Yoichi Kosodo

Asymmetric distribution of the apical plasma membrane during neurogenic divisions of mammalian neuroepithelial cells.

At the onset of neurogenesis in the mammalian central nervous system, neuroepithelial cells switch from symmetric, proliferative to asymmetric, neurogenic divisions. In analogy to the asymmetric division of Drosophila neuroblasts, this switch of mammalian neuroepithelial cells is thought to involve a change in cleavage plane orientation from perpendicular (vertical cleavage) to parallel (horizontal cleavage) relative to the apical surface of the neuroepithelium. Here, we report, using TIS21‐GFP knock‐in mouse embryos to identify neurogenic neuroepithelial cells, that at the onset as well as advanced stages of neurogenesis the vast majority of neurogenic divisions, like proliferative divisions, show vertical cleavage planes. Remarkably, however, neurogenic divisions of neuroepithelial cells, but not proliferative ones, involve an asymmetric distribution to the daughter cells of the apical plasma membrane, which constitutes only a minute fraction (1–2%) of the entire neuroepithelial cell plasma membrane. Our results support a novel concept for the cell biological basis of asymmetric, neurogenic divisions of neuroepithelial cells in the mammalian central nervous system.

Aspm specifically maintains symmetric proliferative divisions of neuroepithelial cells.

The ASPM (abnormal spindle-like microcephaly-associated) protein has previously been implicated in the determination of human cerebral cortical size, but the cell biological basis of this regulation has not been studied. Here we investigate the role of Aspm in mouse embryonic neuroepithelial (NE) cells, the primary stem and progenitor cells of the mammalian brain. Aspm was found to be concentrated at mitotic spindle poles of NE cells and to be down-regulated with their switch from proliferative to neurogenic divisions. Upon RNA interference in telencephalic NE cells, Aspm mRNA is reduced, mitotic spindle poles lack Aspm protein, and the cleavage plane of NE cells is less frequently oriented perpendicular to the ventricular surface of the neuroepithelium. The alteration in the cleavage plane orientation of NE cells increases the probability that these highly polarized cells undergo asymmetric division, i.e., that apical plasma membrane is inherited by only one of the daughter cells. Concomitant with the resulting increase in abventricular cells in the ventricular zone, a larger proportion of NE cell progeny is found in the neuronal layer, implying a reduction in the number of NE progenitor cells upon Aspm knock-down relative to control. Our results demonstrate that Aspm is crucial for maintaining a cleavage plane orientation that allows symmetric, proliferative divisions of NE cells during brain development. These data provide a cell biological explanation of the primary microcephaly observed in humans with mutations in ASPM, which also has implications for the evolution of mammalian brains.

Regulation of interkinetic nuclear migration by cell cycle‐coupled active and passive mechanisms in the developing brain

A hallmark of neurogenesis in the vertebrate brain is the apical–basal nuclear oscillation in polarized neural progenitor cells. Known as interkinetic nuclear migration (INM), these movements are synchronized with the cell cycle such that nuclei move basally during G1‐phase and apically during G2‐phase. However, it is unknown how the direction of movement and the cell cycle are tightly coupled. Here, we show that INM proceeds through the cell cycle‐dependent linkage of cell‐autonomous and non‐autonomous mechanisms. During S to G2 progression, the microtubule‐associated protein Tpx2 redistributes from the nucleus to the apical process, and promotes nuclear migration during G2‐phase by altering microtubule organization. Thus, Tpx2 links cell‐cycle progression and autonomous apical nuclear migration. In contrast, in vivo observations of implanted microbeads, acute S‐phase arrest of surrounding cells and computational modelling suggest that the basal migration of G1‐phase nuclei depends on a displacement effect by G2‐phase nuclei migrating apically. Our model for INM explains how the dynamics of neural progenitors harmonize their extensive proliferation with the epithelial architecture in the developing brain.

Cytokinesis of neuroepithelial cells can divide their basal process before anaphase

Neuroepithelial (NE) cells, the primary stem and progenitor cells of the vertebrate central nervous system, are highly polarized and elongated. They retain a basal process extending to the basal lamina, while undergoing mitosis at the apical side of the ventricular zone. By studying NE cells in the embryonic mouse, chick and zebrafish central nervous system using confocal microscopy, electron microscopy and time‐lapse imaging, we show here that the basal process of these cells can split during M phase. Splitting occurred in the basal‐to‐apical direction and was followed by inheritance of the processes by either one or both daughter cells. A cluster of anillin, an essential component of the cytokinesis machinery, appeared at the distal end of the basal process in prophase and was found to colocalize with F‐actin at bifurcation sites, in both proliferative and neurogenic NE cells. GFP–anillin in the basal process moved apically to the cell body prior to anaphase onset, followed by basal‐to‐apical ingression of the cleavage furrow in telophase. The splitting of the basal process of M‐phase NE cells has implications for cleavage plane orientation and the relationship between mitosis and cytokinesis.

Interkinetic nuclear migration: beyond a hallmark of neurogenesis.

Interkinetic nuclear migration (INM) is an oscillatory nuclear movement that is synchronized with the progression of the cell cycle. The efforts of several researchers, following the first report of INM in 1935, have revealed many of the molecular mechanisms of this fascinating phenomenon linking the timing of the cell cycle and nuclear positioning in tissue. Researchers are now faced with a more fundamental question: is INM important for tissue, particularly brain, development? In this review, I summarize the current understanding of the regulatory mechanisms governing INM, investigations involving several different tissues and species, and possible explanations for how nuclear movement affects cell-fate determination and tissue formation.

