Content uploaded by Fabian Rost
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Fabian Rost on Apr 17, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
Modelling and Analysis of
Chevron Formation in the Fish Myotome
Fabian Rost1
fabian.rost@zih.tu-dresden.de
Lutz Brusch1
lutz.brusch@tu-dresden.de
Andrew C. Oates2
oates@mpi-cbg.de
1Dresden University of Technology, Centre of Information Services and High Performance Computing, 01062 Dresden, Germany
2Max Planck Institue of Molecular Cell Biology, Pfotenhauerstr. 108, 01307 Dresden, Germany
Introduction
Myotomes of adult teleost have a folded shape often referred to as
chevron shape. The chevron shape has been proposed to be optimal
for the alternating body bending during swimming. Much less is
known about which processes underly the ontogenetic development
of the myotome shape.
As far as we know, the only study that deals with this topic was
done by Van Raamsdonk et al. (1974, 1977, 1979). They conclude
”that the lateral body movements have both a shape determining
and a shape-stabilizing role during the early stages of somite mor-
phogenesis.”
We aim to shed new light on the mechanisms that shape the my-
otome chevrons by developing and analysing a mathematical model
of the interactions between muscle fibres and somite boundaries.
3D shape of a myotome of a 3 weeks old zebrafish larva, from Van
Raamsdonk (1979).
Confocal micrographs of β-catenin stained 17 hpf zebrafish
embryo. Side view, anterior to the left, somites 15-19. Red:
Somite boundaries, blue: elongating cells, cyan: cells spanning the
somite. Modified from Henry (2004).
Development of chevrons in the zebrafish myotome. From left to right: 10 somite stage: somite boundaries straight, anterior boundaries begin to
fold. 26 somite stage: most anterior boundaries fairly straight, trunk somites have constant angle, newly formed posterior somites begin folding.
Larva shortly before hatching. Camera Lucida sketches, scale bar = 250µm, taken from zebrafish stageing series from Kimmel (1995).
Model Framework
a1a2a3
x3
x2
x2
Kx
KxKa
Kx
Ka
KxKxKx
L L L
We minimize the energy of a chain of coupled springs:
E=1
2
n
X
i=1
Kxx2
i+Kaa2
i
L=xi+ai−ai−1, i = 1 . . . n
Model analysis yields the exponential increase in
boundary bending as a function of somite index:
ai=C1λi
1+C2λi
2
0
2
4
6
8
10
5 10 15 20 25 30
ai
Somite Number
Ka/Kx:
0.01
0.1
1
10
Data Analysis
We measured angle βin light field time-lapse movies of
dechorionated zebrafish embryos using ImageJ. We calculated
α= 90 −β
2. The movies were provided by Christian Schroeter.
0
10
20
30
40
120 160 200
α [´]
Time [min]
Somite 20
Somite 21
Somite 22
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
0 10 20 30
α [´]
Somite Number i
Zebrafish
Xenopus
Top: Lateral view of a stage 29/30 xenopus embryo expressing
Dvl1 in the somites. From Gray et al. (2009). Bottom: Lateral
view of a 27-somites stage zebrafish embryo. From Schroeter et
al. (2008).
Model Variant: Variable Spring Constants
•Constant chevron angles for all somites can be obtained for
a=K1
x−K2
x
K1
a+K1
x
=K2
x−K3
x
Ka
=· · · =Ki
x−Ki+1
x
Ki
a
=· · · =Kn
x
Kn
a
.
.
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Kx/Ka
Somite Number
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
ai
Somite Number
Solution of the equation above with Ki
a=const,a= 0.1.
•Linear increasing angle ai=m·ican be reproduced with
m=K2
x−K1
x
K2
x−K1
x−K1
a
=K3
x−K2
x
K3
x−K2
x−2K2
a
=· · · =Ki+1
x−Ki
x
Ki+1
x−Ki
x−iKi
a
=· · · =Kn
x
Kn
x+nKn
a
.
0
10
20
30
40
50
5 10 15 20 25 30
Kx/Ka
Somite Number
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
ai
Somite Number
m=1/300
Model Variant: Anharmonic Energy
Introducing anharmonic springs leads to different somite angles. For in-
stance E=1
2Pn
i=1 Kxx2
i+Kae2aican lead to
5
10
15
20
25
30
-3.5
-3.0
-2.5
-2.0
-1.5
-1.0
-0.5
.
We aim to find a potential that leads to a linear increase in ai.
Conclusions
Although our model is not yet able to completely predict the correct
chevron angles in zebrafish we believe our outlined extensions will be able
to do so. The current hypothesis that elongating muscle pioneers which
exert forces on the somite boundaries and therefore are responsible for
the chevron formation is compatible with our model. Data from mutants
with defect chevron or mechanically perturbed embryos would help to
validate our model furthermore.
References
Gray, R.S. et al. Diversification of the expression patterns and developmental functions of the dishevelled gene family during chordate evolution. Dev.
Dyn. 238, 2044-2057 (2009).
Kimmel, C. et al. Stages of embryonic development of the zebrafish. Dev. Dyn. 203, 253-310 (1995).
Raamsdonk, W. et al. Differentiation of the musculature of the teleost Brachydanio rerio. Anat. and Embr. 145, 321-342 (1974).
Raamsdonk, W. et al. Differentiation of the Musculature of the Teleost Brachydanio-Rerio. 2. Effects of Immobilization on the Shape and Structure of
Somites. Acta Mor. Neerl.-Scand. 17, 259-274 (1979).
Raamsdonk, W. et al. On the relation between movements and the shape of the somites in early embryos of the teleost Brachydanio rerio. Contrib. Zool
46, 261-274 (1977).
Schroeter, C. et al. Dynamics of zebrafish somitogenesis. Dev. Dyn. 237, 545-553 (2008).