<i>In vivo</i> contribution of nestin‐ and GLAST‐lineage cells to adult hippocampal neurogenesis

  • Nathan A. DeCarolis
    Department of Psychiatry UT Southwestern Medical Center Dallas Texas
  • Maxwell Mechanic
    Department of Psychiatry UT Southwestern Medical Center Dallas Texas
  • David Petrik
    Department of Psychiatry UT Southwestern Medical Center Dallas Texas
  • Adam Carlton
    Department of Psychiatry UT Southwestern Medical Center Dallas Texas
  • Jessica L. Ables
    Department of Psychiatry UT Southwestern Medical Center Dallas Texas
  • Shveta Malhotra
    Department of Psychiatry UT Southwestern Medical Center Dallas Texas
  • Robert Bachoo
    Department of Neurology UT Southwestern Medical Center Dallas Texas
  • Magdalena Götz
    Institute for Stem Cell Research Helmholtz Center Munich, German Research Center for Environmental Health 85764 Munich‐Neuherberg GER
  • Diane C. Lagace
    Department of Psychiatry UT Southwestern Medical Center Dallas Texas
  • Amelia J. Eisch
    Department of Psychiatry UT Southwestern Medical Center Dallas Texas

説明

<jats:title>ABSTRACT</jats:title><jats:p>Radial glia‐like cells (RGCs) are the hypothesized source of adult hippocampal neurogenesis. However, the current model of hippocampal neurogenesis does not fully incorporate the <jats:italic>in vivo</jats:italic> heterogeneity of RGCs. In order to better understand the contribution of different RGC subtypes to adult hippocampal neurogenesis, we employed widely used transgenic lines (Nestin‐CreER<jats:sup>T2</jats:sup> and GLAST::CreER<jats:sup>T2</jats:sup> mice) to explore how RGCs contribute to neurogenesis under basal conditions and after stimulation and depletion of neural progenitor cells. We first used these inducible fate‐tracking transgenic lines to define the similarities and differences in the contribution of nestin‐ and GLAST‐lineage cells to basal long‐term hippocampal neurogenesis. We then explored the ability of nestin‐ and GLAST‐lineage RGCs to contribute to neurogenesis after experimental manipulations that either ablate neurogenesis (i.c.v. application of the anti‐mitotic AraC, cytosine‐β‐D‐arabinofuranoside) or stimulate neurogenesis (wheel running). Interestingly, in both ablation and stimulation experiments, labeled RGCs in GLAST::CreER<jats:sup>T2</jats:sup> mice appear to contribute to neurogenesis, whereas RGCs in Nestin‐CreER<jats:sup>T2</jats:sup> mice do not. Finally, using NestinGFP reporter mice, we expanded on previous research by showing that not all RGCs in the adult dentate gyrus subgranular zone express nestin, and therefore RGCs are antigenically heterogeneous. These findings are important for the field, as they allow appropriately conservative interpretation of existing and future data that emerge from these inducible transgenic lines. These findings also raise important questions about the differences between transgenic driver lines, the heterogeneity of RGCs, and the potential differences in progenitor cell behavior between transgenic lines. As these findings highlight the possible differences in the contribution of cells to long‐term neurogenesis <jats:italic>in vivo</jats:italic>, they indicate that the current models of hippocampal neurogenesis should be modified to include RGC lineage heterogeneity. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</jats:p>

収録刊行物

  • Hippocampus

    Hippocampus 23 (8), 708-719, 2013-05-17

    Wiley

被引用文献 (2)*注記

もっと見る

問題の指摘

ページトップへ