Basal process and cell divisions of neural progenitors in the developing brain

The basal process is an extension of certain types of neural progenitors during brain development; that is, the neuroepithelial and radial glial cells, which show radial orientation, emanating from their cell body. Originally, the basal process was considered to serve as a scaffold for the migration of newborn neurons, but recent observations obtained by advanced genetic manipulations and microscopic methods show that the basal process has additional roles. In this review, we first summarize the role of the radial glial basal process for neuronal migration and signaling and for the proper organization of the developing brain. We then focus on the emerging roles of the basal process during the division of neural progenitor cells, specifically the various modes of division of neuroepithelial and radial glial cells.

Systematic profiling of spatiotemporal tissue and cellular stiffness in the developing brain

Accumulating evidence implicates the significance of the physical properties of the niche in influencing the behavior, growth and differentiation of stem cells. Among the physical properties, extracellular stiffness has been shown to have direct effects on fate determination in several cell types in vitro. However, little evidence exists concerning whether shifts in stiffness occur in vivo during tissue development. To address this question, we present a systematic strategy to evaluate the shift in stiffness in a developing tissue using the mouse embryonic cerebral cortex as an experimental model. We combined atomic force microscopy measurements of tissue and cellular stiffness with immunostaining of specific markers of neural differentiation to correlate the value of stiffness with the characteristic features of tissues and cells in the developing brain. We found that the stiffness of the ventricular and subventricular zones increases gradually during development. Furthermore, a peak in tissue stiffness appeared in the intermediate zone at E16.5. The stiffness of the cortical plate showed an initial increase but decreased at E18.5, although the cellular stiffness of neurons monotonically increased in association with the maturation of the microtubule cytoskeleton. These results indicate that tissue stiffness cannot be solely determined by the stiffness of the cells that constitute the tissue. Taken together, our method profiles the stiffness of living tissue and cells with defined characteristics and can therefore be utilized to further understand the role of stiffness as a physical factor that determines cell fate during the formation of the cerebral cortex and other tissues.

Lunatic fringe potentiates Notch signaling in the developing brain.

Notch signaling is essential for the self-renewal of mammalian neural progenitor cells. A variety of mechanisms modulate Notch signaling to balance the self-renewal and differentiation of progenitor cells. Fringe is a major Notch regulator and promotes or suppresses Notch signaling, depending on the Notch ligands. In the developing brain, Lunatic fringe (Lfng) is expressed in self-renewing progenitors, but its roles are unknown. In this study, in vivo mosaic analyses using in utero electroporation were developed to investigate the roles of Lfng in neural progenitor cells. We found that Lfng potentiates Notch signaling cell-autonomously. Its depletion did not affect the balance between neuronally committed cells and self-renewing progenitors, however, irrespective of the cell density of Lfng-depleted cells, and caused no obvious defects in brain development. In vivo overexpression experiments with Notch ligands suggest that Lfng strongly augments Notch signaling mediated by Delta-like 1 but not Jagged 1.

Extra‐cell cycle regulatory functions of cyclin‐dependent kinases (CDK) and CDK inhibitor proteins contribute to brain development and neurological disorders

In developing brains, neural progenitors exhibit cell cycle‐dependent nuclear movement within the ventricular zone [interkinetic nuclear migration (INM)] and actively proliferate to produce daughter progenitors and/or neurons, whereas newly generated neurons exit from the cell cycle and begin pial surface‐directed migration and maturation. Dysregulation of the balance between the proliferation and the cell cycle exit in neural progenitors is one of the major causes of microcephaly (small brain). Recent studies indicate that cell cycle machinery influences not only the proliferation but also INM in neural progenitors. Furthermore, several cell cycle‐related proteins, including p27kip1, p57kip2, Cdk5, and Rb, regulate the migration of neurons in the postmitotic state, suggesting that the growth arrest confers dual functions on cell cycle regulators. Consistently, several types of microcephaly occur in conjunction with neuronal migration disorders, such as periventricular heterotopia and lissencephaly. However, cell cycle re‐entry by disturbance of growth arrest in mature neurons is thought to trigger neuronal cell death in Alzheimers disease. In this review, we introduce the cell cycle protein‐mediated regulation of two types of nuclear movement, INM and neuronal migration, during cerebral cortical development, and discuss the roles of growth arrest in cortical development and neurological disorders.

Deubiquitinating enzymes regulate Hes1 stability and neuronal differentiation

Hairy and enhancer of split 1 (Hes1), a basic helix‐loop‐helix transcriptional repressor protein, regulates the maintenance of neural stem/progenitor cells by repressing proneural gene expression via Notch signaling. Previous studies showed that Hes1 expression oscillates in both mouse embryonic stem cells and neural stem cells, and that the oscillation contributes to their potency and differentiation fates. This oscillatory expression depends on the stability of Hes1, which is rapidly degraded by the ubiquitin/proteasome pathway. However, the detailed molecular mechanisms governing Hes1 stability remain unknown. We analyzed Hes1‐interacting deubiquitinases purified from mouse embryonic stem cells using an Hes1‐specific antibody, and identified the ubiquitin‐specific protease 27x (Usp27x) as a new regulator of Hes1. We found that Hes1 was deubiquitinated and stabilized by Usp27x and its homologs ubiquitin‐specific protease 22 (Usp22) and ubiquitin‐specific protease 51 (Usp51). Knockdown of Usp22 shortened the half‐life of Hes1, delayed its oscillation, and enhanced neuronal differentiation in mouse developing brain, whereas mis‐expression of Usp27x reduced neuronal differentiation. These results suggest that these deubiquitinases modulate Hes1 protein dynamics by removing ubiquitin molecules, and thereby regulate neuronal differentiation of stem cells.