Henderson CE, Huchet M, Changeux JP. Neurite-promoting activities for embryonic spinal neurons and their developmental changes in the chick.
Dev Biol 1984;
104:336-47. [PMID:
6378691 DOI:
10.1016/0012-1606(84)90089-7]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/19/2023]
Abstract
Spinal motoneurons may depend upon muscle-derived factors for axon outgrowth and stabilization at two principal stages of their development: during the initial invasion of the differentiating muscle masses in the embryo and during the perinatal regression of multiple innervation. Using a bioassay involving the measurement of neurite outgrowth from 4.5-day embryonic chick spinal neurons in dissociated cell culture, neurite-promoting activities were detected both in medium conditioned over embryonic chicken myotubes in vitro (embryonic muscle-conditioned medium) and in soluble extracts of chick leg muscle prepared 3-5 days after hatching (postnatal muscle extract). The molecules responsible for these two activities had physicochemical properties that distinguished them both from each other and from some other reported neurite-promoting factors. The factor in embryonic muscle-conditioned medium, although active on uncoated tissue culture wells, bound with only low affinity to tissue culture plastic under cell culture conditions. It was inactivated by incubation with trypsin, and was essentially found only in media conditioned by muscle and liver cells. The factor in PNME, on the other hand, bound to plastic culture wells and was found in extracts of a variety of tissues. Its concentration in postnatal leg muscle was developmentally regulated: the specific activity increased approximately 10-fold between hatching and Day 3 (maximum value: 3200 units/mg protein) and then fell back to nearly its original levels by Day 7. Evidence is presented that the observed effects of these two neurite-promoting factors did not result from differential survival in vitro of different cell subpopulations. Possible roles for the two active factors during motoneuron development are discussed.
Collapse