Didier Montarras

The formation of skeletal muscle: from somite to limb.

During embryogenesis, skeletal muscle forms in the vertebrate limb from progenitor cells originating in the somites. These cells delaminate from the hypaxial edge of the dorsal part of the somite, the dermomyotome, and migrate into the limb bud, where they proliferate, express myogenic determination factors and subsequently differentiate into skeletal muscle. A number of regulatory factors involved in these different steps have been identified. These include Pax3 with its target c‐met, Lbx1 and Mox2 as well as the myogenic determination factors Myf5 and MyoD and factors required for differentiation such as Myogenin, Mrf4 and Mef2 isoforms. Mutants for genes such as Lbx1 and Mox2, expressed uniformly in limb muscle progenitors, reveal unexpected differences between fore and hind limb muscles, also indicated by the differential expression of Tbx genes. As development proceeds, a secondary wave of myogenesis takes place, and, postnatally, satellite cells become located under the basal lamina of adult muscle fibres. Satellite cells are thought to be the progenitor cells for adult muscle regeneration, during which similar genes to those which regulate myogenesis in the embryo also play a role. In particular, Pax3 as well as its orthologue Pax7 are important. The origin of secondary/fetal myoblasts and of adult satellite cells is unclear, as is the relation of the latter to so‐called SP or stem cell populations, or indeed to potential mesangioblast progenitors, present in blood vessels. The oligoclonal origin of postnatal muscles points to a small number of founder cells, whether or not these have additional origins to the progenitor cells of the somite which form the first skeletal muscles, as discussed here for the embryonic limb.

An adult tissue-specific stem cell in its niche: A gene profiling analysis of in vivo quiescent and activated muscle satellite cells

The satellite cell of skeletal muscle provides a paradigm for quiescent and activated tissue stem cell states. We have carried out transcriptome analyses on satellite cells purified by flow cytometry from Pax3(GFP/+) mice. We compared samples from adult skeletal muscles where satellite cells are mainly quiescent, with samples from growing muscles or regenerating (mdx) muscles, where they are activated. Analysis of regulation that is shared by both activated states avoids other effects due to immature or pathological conditions. This in vivo profile differs from that of previously analyzed satellite cells activated after cell culture. It reveals how the satellite cell protects itself from damage and maintains quiescence, while being primed for activation on receipt of the appropriate signal. This is illustrated by manipulation of the corepressor Dach1, and by the demonstration that quiescent satellite cells are better protected from oxidative stress than those from mdx or 1-week-old muscles. The quiescent versus in vivo activated comparison also gives new insights into how the satellite cell controls its niche on the muscle fiber through cell adhesion and matrix remodeling. The latter also potentiates growth factor activity through proteoglycan modification. Dismantling the extracellular matrix is important for satellite cell activation when the expression of proteinases is up-regulated, whereas transcripts for their inhibitors are high in quiescent cells. In keeping with this, we demonstrate that metalloproteinase function is required for efficient regeneration in vivo.

Autocrine and Paracrine Angiopoietin 1/Tie-2 Signaling Promotes Muscle Satellite Cell Self-Renewal

Mechanisms governing muscle satellite cell withdrawal from cell cycle to enter into quiescence remain poorly understood. We studied the role of angiopoietin 1 (Ang1) and its receptor Tie-2 in the regulation of myogenic precursor cell (mpc) fate. In human and mouse, Tie-2 was preferentially expressed by quiescent satellite cells in vivo and reserve cells (RCs) in vitro. Ang1/Tie-2 signaling, through ERK1/2 pathway, decreased mpc proliferation and differentiation, increased the number of cells in G0, increased expression of RC-associated markers (p130, Pax7, Myf-5, M-cadherin), and downregulated expression of differentiation-associated markers. Silencing Tie-2 had opposite effects. Cells located in the satellite cell neighborhood (smooth muscle cells, fibroblasts) upregulated RC-associated markers by secreting Ang1 in vitro. In vivo, Tie-2 blockade and Ang1 overexpression increased the number of cycling and quiescent satellite cells, respectively. We propose that Ang1/Tie-2 signaling regulates mpc self-renewal by controlling the return to quiescence of a subset of satellite cells.

