Article

Leukemia inhibitory factor is a key signal for injury-induced neurogenesis in the adult mouse olfactory epithelium.

Unité Mixte de Recherche 5020 Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Université Lyon I, 69622 Villeurbanne, France.
The Journal of Neuroscience : The Official Journal of the Society for Neuroscience (Impact Factor: 6.75). 04/2003; 23(5):1792-803.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The mammalian olfactory epithelium (OE) is composed of primary olfactory sensory neurons (OSNs) that are renewed throughout adulthood by local, restricted neuronal progenitor cells. The molecular signals that control this neurogenesis in vivo are unknown. Using olfactory bulb ablation (OBX) in adult mice to trigger synchronous mitotic stimulation of neuronal progenitors in the OE, we show the in vivo involvement of a cytokine in the cellular events leading to the regeneration of the OE. We find that, of many potential mitogenic signals, only leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF) is induced before the onset of neuronal progenitor proliferation. The rise in LIF mRNA expression peaks at 8 hr after OBX, and in situ RT-PCR and immunocytochemistry indicate that LIF is upregulated, in part, in the injured neurons themselves. This rise in LIF is necessary for injury-induced neurogenesis, as OBX in the LIF knock-out mouse fails to stimulate cell proliferation in the OE. Moreover, delivery of exogenous LIF to the intact adult OE using an adenoviral vector stimulates BrdU labeling in the apical OE. Taken together, these results suggest that injured OSNs release LIF as a stimulus to initiate their own replacement.

Full-text

Available from: Emmanuel Moyse, Mar 12, 2014
0 Followers
 · 
90 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Mechanisms that regulate cellular differentiation in developing embryos are maintained across multiple physiological systems, including the nervous system where neurons and glia are generated. The olfactory epithelium, which arises from the olfactory pit, is a stratified tissue in which the stepwise generation of neurons and support cells can easily be assessed and followed during embryogenesis and throughout adulthood. During olfactory epithelium morphogenesis, progenitor cells respond to factors that control their proliferation, survival, and differentiation in order to generate olfactory receptor neurons that detect odorants in the environment and glia-like sustentacular cells. The tight temporal regulation of expression of proneural genes in dividing progenitor cells, including Mash-1, Neurogenin-1, and NeuroD1, plays a central role in the production of olfactory receptor neurons. Multiple factors that either positively or negatively affect the generation of olfactory receptor neurons have been identified and shown to impinge on the transcriptional regulatory network in dividing progenitor cells. Several growth factors, such as FGF-8, act to promote neurogenesis by ensuring survival of progenitor cells that will give rise to olfactory receptor neurons. In contrast, other molecules, including members of the large TGF- β family of proteins, have negative impacts on neurogenesis by restricting progenitor cell proliferation and stalling their differentiation. Since recent reviews have focused on neurogenesis in the regenerating adult olfactory epithelium, this review describes neurogenesis at embryonic stages of olfactory epithelium development and summarizes our current understanding of how both cell intrinsic and extrinsic factors control this process.
    International Journal of Developmental Neuroscience 07/2014; 37. DOI:10.1016/j.ijdevneu.2014.06.017 · 2.92 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Emerging evidence indicates that neuroimmunological changes in the brain can modify intrinsic brain processes that are involved in regulating neuroplasticity. Increasing evidence suggests that in some forms of motor neuron injury, many neurons do not die, but reside in an atrophic state for an extended period of time. In mice, facial motor neurons in the brain undergo a protracted period of degeneration or atrophy following resection of their peripheral axons. Reinjuring the proximal nerve stump of the chronically resected facial nerve stimulates a robust reversal of motor neuron atrophy which results in marked increases in both the number and size of injured motor neurons in the facial motor nucleus. In this brief review, we describe research from our lab which indicates that the reversal of atrophy in this injury model is dependent on normal cellular immunity. The role of T cells in this unique form of neuroplasticity following injury and in brain aging, are discussed. The potential role of yet undiscover intrinsic actions of recombination activating genes in the brain are considered. Further research using the facial nerve reinjury model could identify molecular signals involved in neuroplasticity, and lead to new ways to stimulate neuroregenerative processes in neurotrauma and other forms of brain insult and disease.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Adult forebrain definitive neural stem cells (NSCs) comprise a subpopulation of GFAP-expressing subependymal cells that arise from embryonic fibroblast growth factor (FGF)-dependent NSCs that are first isolated from the developing brain at E8.5. Embryonic FGF-dependent NSCs are derived from leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF)-responsive, Oct4-expressing primitive NSCs (pNSCs) that are first isolated at E5.5. We report the presence of a rare population of pNCSs in the periventricular region of the adult forebrain. Adult-derived pNSCs (AdpNSCs) are GFAP(-), LIF-responsive stem cells that display pNSC properties, including Oct4 expression and the ability to integrate into the inner cell mass of blastocysts. AdpNSCs generate self-renewing, multipotent colonies that give rise to definitive GFAP(+) NSCs in vitro and repopulate the subependyma after the ablation of GFAP(+) NSCs in vivo. These data support the hypothesis that a rare population of pNSCs is present in the adult brain and is upstream of the GFAP(+) NSCs.
    Stem Cell Reports 06/2014; 2(6):810-24. DOI:10.1016/j.stemcr.2014.04.008