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
Articles, Development/Plasticity/Repair

Endogenous Gradients of Resting Potential Instructively Pattern Embryonic Neural Tissue via Notch Signaling and Regulation of Proliferation

Vaibhav P. Pai, Joan M. Lemire, Jean-François Paré, Gufa Lin, Ying Chen and Michael Levin
Journal of Neuroscience 11 March 2015, 35 (10) 4366-4385; https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1877-14.2015
Vaibhav P. Pai
1Biology Department, Center for Regenerative and Developmental Biology, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts 02155-4243 and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Joan M. Lemire
1Biology Department, Center for Regenerative and Developmental Biology, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts 02155-4243 and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Joan M. Lemire
Jean-François Paré
1Biology Department, Center for Regenerative and Developmental Biology, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts 02155-4243 and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Gufa Lin
2Stem Cell Institute, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ying Chen
2Stem Cell Institute, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Michael Levin
1Biology Department, Center for Regenerative and Developmental Biology, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts 02155-4243 and
  • 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

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

    A distinct and intense hyperpolarization of cells lining the neural tube exists before neural tube closure. A, Representative CC2-DMPE:DiBAC staining (Aiii, Aiv) of indicated regions (Ai, Aii) of Xenopus embryos at stages 16 and 18. Blue arrows mark the cluster of intensely hyperpolarized cells in the anterior neural field. The hyperpolarization begins well before the neural tube closure (N = 23 embryos). Illustrations reproduced with permission from Nieuwkoop and Faber, 1967). B, Fluorescence intensity measurements of CC2-DMPE:DiBAC-stained embryo along the indicated axis (white line in inset) at multiple time points (t1–t7) during development from stage 14–20. Representative set of measurements from among 10 different embryos analyzed (C) showed the transformation of broad low-intensity hyperpolarization becoming focused high-intensity hyperpolarization before diminishing to background levels during neurulation. C, Quantification of CC2-DMPE:DiBAC peak fluorescence intensities at each of the time points (stages 14–20) in developing embryos (n = 10). A one-way ANOVA analysis showed that at time point t4 the peak fluorescence intensity is significantly different than t1 and t7. Data are presented as mean ± SEM, ***p < 0.001. D, Electrophysiological Vmem measurements of cells stained with CC2-DMPE:DiBAC in areas as indicated. Readings were recorded from five embryos. Values are plotted as mean ± SEM. Data were analyzed by paired t test and p = 0.0001.

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

    Local perturbation of Vmem disrupts endogenous brain development. A, CC2-DMPE:DiBAC staining of stage 16 Xenopus control (uninjected) and Kv1.5, GlyR (+IVM), or only GlyR-microinjected (two dorsal cells at four-cell stage) embryos. Control embryos (n = 28; Ai) and only GlyR (n = 34; Aiv)-injected embryos showed characteristic hyperpolarization within the forming neural tube (blue arrow) but the Kv1.5-injected embryo (Aii) shows widespread hyperpolarization [n = 24, 21 embryos (87.5%) show changed Vmem] and the GlyR (+IVM, in standard saline) embryo (Aiii) shows widespread depolarization [n = 27, 18 embryos (66.7%) show changed Vmem]. Av, Fluorescence intensity measurements of CC2-DMPE:DiBAC-stained embryos. One-way ANOVA analysis pixel distance 100, 250, and 400, shows significant difference of CC2-DMPE:DiBAC signal in the Kv1.5 and GlyR + IVM embryos compared with control embryos. Data are represented as mean ± SEM; ***p < 0.001 and **p < 0.01. B, Quantification of tadpoles with brain phenotypes upon microinjections of Kv1.5 or GlyR (+IVM ± 70 mm Cl−) ion channel mRNA in the two dorsal cells (red arrows) of the four-cell Xenopus embryo. A high incidence of malformed brain is observed in dorsal injections compared with uninjected controls. A χ2 analysis showed that the too-hyperpolarized and the too-depolarized embryos were significantly different from the rightly polarized controls. ***p < 0.001. C, Four-cell Xenopus embryos were injected (red arrow indicates injected cell). Ci, Stage 45 uninjected control tadpoles show well formed anterior neural tissue with red arrowheads indicating nostrils, orange arrowheads indicating forebrain/olfactory bulbs, yellow arrowheads indicating mid brain, and green arrowheads indicating hindbrain. Cii, Stage 45 tadpole injected with hyperpolarizing channel Kv1.5 in both the dorsal cells at the four-cell stage. The green arrowheads indicate the hindbrain, which remains largely unaffected. Blue arrowheads indicate severely malformed midbrain and forebrain. Eyes were also found to be malformed or absent. Ciii, Stage 45 tadpole that had been injected with hyperpolarizing Kv1.5 in only one dorsal cell of four-cell embryo with the other side as contralateral control. The uninjected side of the embryo shows unaffected nostrils, forebrain, midbrain, and hindbrain (arrowhead colors as in Ci). The injected side of the embryo shows misformed nostrils and forebrain/olfactory bulb (blue arrowheads) but unaffected midbrain and hindbrain. D, Stage 45 PNTub::GFP transgenic tadpole shows GFP fluorescence in neural tissue (arrowhead colors as in Ci). Gut autofluorescence is also seen as indicated. Di, The uninjected control tadpole shows intact nostrils, forebrain/olfactory bulbs, midbrain, and hindbrain. Dii, Stage 45 tadpoles injected with Kv1.5 ion channel mRNA in one dorsal cell at the four-cell stage, with the contralateral side of the brain as control (as in Ciii). Blue arrowheads indicate the malformed nostrils and forebrain/olfactory bulbs regions in the injected tadpole (n = 100). Black spots are melanocytes.

