发布: 2019年09月20日第9卷第18期 DOI: 10.21769/BioProtoc.3373 浏览次数: 5383
评审: Giusy TornilloJackeline Moraes MalheirosAnonymous reviewer(s)
Abstract
Developing axons change responsiveness to guidance cues during the journey to synapse with target cells. Axon crossing at the ventral midline serves as a model for studying how axons accomplish such a switch in their response. Although primary neuron culture has been a versatile technique for elucidating various developmental mechanisms, many in vivo characteristics of neurons, such as long axon-extending abilities and axonal compartments, are not thoroughly preserved. In explant cultures, such properties of differentiated neurons and tissue architecture are maintained. To examine how the midline repellent Slit regulated the distribution of the Robo receptor in spinal cord commissural axons upon midline crossing and whether Robo trafficking machinery was a determinant of midline crossing, novel explant culture systems were developed. We have combined an “open-book” spinal cord explant method with that devised for flat-mount retinae. Here we present our protocol for explant culture of embryonic mouse spinal cords, which allows flexible manipulation of experimental conditions, immunostaining of extending axons and quantitative analysis of individual axons. In addition, we present a modified method that combines ex vivo electroporation and “closed-book” spinal cord explant culture. These culture systems provide new platforms for detailed analysis of axon guidance, by adapting gene knockdown, knockout and genome editing.
Keywords: Explant culture (组织块培养)Background
Growing axons sense numerous extracellular cues to reach their final target cells (Stoeckli, 2018). At intermediate targets on the way to the destination, axons timely switch on/off responses to guidance cues. Molecular mechanisms underlying this switch have been a hot topic in neurobiology (Guan and Rao, 2003; Sabatier et al., 2004; Dickson and Zou, 2010; Kolodkin and Tessier-Lavigne, 2011; Stoeckli, 2018; Yang et al., 2018; Ducuing et al., 2019).
The ventral midline of the central nervous system is an important intermediate target for different types of axons. Floor plate (FP) cells at the ventral midline secrete short- and long-range guidance cues, which act as attractants or repellents, and spatiotemporally organize the formation of neural circuits. Commissural axons project across the midline, connect the left and right sides of the nervous system and play roles in information transfer between both sides (Figures 1A and 1B). Commissural axons are initially guided to the midline by attractants derived from the FP and ventricular zones, such as netrin-1 and Sonic hedgehog (Dominici et al., 2017; Varadarajan et al., 2017; Moreno-Bravo et al., 2019; Wu et al., 2019). At the midline, commissural axons lose their responsiveness to the attractants and acquire responsiveness to repellents, such as Slit and semaphorins (Shirasaki et al., 1998; Zou et al., 2000). Thus, the midline is initially an attractive target for commissural axons, but becomes an unfavorable place upon their arrival, so that commissural axons exit the midline and never re-cross it. What mechanism ensures that commissural axons cross the midline only once? One key is the molecular basis by which commissural axons increase Slit sensitivity upon midline crossing.
Here we will summarize how spinal cord explant cultures have contributed to our understanding of axon guidance. The landmark research using explants showed that FP cells produce chemoattractant activity for commissural axons (Tessier-Lavigne et al., 1988). Two-dimensional co-culture assays using explants of commissural neurons and the FP revealed the presence of unknown midline repellent activity, which is unmasked by inhibiting either axonin-1/TAG-1 (a cell adhesion molecule [CAM] expressed in commissural axons) or NrCAM (expressed in FP cells) (Stoeckli et al., 1997). When Slit was identified as a ligand for Robo receptor and a long-awaited midline repellent (Brose et al., 1999; Kidd et al., 1999; Li et al., 1999), its repellent activity for vertebrate commissural axons was not clarified. But soon later, ingenious assay systems using FP-containing and FP-lacking spinal cord explants embedded in collagen gel revealed that Slit inhibits outgrowth of commissural axons that have crossed the midline (post-crossing axons), but not pre-crossing axons (Zou et al., 2000). This was the first demonstration that Slit is an evolutionally conserved midline repellent.
