↔ +/+ cerebellum in Figure 10B, immunostained for the neuronal marker NeuN (A, arrowheads), the glial marker GFAP (B, arrow), and the Math1/LacZ+ marker β-gal (C, arrow). In the merged image (D), most of the β-gal-immunopositive cells were also positive for GFAP. Scale bar, 30 μm.

  •   Figure 9.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 9.

    Only +/+ cells colonize the EGL in the math1β-Gal/β-Gal ↔ +/+ cerebellum. A-C, Sagittal view of a P5 math1β-Gal/β-Gal ↔ +/+ cerebellum probed for the presence of the Globin transgene present in the wild-type cells of the chimeric cerebellum. In both normal (B) and disrupted (C) regions (asterisks) of the chimeric cerebellum, the EGL contains only labeled +/+ granule cell neuroblasts (white arrowheads), whereas both +/+ (black arrowhead) and math1β-Gal/β-Gal (arrow) Purkinje cells are found. Scale bar: A, 378 μm; B, C,30 μm.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1.

    Summary of chimeras generated noting age, wild-type genotype, and mutant phenotype

    Age Chimeras (math1 ↔ wild type) Total number of chimeras generated Number of chimeras with abnormal cerebellar phenotype
    P0 math1 ↔ BALB/c 12 2
    P0 math1 ↔ math1+/+ 13 4
    P0 math1 ↔ GTO 11 3
    P5 math1 ↔ ICR 22 5
    P5 math1 ↔ GTO 5 3
    P12 math1 ↔ math1+/+ 4 1
    P12 math1 ↔ BALB/c 8 2
    P12 math1 ↔ GTO 6 2
    P21 math1 ↔ BALB/c 10 3
    P21 math1 ↔ ROSA26 12 4
    Total 103 29
    • View popup
    Table 2.

    EGL and cerebellar area in P0 and P5 math1β−gal/β−gal ↔ +/+ chimeras and controls

    Age Chimera Genotype EGL areaa (μm2) Cerebellum areaa (μm2)
    P5 math 1+/+ 194705 1239518
    P5 ICR 184015 1149068
    P5 090700K math 1β−gal/β−gal ↔ ICR 65845 595783
    P5 090700A math 1β−gal/β−gal ↔ ICR 85515 506948
    P5 090700M math 1β−gal/β−gal ↔ ICR 121622 1243073
    P5 090700G Math 1β−gal/β−gal ↔ ICR 136389 1253508
    P5 Math 1β−gal/+ or +/+ ↔ ICR 184477b (164213-213105) 1148023b (1013108-1332086)
    P0 math 1+/+ 59343 524207
    P0 Balb/cJ 61298 532759
    P0 080899H math 1β−gal/β−gal ↔ Balb/cJ 26285 426604
    P0 080899E math 1β−gal/β−gal ↔ Balb/cJ 44028 507886
    Math 1β−gal/+ or +/+ ↔
    P0 Balb/cJ 59296b (55081-63605) 539310b (516805-572824)
    • ↵ a Mean area of EGL and cerebellum calculated for three nonconsecutive sections.

    • ↵ b Mean area of EGL and cerebellum calculated for three nonconsecutive sections of n = 5 animals within each group. The range of mean for individual animals is in parentheses.

Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Neuroscience: 24 (9)
Journal of Neuroscience
Vol. 24, Issue 9
3 Mar 2004
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
  • AbstractBrowser.pdf
Email

Thank you for sharing this Journal of Neuroscience article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Analysis of Cerebellar Development in math1 Null Embryos and Chimeras
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of Neuroscience
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Journal of Neuroscience.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
View Full Page PDF
Citation Tools
Analysis of Cerebellar Development in math1 Null Embryos and Chimeras
Patricia Jensen, Richard Smeyne, Dan Goldowitz
Journal of Neuroscience 3 March 2004, 24 (9) 2202-2211; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3427-03.2004

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Request Permissions
Share
Analysis of Cerebellar Development in math1 Null Embryos and Chimeras
Patricia Jensen, Richard Smeyne, Dan Goldowitz
Journal of Neuroscience 3 March 2004, 24 (9) 2202-2211; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3427-03.2004
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Responses to this article

Respond to this article

Jump to comment:

No eLetters have been published for this article.

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • IGFBP2–Ceramide Pathway Mediates Divergent Myelin Breakdown in the PNS and CNS Following Injury
  • Smg5 Enhances Oligodendrocyte Differentiation via Nonsense-Mediated mRNA Decay of Hnrnpl Variant Transcripts
  • Sphingosine-1-Phosphate Signaling through Müller Glia Regulates Neuroprotection, Accumulation of Immune Cells, and Neuronal Regeneration in the Rodent Retina
Show more Development/Plasticity/Repair
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Follow SFN on BlueSky
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Facebook
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on Twitter
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on LinkedIn
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Youtube
  • Follow our RSS feeds

Content

  • Early Release
  • Current Issue
  • Issue Archive
  • Collections

Information

  • For Authors
  • For Advertisers
  • For the Media
  • For Subscribers

About

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Privacy Notice
  • Contact
  • Accessibility
(JNeurosci logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2025 by the Society for Neuroscience.
JNeurosci Online ISSN: 1529-2401

The ideas and opinions expressed in JNeurosci do not necessarily reflect those of SfN or the JNeurosci Editorial Board. Publication of an advertisement or other product mention in JNeurosci should not be construed as an endorsement of the manufacturer’s claims. SfN does not assume any responsibility for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from or related to any use of any material contained in JNeurosci.