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

    Local perturbation of Vmem signal disrupts endogenous forebrain marker expression during neural development. A, Control (Ctrl; uninjected) embryos at the indicated stage (Ai, Aiii, Av, Avii, Aix) and embryos microinjected (Inj) with Kv1.5 mRNA (Aii, Aiv, Avi, Aviii, Ax) in the right dorsal cell at the four-cell stage. In situ hybridization for emx (Ai, Aii [n = 7 of 10], Avii, Aviii [n = 10 of 14]), bf1 (Aiii, Aiv [n = 6 of 9], Aix, Ax [n = 6 of 9]), and otx2 (Av, Avi [n = 9 of 13]) show a significantly decreased or missing expression (red arrowheads) of emx, bf1, and otx2 only on the injected side of the embryos, while expression on the uninjected (Uninj) side is intact (green arrowheads). Quantification of the in situ signal (Axi–xiii) as ratio of the signal intensity for uninjected verses its contralateral injected side for emx (Axi), bf1 (Axii), and otx2 (Axiii) show a significant change in the in situ signal for these probes upon Kv1.5 mRNA injection. The data are represented as mean ± SEM (n > 8 for each). The data are analyzed via t test. ***p < 0.001. B, Control (untreated) embryos (Bi, Bv, Bix), embryos treated with LiCl (0.2 m for 10 min at 32-cell stage; Bii, Bvi, Bx), UV light (75 s; Biii, Bvii, Bxi) and microinjected with Kv1.5 mRNA in the two dorsal cells at four-cell stage (Biv, Bviii, Bxii). Phase contrast images (Bi–iv) of embryos at stage 30 show that LiCl treatment (Bii) dorsalizes the embryos with a majority of dorsal tissue and lack of ventral tissue development, while UV treatment (Biii) ventralizes the embryos with increased ventral tissue specification and lack of dorsal tissue development as compared with control embryos (Bi), which show correctly balanced development of dorsal and ventral tissues. Kv1.5-injected embryos (Biv) appear normal similar to control embryos with balanced development of dorsal and ventral tissues. In situ hybridization for dorsalization markers chordin (Bv–viii) and cerberus (Bix–xii) show normal expression (green arrows) in control embryos (Bv, Bix), a significantly increased expression (yellow arrows) in LiCl-treated embryos (Bvi [n = 9 of 10], Bx [n = 9 of 9]), a significantly decreased expression (red arrow) in UV-treated embryos (Bvii [n = 14 of 15], Bxi [n = 11 of 11]), and relatively unchanged expression (green arrows) in Kv1.5-injected embryos (Bviii [n = 20 of 20], Bxii [n = 18 of 18]) compared with control embryos.