What does the concept of the stem cell niche really mean today

Lander et al. BMC Biology 2012, 10:19 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7007/10/19 FORUM Open Access What does the concept of the stem cell niche really mean today? Arthur D Lander, Judith Kimble, Hans Clevers, Elaine Fuchs, Didier Montarras, Margaret Buckingham, Anne L Calof, Andreas Trumpp and Thordur Oskarsson The richness of niche-ness – an introduction Arthur D Lander Ideas about stem cells, and how they behave, have been undergoing a lot of change in recent years, thanks to developments in visualizing, monitoring, and manipulating cells and tissues. Curious to find out what impact these changes are having on one of the most enduring and widely accepted metaphors in stem cell biology – the idea of the stem cell niche – BMC Biology asked researchers working on a variety of systems to write about their current conception of what a stem cell niche really is. The answers presented below suggest that the detailed mechanisms underlying niche function are extremely varied. Niches may be composed of cells, or cells together with extracellular structures such as the extracellular matrix (ECM). They may be sources of secreted or cell surface factors – including members of the Notch, Wnt, fibroblast growth factor (FGF), epidermal growth factor (EGF), transforming growth factor (TGF)-β, stem cell factor (SCF), and chemokine families – that control stem cell renewal, maintenance, or survival. They may consist of just a single cell type, or a whole host of interacting cells. They may derive from cells outside the stem cell’s lineage, or they may derive primarily from the stem cell’s own descendents. In general, there seems to be much more consensus about the fact that stem cells invariably need niches than about the specific mechanisms by which niches do their jobs. Why should a stem cell need a special environment? This is a pertinent question, given that none of the elementary processes that stem cells rely upon – growing, dividing, differentiating – are unique to stem cells. We can easily imagine three classes of answers: One possibility is that there are demands placed on stem cells that necessitate special support for viability. For example, the need, imposed by cellular immortality, to minimize the accumulation of genetic damage, may drive stem cells to adopt a peculiar metabolic state that Correspondence: bmcbiologyeditorial@biomedcentral.com might force them to rely upon other cells nearby for sustenance. This ‘nutritive’ function of the niche remains a formal possibility, but in most systems few experimental data in support of it have so far emerged. A second possibility is that niches are agents of feedback control. Recent studies tell us that stem cell pools are not slavishly maintained at a constant size by fixed, asymmetric divisions, but are usually capable of expanding or contracting and, even under homeostatic conditions, may face large stochastic fluctuations. The varied growth factors and cell surface molecules produced by niche cells may share the common goal of controlling stem cell pools. If this is the case, then the niche might best be thought of not simply as an environment conducive to stem cell functioning, but as an apparatus for communicating information about the state of a tissue back to the stem cells that maintain it. An important question to address would then be how niches obtain and relay such information. A third possibility is that niches are instruments of coordination among tissue compartments. Some of the best evidence for this view comes from work on the hair follicle niche, described below by Elaine Fuchs. There, stem and progenitor cells responsible for maintenance of epidermis, pigmentation, hair, and connective and adipose tissue all interact in close proximity. A need to achieve tight coordination among these different cell populations may be the overriding reason for complex organization of this niche. The possibility that other niches may also be hubs of inter-lineage coordination is certainly an idea worth investigating. The C. elegans distal tip cell and the concept of a stem cell niche Judith Kimble Schofield originally hypothesized the existence of a microenvironment required for maintenance of stem cells and coined the term stem cell niche [1] (Figure 1a, left). The first example of such a stem cell niche was the mesenchymal ‘distal tip cell’ (DTC) in Caenorhabditis

Expression and Functional Characteristics of Calpain 3 Isoforms Generated through Tissue-Specific Transcriptional and Posttranscriptional Events

ABSTRACT Calpain 3 is a nonlysosomal cysteine protease whose biological functions remain unknown. We previously demonstrated that this protease is altered in limb girdle muscular dystrophy type 2A patients. Preliminary observations suggested that its gene is subjected to alternative splicing. In this paper, we characterize transcriptional and posttranscriptional events leading to alterations involving the NS, IS1, and IS2 regions and/or the calcium binding domains of the mouse calpain 3 gene (capn3). These events can be divided into three groups: (i) splicing of exons that preserve the translation frame, (ii) inclusion of two distinct intronic sequences between exons 16 and 17 that disrupt the frame and would lead, if translated, to a truncated protein lacking domain IV, and (iii) use of an alternative first exon specific to lens tissue. In addition, expression of these isoforms seems to be regulated. Investigation of the proteolytic activities and titin binding abilities of the translation products of some of these isoforms clearly indicated that removal of these different protein segments affects differentially the biochemical properties examined. In particular, removal of exon 6 impaired the autolytic but not fodrinolytic activity and loss of exon 16 led to an increased titin binding and a loss of fodrinolytic activity. These results are likely to impact our understanding of the pathophysiology of calpainopathies and the development of therapeutic strategies.

