A common characteristic of mammals is the development of extraembryonic supporting tissues and organs that are required for embryonic implantation, survival and development in utero. The amnion is the innermost extraembryonic membrane that eventually surrounds the fetus of amniotes, and contains the amniotic fluid. Next to its function in in utero development, the amnion has been shown to have an important potential for clinical applications. It is mainly used as a dressing to stimulate healing in skin and ocular wounds. Moreover, cells derived from the amniotic membrane and amniotic fluid have been reported to possess stem cell features, like pluripotent differentiation ability. Little is known about the early development of this membrane in humans. The mouse is a powerful genetic model organism that can be used to address the dynamics and the developmental origin of amnion and amnion-derived stem cells. Here, we discuss some fundamental differences in amnion development in the disc-shaped primate embryo and in the cup-shaped mouse embryo. We emphasize the consequences that this may have on the derivation of amniotic "stem" cells. After revision of the different isolation procedures of amniotic (fluid) derived "stem" cells from rodents, we reveal striking differences in the sources used to derive these cells across studies. The profound differences in the development of the extraembryonic membranes and cavities between primates and rodents may result in comparing cell types of different developmental origins, eventually leading to missinterpretations.

Pink1 is a mitochondrial kinase involved in Parkinson's disease, and loss of Pink1 function affects mitochondrial morphology via a pathway involving Parkin and components of the mitochondrial remodeling machinery. Pink1 loss also affects the enzymatic activity of isolated Complex I of the electron transport chain (ETC); however, the primary defect in pink1 mutants is unclear. We tested the hypothesis that ETC deficiency is upstream of other pink1-associated phenotypes. We expressed Saccaromyces cerevisiae Ndi1p, an enzyme that bypasses ETC Complex I, or sea squirt Ciona intestinalis AOX, an enzyme that bypasses ETC Complex III and IV, in pink1 mutant Drosophila and find that expression of Ndi1p, but not of AOX, rescues pink1-associated defects. Likewise, loss of function of subunits that encode for Complex I–associated proteins displays many of the pink1-associated phenotypes, and these defects are rescued by Ndi1p expression. Conversely, expression of Ndi1p fails to rescue any of the parkin mutant phenotypes. Additionally, unlike pink1 mutants, fly parkin mutants do not show reduced enzymatic activity of Complex I, indicating that Ndi1p acts downstream or parallel to Pink1, but upstream or independent of Parkin. Furthermore, while increasing mitochondrial fission or decreasing mitochondrial fusion rescues mitochondrial morphological defects in pink1 mutants, these manipulations fail to significantly rescue the reduced enzymatic activity of Complex I, indicating that functional defects observed at the level of Complex I enzymatic activity in pink1 mutant mitochondria do not arise from morphological defects. Our data indicate a central role for Complex I dysfunction in pink1-associated defects, and our genetic analyses with heterologous ETC enzymes suggest that Ndi1p-dependent NADH dehydrogenase activity largely acts downstream of, or in parallel to, Pink1 but upstream of Parkin and mitochondrial remodeling.

Signaling by the many ligands of the TGFβ family strongly converges towards only five receptor-activated, intracellular Smad proteins, which fall into two classes i.e. Smad2/3 and Smad1/5/8, respectively. These Smads bind to a surprisingly high number of Smad-interacting proteins (SIPs), many of which are transcription factors (TFs) that co-operate in Smad-controlled target gene transcription in a cell type and context specific manner. A combination of functional analyses in vivo as well as in cell cultures and biochemical studies has revealed the enormous versatility of the Smad proteins. Smads and their SIPs regulate diverse molecular and cellular processes and are also directly relevant to development and disease. In this survey, we selected appropriate examples on the BMP-Smads, with emphasis on Smad1 and Smad5, and on a number of SIPs, i.e. the CPSF subunit Smicl, Ttrap (Tdp2) and Sip1 (Zeb2, Zfhx1b) from our own research carried out in three different vertebrate models.

BackgroundDespite the detailed knowledge obtained over the last decade on the molecular regulation of gastrulation in amniotes, the process of amnion development has been poorly described and illustrated in mice, and conflicting descriptions exist. Understanding the morphogenesis and development not only of the early mouse embryo, but also of its extraembryonic tissues, is crucial for correctly interpreting fate-mapping data and mouse mutants with gastrulation defects. Moreover, the recent isolation from amnion of cells with stem cell features further argues for a better understanding of the process of amnion formation. Here, we revisit the highly dynamic process of amnion formation in the mouse. Amnion development starts early during gastrulation and is intimately related to the formation of the exocoelom and the expansion of the amniotic fold. The authoritative description involves the fusion of two amniotic folds, a big posterior and a smaller anterior fold. We challenged this 'two amniotic folds' model by performing detailed histomorphological analyses of dissected, staged embryos and 3D reconstructions using historical sections.ResultsA posterior fold of extraembryonic ectoderm and associated epiblast is formed early during gastrulation by accumulation of extraembryonic mesoderm posterior to the primitive streak. Previously called the "posterior amniotic fold", we rename it the "amniochorionic fold" (ACF) because it forms both amnion and chorion. Exocoelom formation within the ACF seems not to involve apoptosis within the mesoderm. The ACF and exocoelom expand without disrupting the anterior junction of epiblast, extraembryonic ectoderm and visceral endoderm. No separate anterior fold is formed; its absence was confirmed in 3D reconstructions. Amnion and chorion closure is eccentric, close to the anterior margin of the egg cylinder: we name it the "anterior separation point".ConclusionsHere, we reconcile previous descriptions of amnion formation and provide new nomenclature, as well as an animation, that clarify and emphasize the arrangement of the tissues that contribute to amnion development and the dynamics of the process. According to our data, the amnion and the chorion are formed by a single amniochorionic fold initiated posteriorly. Finally, we give an overview on mutant mouse models with impaired amnion development.