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

    The Vmem signal is transduced via Ca2+ and GJ. A, Schematic of the logic behind the suppression screen to test known candidate mechanisms for transduction of Vmem change to malformed brain tissue phenotype in tadpoles: GJ, serotonin signaling, and calcium influx. B, Quantification of tadpoles with malformed brain phenotype in control (GFP-injected) and Kv1.5-microinjected (dorsal two blastomeres at four-cell stage) embryos with or without the indicated inhibitors. A high incidence of malformed brain phenotype is seen in Kv1.5-microinjected embryos and this effect of Kv1.5 is prevented by verapamil (a blocker of voltage-gated calcium channels, stages 10–30), Lindane (a blocker of GJC among cells, stages 10–30), and H7 (a chimeric dominant-negative connexin that blocks GJ) but not by fluoxetine (Flx) or sertraline (chemical blockers of the serotonin transporter, stages 10–30) or dominant-negative SERT (DN-SERT) mutant (molecular blocker of serotonin transport). A one-way ANOVA (n = 3 experiments) analysis with post hoc test showed significant variance among the groups, with Kv1.5 significantly different from control, Kv1.5 + verapamil, Kv1.5 + Lindane, and Kv1.5 + H7. ***p < 0.001, **p < 0.01.

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

    Notch ICD-induced brain mispatterning can be rescued by Vmem modulation. A, Quantification of tadpoles with malformed brain phenotype in control (Ctrl; uninjected) embryos and embryos microinjected with a constitutively active notch ICD mRNA (in the dorsal two blastomeres at four-cell stage) alone or in combination with Kv1.5 or Bir10 or dominant-negative Kir6.1p mRNA. As expected (see text), misexpression of Notch ICD alone results in a malformed brain phenotype. Remarkably, hyperpolarizing mRNAs Kv1.5 and Bir10 significantly rescue this effect, while depolarizing channel mRNA (DNKir6.1p) increases the number of tadpoles with malformed brains. A χ2 analysis showed that the Notch ICD group is significantly different from the other (Ctrl, Notch ICD + Kv1.5, Notch ICD + Bir10, and Notch ICD + DNKir6.1p) groups. ***p < 0.001. B, Four-cell Xenopus embryos were microinjected with the indicated constructs in two dorsal cells. Bi, Stage 45 control (uninjected) embryos show well formed anterior neural tissue including nostrils, forebrain/olfactory bulbs, midbrain, and hindbrain (arrowhead colors as in Fig. 2Ci). Bii, Stage 45 tadpoles injected with constitutively active notch ICD showed severely malformed neural patterning with the forebrain almost absent and a severely mispatterned midbrain (blue arrowheads). Biii, Stage 45 tadpole injected with both Notch ICD and hyperpolarizing Bir10 ion channel showed significant restoration of neural patterning with intact nostrils and distinct forebrain, midbrain, and hindbrain (arrowhead colors as in Fig. 2Ci). Biv, Stage 45 tadpole injected with both Notch ICD and depolarizing dominant-negative DNKir6.1p channel mRNA shows severely malformed neural tissues and eye patterning with nostrils and forebrain/olfactory bulbs absent and mispatterned midbrain (blue arrowheads). C, Imaging of resting potentials during brain development reveals that Notch ICD misexpression perturbs the normal hyperpolarization patterns required for brain patterning. Fluorescent voltage-sensitive dye (CC2-DMPE:DiBAC) staining of stage 16 Xenopus control (uninjected) embryos (Ci [n = 12]) and embryos microinjected with Notch ICD in two dorsal cells at four-cell stage (Cii [n = 10]). Control embryos show the expected (Fig. 1) hyperpolarization in the forming neural tube as well as in the lateral region of the embryo (solid orange arrowheads), while the Notch ICD-injected embryos are depolarized and fail to show the characteristic hyperpolarization signal (empty orange arrowheads) and develop major neural tissue and eye-patterning defects if grown to stage 45 (see B). D, Fluorescence intensity measurements of CC2-DMPE:DiBAC-stained embryos. One-way ANOVA analysis shows significant difference of CC2-DMPE:DiBAC signal in the Notch ICD-injected embryos (n = 10) compared with control (uninjected) embryos (n = 12). Data are represented as mean ± SEM; ***p < 0.001 and *p < 0.05.