Lying low but ready for action: the quiescent muscle satellite cell

The muscle satellite cell is essential for skeletal muscle regeneration. It is located on the muscle fibre, under the basal lamina as a quiescent cell, which becomes activated after injury, when it leaves the fibre, proliferates, and either undergoes myogenesis to form new fibres or reconstitutes the satellite cell pool. In this review, we discuss the cellular environment of the quiescent cell, including the extracellular matrix, which constitutes its niche. Cell adhesion molecules and some signalling pathways reinforce its quiescent state, whereas other signals lead to activation. We discuss how the satellite cell is ready to respond with the appropriate receptors, but protects its quiescence by mechanisms that include immobilization of ligands by extracellular matrix components and synthesis of inhibitors for intracellular signalling pathways and for metalloproteinases that break down the matrix and promote ligand processing and receptor activation. The quiescent satellite cell is also well protected against toxins and oxidative stress. It has a low metabolic rate, as shown by few active mitochondria and anaerobic glycolysis. Different subpopulations of quiescent satellite cells can be distinguished on the basis of cell surface markers and stem cell‐like properties. We discuss the latter in the context of the small proportion of satellite cells that express high levels of Pax7, or that are derived from cells that have never activated the Myf5 myogenic determination gene. However, many quiescent satellite cells transcribe Myf5, but do not enter myogenesis because of post‐transcriptional regulation, which prevents Myf5 protein accumulation. Post‐transcriptional regulation, through microRNA repression of a potential cell cycle activator, further illustrates how these cells are ready for action.

Skeletal muscle stem cells.

In this review we shall discuss recent publications on the heterogeneity of muscle stem cells, signaling pathways that affect their behaviour and regulatory mechanisms that underlie their myogenic fate, with reference to insights provided by work on skeletal muscle formation in the embryo as well as the adult, with the mouse as a model of reference.

Overexpressed BCL6 (LAZ3) oncoprotein triggers apoptosis, delays S phase progression and associates with replication foci

One of the most frequent genetic abnormalities associated with non Hodgkin lymphoma is the structural alteration of the 5′ non coding/regulatory region of the BCL6 (LAZ3) protooncogene. BCL6 encodes a POZ/Zn finger protein, a structure similar to that of many Drosophila developmental regulators and to another protein involved in a human hematopoietic malignancy, PLZF. BCL6 is a sequence specific transcriptional repressor controlling germinal center formation and T cell dependent immune response. Although the expression of BCL6 negatively correlates with cellular proliferation in different cell types, the influence of BCL6 on cell growth and survival is currently unknown so that the way its deregulation may contribute to cancer remains elusive. To directly address this issue, we used a tetracycline-regulated system in human U2OS osteosarcoma cells and thus found that BCL6 mediates growth suppression associated with impaired S phase progression and apoptosis. Interestingly, overexpressed BCL6 can colocalize with sites of ongoing DNA synthesis, suggesting that it may directly interfere with S phase initiation and/or progression. In contrast, the isolated Zn finger region of BCL6, which binds BCL6 target sequence but lacks transcriptional repression activity, slows, but does not suppress, U2OS cell growth, is less efficient at delaying S phase progression, and does not trigger apoptosis. Thus, for a large part, the effects of BCL6 overexpression on cell growth and survival depend on its ability to engage protein/protein interactions with itself and/or its transcriptional corepressors. That BCL6 restricts cell growth suggests that its deregulation upon structural alterations may alleviate negative controls on the cell cycle and cell survival.

Cultured myf5 null and myoD null muscle precursor cells display distinct growth defects

Summry— Myf‐5 and MyoD are the two muscle regulatory factors expressed from the myoblast stage to maintain the identity and to promote the subsequent differentiation of muscle precursor cells. To get insight into their role we have studied the capacity to proliferate and to differentiate of myf‐5 and myoD null myoblasts in primary cultures and in the subsequent passages. Our results indicate that myf‐5 null myoblasts differ from wild type (wt) myoblasts in that they undergo precocious differentiation: they become myogenin‐ and troponin T‐positive and fail to incorporate bromodeoxyuridine (BrdU) under culture conditions and at a time when wt cells are not yet differentiated and continue to proliferate. In primary cultures of myoD null cells, up to 60% of the cells were scored as myoblasts on the basis of the expression of myf‐5. These myoD‐deficient myoblasts, unlike myoD‐expressing cells, were poorly differentiating and displayed a severe growth defect that led to their elimination from the cultures: within a few passages myoblasts were absent from myoD‐deficient cultures, which mostly consisted of senescent cells. That a null mutation in either gene reduces the proliferative potential of cultured myoblasts raises the possibility that Myf‐5 and MyoD serve proliferation of muscle precursor cells.

Regulation of Skeletal Muscle Stem Cell Behavior by Pax3 and Pax7

Pax genes have important roles in the regulation of stem cell behavior, leading to tissue differentiation. In the case of skeletal muscle, Pax3 and Pax7 perform this function both during development and on regeneration in the adult. The myogenic determination gene Myf5 is directly activated by Pax3, leading to the formation of skeletal muscle. Fgfr4 is also a direct Pax3 target and Sprouty1, which encodes an intracellular inhibitor of fibroblast growth factor (FGF) signaling, is under Pax3 control. Orchestration of FGF signaling, through Fgfr4/Sprouty1, modulates the entry of cells into the myogenic program, thus controling the balance between stem cell self-renewal and tissue differentiation. This and other aspects of Pax3/7 function in regulating the behavior of skeletal muscle stem cells are discussed.