To examine how Slit sensitivity of commissural axons was regulated, we established a primary culture system (Kinoshita-Kawada et al., 2019; Yuasa-Kawada et al., 2009). Commissural neurons dissociated from dorsal spinal cords of mouse embryos at post-crossing stages (embryonic day [E]11.5-12.5) exhibit growth cone collapse and the increase in axonal Robo1 levels in response to Slit. In contrast, commissural neurons harvested from pre-crossing stage embryos show neither collapse responses to Slit nor the Slit-induced increase in axonal Robo1. Therefore, even without FP cells, dissociated commissural neurons recapitulate in vivo behaviors, with respect to the acquisition of Slit responsiveness. We then sought to develop an explant assay to examine Slit-induced Robo redistribution and growth cone responses in individual axons (or small fascicles) in a more physiological context, with subcellular resolution. Unfortunately, it was difficult to use so far developed explant assays for such purposes, because axons tended to form vigorous bundles in collagen gel.
To study retinotectal topography, Drs. Friedrich Bonhoeffer, Uli Schwarz and colleagues developed retinal explant culture systems; a large mass of embryonic retinae were flat-mounted onto nitrocellulose (NC) filters and placed on the tectal cell membrane carpets, allowing robust extension of retinal axons (Halfter et al., 1981 and 1983; Bonhoeffer and Huf, 1982; Walter et al., 1987a and 1987b; Ichijo and Bonhoeffer, 1998; Yuasa-Kawada et al., 2003). By combining these protocols with spinal cord explant techniques (Zou et al., 2000), we prepared FP-lacking dorsal spinal cord [dSC (-FP)] and FP-containing hemisected spinal cord [SC (+FP)] explants (from cervical to lumbar levels) from E11.5 embryos and spread them on NC filters. Such explants were cultured on the Matrigel-coated substratum (Figures 1C-1G). Under these conditions, individual axons robustly extended from explants onto the two-dimensional surface, even without netrin-1, a stimulator of commissural axon growth. In both explant types, the extending axons were negative for TAG-1, a pre-crossing commissural axon marker but positive for L1, a post-crossing commissural axon marker (Dodd et al., 1988), maintaining the characteristics of post-crossing axons (Figure 3). These explant cultures allow simple immunostaining protocols and testing effects of Slit alone on Robo distribution (Kinoshita-Kawada et al., 2019).
Furthermore, to perform RNA interference (RNAi) against transducers of Slit-Robo signals, Arf6 GTPase and cytohesin Arf-guanine nucleotide exchange factors (Arf-GEFs), we modified an RNAi-based assay that combines ex utero electroporation with spinal cord explant culture (Wolf et al., 2008; Parra and Zou, 2010). Because the spinal cord, especially the FP region, becomes too fragile to prepare open-book explants after electroporation, we developed a new culture system of intact, “closed-book” spinal cords embedded in collagen gel (Kinoshita-Kawada et al., 2019) (Figures 2A-2D). The combination of these culture systems with RNAi-mediated knockdown or clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)-based genome editing, introduced by electroporation, virus or nanocomplex (e.g., Mikuni et al., 2016; Nishiyama et al., 2017; Park et al., 2019), will allow more flexibility to manipulate experimental conditions and to tag endogenous proteins. Such techniques will contribute to the elucidation of molecular mechanisms of axon guidance.
Materials and Reagents
Equipment
Software
Procedure
文章信息
版权信息
© 2019 The Authors; exclusive licensee Bio-protocol LLC.
如何引用
Kinoshita-Kawada, M., Hasegawa, H., Hongu, T., Yanagi, S., Kanaho, Y., Masai, I., Mishima, T., Chen, X., Tsuboi, Y., Rao, Y., Yuasa-Kawada, J. and Wu, J. Y. (2019). Explant Culture of the Embryonic Mouse Spinal Cord and Gene Transfer by ex vivo Electroporation. Bio-protocol 9(18): e3373. DOI: 10.21769/BioProtoc.3373.
分类
神经科学 > 发育 > 外植体培养
神经科学 > 发育 > 电穿孔
细胞生物学 > 细胞运动 > 细胞迁移
您对这篇实验方法有问题吗?
在此处发布您的问题,我们将邀请本文作者来回答。同时,我们会将您的问题发布到Bio-protocol Exchange,以便寻求社区成员的帮助。
提问指南
+ 问题描述
写下详细的问题描述,包括所有有助于他人回答您问题的信息(例如实验过程、条件和相关图像等)。
Share
Bluesky
X
Copy link