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

    Vmem modulation potentiates ability of reprogramming factors to induce ectopic neural tissues. A, Quantification of tadpoles with ectopic neural tissue in control embryos (uninjected; Uninj) and embryos microinjected with POU + HB4 mRNA in both cells at the two-cell stage. Coinjection with the hyperpolarizing Kv1.5 channels caused a significant increase in the number of tadpoles with ectopic neural tissue compared with POU + HB4-only controls. A χ2 analysis showed that the POU + HB4-only controls are significantly different from POU + HB4 + Kv1.5. **p < 0.01. B, Stage 45 PNTub::GFP transgenic tadpoles (Bi–viii). Bi, Biv, and Bvi are bright-field images. Bii, Biii, Bv, Bvii, and Bviii are GFP fluorescence. Control (uninjected) embryos (Bi–iii) show well patterned nostrils, forebrain/olfactory bulbs, midbrain, hindbrain (arrowhead colors same as Fig. 2Ci), and spinal cord (Biii; white arrowheads). Tadpoles injected with POU + HB4 + hyperpolarizing Kv1.5 (Biv–viii) showed brain tissue that was highly expanded anteriorly (Biv; yellow arrows), noticeable amounts of ectopic neural tissue in the head unattached to the brain (Bv; yellow arrows), and noticeable ectopic neural tissue in the tail (Bvi—viii; yellow arrows) away from the spinal cord (white arrowhead).

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

    Identity of ectopic neural tissue induced by Vmem modulation was confirmed by in situ hybridization for developing brain-tissue markers. In situ hybridization for forebrain markers emx (ii–viii) and bf1 (ix–xv) of stage 30 control embryos (i–iv [n = 7], ix–xi [n = 11]) and embryos microinjected (both cells at two-cell stage) with POU + HB4 + Kv1.5 ion channel mRNA (v–xv) [emx: n = 8 of 15; bf1: n = 6 of 12]. The areas marked by white squares in ii, v, vii, ix, xii, and xiv are expanded in iii, iv, vi, viii, x, xi, xiii, and xv, respectively. Red arrows mark ectopic expression and green arrowheads mark the endogenous normal signal; especially striking was the appearance of brain marker-positive tissues in the flank and mid-body dorsal fin (xv; red arrows).

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

    Ectopic neural tissue induction by Vmem is local but initially not cell autonomous. A, In situ hybridization for forebrain markers emx (Ai) and bf1 (Aii; blue) of stage 30 embryos that were microinjected (both cells at two-cell stage) with POU + HB4 + Kv1.5-β-galactosidase mRNA (red). β-Galactosidase stain was developed using Magenta-Gal (red/magenta) substrate. At this stage Magenta-Gal signal and emx/bf1 in situ signal overlap with each other, although not perfectly; especially notable are regions where ectopic blue signal (yellow arrowheads; neural marker expression) is next to, but not overlapping with, the misexpressed ion channel (black arrowheads; Magenta-Gal), indicating that not only hyperpolarized cells but also their neighbors are initially driven to turn on neural markers. B, A typical stage 45 tadpole that had been microinjected with POU + HB4 + Kv1.5-EGFP shows that by this stage, ectopic neural tissues induced in the head (Bi, Bii) and tail (Biii, Biv; yellow arrows) are always positive for the EGFP signal indicating hyperpolarizing ion channel expression (this was true in 100% of embryos examined [n = 20]). Thus, by stage 45, any neighboring cells that were not hyperpolarized have turned off the aberrant neural markers, and only cells that were expressing the channel remain and form ectopic brain. Conversely, at both stages, we observed expression of the hyperpolarizing channel in some regions in which it was not sufficient to induce neural markers or ectopic brain. C, A model for de novo neural tissue induction by Vmem change was formulated to explain the local but initially not cell-autonomous misexpression of neural fate induced by hyperpolarization. This model is based on cells sharing their resting potential through GJs. Such electrical coupling of cells has been documented during neural induction and within the developing neural plate cells (Properzi et al., 2013) with the transfer of Vmem signals occurring to the surrounding cells through these GJ couplings (Blackshaw and Warner, 1976; Shi and Borgens, 1995). As cell fields become partitioned into more finely defined regions with developmental age, large areas of GJ connections are progressively shut down to isolate specific groups of cells with different fates and to insulate such isopotential groups from the long-range signals (Warner, 1985, Fig. 8C). Early pluripotent embryonic cells are connected by GJ to form isopotential cell clusters with respect to Vmem (Ci). Introduction of an ion channel in one cell results in the hyperpolarization of the Vmem of that cell (Cii). As the cell adopts a neural fate and turns on expression of neural markers (Ciii), GJs spread this hyperpolarization to coupled neighbors, causing them also to express the observed ectopic neural markers even though they were not injected with the channel (Civ). As embryonic development proceeds, the tissues become progressively more subdivided with respect to gap junctional connections (Cv). As coupling is reduced, the uninjected cells lose the temporarily hyperpolarized Vmem and then revert back to their original non-neural fate, whereas the injected cells retain their new/changed Vmem giving rise to de novo neural tissues detected at much later stages (Cvi).

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

    Local and distant Vmem signals regulate the proliferation in the developing brain. A, Agarose sections of stage 30 control (uninjected) embryos (Ai) and embryos microinjected with hyperpolarizing Kv1.5 mRNA (Aii, Aiii) in the indicated blastomeres (red arrows) at four-cell stage [n > 11 for each group including controls]. Immunostaining of sections through the developing brain with H3P (Ai–iii) shows a distinct change in the H3P (orange arrowheads) staining in the developing brains of microinjected embryos with highly increased H3P staining in the ventral-injected embryos compared with uninjected controls. B, Quantification of H3P immunostaining in the agarose sections through developing brains of stage 30 control (uninjected) and Kv1.5 microinjected (red arrows indicate injected blastomeres at four-cell stage) embryos. Dorsal blastomere injections significantly decrease the H3P signal whereas ventral injections significantly increase the H3P signal. Values are mean ± SEM (n ≥ 10); *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, and ***p < 0.001 one-way ANOVA with post-test. C, Agarose sections of Fucci-microinjected (both cells at two-cell stage) stage 30 control embryos (Ci) and embryos also microinjected with hyperpolarizing Kv1.5 mRNA (Cii, Ciii) in the indicated blastomeres (red arrows) at four-cell stage [n = 12 for each experimental group]. Fluorescence detection in sections through the developing brain (Ci–iii) shows a distinct change in the cells' fluorescence pattern (indicator of their placement in different stages of cell cycle; green, S/G2/M; red, G1; yellow, S) in the developing brains of microinjected embryos, with decreased numbers of green and yellow fluorescent cells (S/G2/M phase-dividing cells) and increased red fluorescent cells (G1 nondividing cells) in the dorsal-injected embryos (Cii), and increased numbers of yellow fluorescent cells (G1 to S phase–cells entering division) in ventrally injected embryos (Ciii), compared with controls (Ci). D, Quantification of Fucci fluorescence (green, red, and yellow) in the agarose sections through developing brains of stage 30 controls (only Fucci-injected) and Kv1.5 (in addition to Fucci)-microinjected (red arrows indicate injected blastomeres at four-cell stage) embryos. Kv1.5 microinjection significantly changes the fluorescence pattern of cells compared with the controls. Dorsal blastomere injections significantly decrease green fluorescence and significantly increased red fluorescence whereas ventral blastomere injections significantly increase yellow fluorescence. Values are mean ± SEM (n = 12); *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, and ***p < 0.001; two-way ANOVA with post-tests. E, Quantification of H3P immunostaining in the agarose sections through developing brains of stage 30 control (uninjected) and Kv1.5 mRNA microinjected into two ventral blastomeres at four-cell stage embryos. Injected embryos were kept with or without the indicated inhibitors. A high incidence of H3P signal is seen in the brain tissue in Kv1.5 microinjected embryos and this effect of Kv1.5 is prevented by Lindane (stages 10–30) and H7 (respective pharmacological and chimeric dominant-negative blockers of GJC among cells) but not by fluoxetine (Flx; stages 10–30) or dominant-negative SERT (DN-SERT; a chemical blocker and molecular blocker of the serotonin transporter, respectively) or verapamil (stages 10—30; a blocker of voltage-gated calcium channels). A one-way ANOVA (values are mean ± SEM; n ≥ 10) analysis with post hoc test showed significant variance among the groups, with Kv1.5 significantly different from control and Kv1.5 + Lindane and Kv1.5 + H7 (***p < 0.001). F, Model for Vmem control of neural tissue size by regulating proliferation over long range. The set of studies reported here show that there is a specific degree of hyperpolarized resting membrane potential within the developing neural tissue, with the surrounding tissue depolarized (Fi). This specific degree of hyperpolarized potential regulates the proliferation within that tissue as disrupting this specific hyperpolarization signal decreases the proliferation in the brain. Concurrently, the surrounding depolarized tissues restrict proliferation in the brain tissue over long distance thus governing the tissue size and sculpting the brain tissue (Fii). Hence, when the surrounding tissue is hyperpolarized this restriction is lost and there is increased proliferation in the brain tissue observed (Fiii). These ectopic hyperpolarized tissues not only induce ectopic brain tissues but also might regulate the proliferation within these ectopic brain tissues in conjugation with the surrounding depolarized tissue to bring about sculpting these ectopically induced brain tissues. These results suggest an important role of resting potential distribution in regulating brain tissue size and sculpting.

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

    Synthesizing model for Vmem regulation of brain morphology. Model for Vmem-Notch integration in directing brain morphology. The set of studies reported here show that specific resting potential change is important for induction of neural tissue. Such a Vmem-mediated signal is strong enough to rescue inhibition of neural tissue induction by the constitutively active notch on brain morphology, suggesting cross talk with notch pathway. Notch, however, is shown to depolarize Vmem, resulting in a feedback loop. Our data also show that the Vmem signal is transduced via calcium and GJs, and also regulates the brain development transcription factors. Together, previous data and our new observations suggest the model schematized here for the interaction of two key factors—biochemical signaling via Notch and bioelectrical signaling via resting potential—in regulating the events that pattern the vertebrate brain.

Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Neuroscience: 35 (10)
Journal of Neuroscience
Vol. 35, Issue 10
11 Mar 2015
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
  • Advertising (PDF)
  • Ed Board (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.
Endogenous Gradients of Resting Potential Instructively Pattern Embryonic Neural Tissue via Notch Signaling and Regulation of Proliferation
(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
Endogenous Gradients of Resting Potential Instructively Pattern Embryonic Neural Tissue via Notch Signaling and Regulation of Proliferation
Vaibhav P. Pai, Joan M. Lemire, Jean-François Paré, Gufa Lin, Ying Chen, Michael Levin
Journal of Neuroscience 11 March 2015, 35 (10) 4366-4385; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1877-14.2015

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
Endogenous Gradients of Resting Potential Instructively Pattern Embryonic Neural Tissue via Notch Signaling and Regulation of Proliferation
Vaibhav P. Pai, Joan M. Lemire, Jean-François Paré, Gufa Lin, Ying Chen, Michael Levin
Journal of Neuroscience 11 March 2015, 35 (10) 4366-4385; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1877-14.2015
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

Keywords

  • bioelectricity
  • brain morphogenesis
  • long range
  • proliferation
  • resting potential

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

Articles

  • Memory Retrieval Has a Dynamic Influence on the Maintenance Mechanisms That Are Sensitive to ζ-Inhibitory Peptide (ZIP)
  • Neurophysiological Evidence for a Cortical Contribution to the Wakefulness-Related Drive to Breathe Explaining Hypocapnia-Resistant Ventilation in Humans
  • Monomeric Alpha-Synuclein Exerts a Physiological Role on Brain ATP Synthase
Show more Articles

Development/Plasticity/Repair

  • Neddylation E1 obligatory subunit Nae1 is critical to neuromuscular junction development and maintenance
  • Developmental Changes in Brain Cellular Membrane and Energy Metabolism: A Multi-Occasion 31P Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy Study
  • The Epigenetic Reader PHF23 Is Required for Embryonic Neurogenesis
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.