We investigated whether co-expression of Neurog1 and Atoh1 in common neurosensory precursors could explain the loss of hair cells in Neurog1 null mice. Analysis of terminal mitosis, using BrdU, supports previous findings regarding timing of exit from cell cycle. Specifically, we show that cell cycle exit occurs in spiral sensory neurons in a base-to-apex progression followed by cell

We have investigated the expression of FGF10 during ear development and the effect of an FGF10 null mutation on ear development. Our in situ hybridization data reveal expression of FGF10 in all three canal crista sensory epithelia and the cochlea anlage as well as all sensory neurons at embryonic day 11.5 (E11.

The forkhead genes are involved in patterning, morphogenesis, cell fate determination, and proliferation. Several Fox genes (Foxi1, Foxg1) are expressed in the developing otocyst of both zebrafish and mammals. We show that Foxg1 is expressed in most cell types of the inner ear of the adult mouse and that Foxg1 mutants have both morphological and histological defects in the inner ear. These mice have a shortened cochlea with multiple rows of hair cells and supporting cells. Additionally, they demonstrate striking abnormalities in cochlear and vestibular innervation, including loss of all crista neurons and numerous fibers that overshoot the organ of Corti. Closer examination shows that some anterior crista fibers exist in late embryos. Tracing these fibers shows that they do not project to the brain but, instead, to the cochlea. Finally, these mice completely lack a horizontal crista, although a horizontal canal forms but comes off the anterior ampulla. Anterior and posterior cristae, ampullae, and canals are reduced to varying degrees, particularly in combination with Fgf10 heterozygosity. Compounding Fgf10 heterozygotic effects suggest an additive effect of Fgf10 on Foxg1, possibly mediated through bone morphogenetic protein regulation. We show that sensory epithelia formation and canal development are linked in the anterior and posterior canal systems. Much of the Foxg1 phenotype can be explained by the participation of the protein binding domain in the delta/notch/hes signaling pathway. Additional Foxg1 effects may be mediated by the forkhead DNA binding domain.

At E8.5, the LIM-homeodomain factor Lmx1a is expressed throughout the otic placode but becomes developmentally restricted to non-sensory epithelia of the ear (endolymphatic duct, ductus reuniens, cochlea lateral wall). We confirm here that the ears of newborn dreher (Lmx1a dr ) mutants are dysmorphic. Hair cell markers such as Atoh1 and Myo7 reveal for the first time that newborn Lmx1a mutants have only three sensory epithelia: two enlarged canal cristae and one fused epithelium comprising an amalgamation of the cochlea, saccule and utricle, a "cochlear-gravistatic" endorgan. The enlarged anterior canal crista develops by fusion of horizontal and anterior crista whereas the posterior crista fuses with an enlarged papilla neglecta that may extend into the cochlear lateral wall. In the fused endorgan the cochlear region is distinguished from the vestibular region by markers such as Gata3, the presence of a tectorial membrane and cochlea-specific innervation. The cochlea-like apex displays minor disorganization of the hair and supporting cells. This contrasts with the basal half of the cochlear region which shows a vestibular epithelium-like organization of hair cells and supporting cells. The dismorphic features of the cochlea are also reflected in altered gene expression patterns. Fgf8 expression expands from inner hair cells in the apex to most hair cells in the base. Two supporting cell marker proteins, Sox2 and Prox1, also differ in their cellular distribution between the base and the apex. Sox2 expression expands in mutant canal cristae prior to their enlargement and fusion and displays a more diffuse and widespread expression in the base of the cochlear region whereas Prox1 is not detected in the base. These changes in Sox2 and Prox1 expression suggest that Lmx1a expression restricts and sharpens Sox2 expression thereby defining non-sensory and sensory epithelium. The adult Lmx1a mutant organ of Corti showed a loss of cochlear hair cells, suggesting that long term hair cell maintenance is also disrupted in these mutants.

The molecular basis of mechanosensation, mechanosensory cell development and mechanosensory organ development is reviewed with an emphasis on its evolution. In contrast to eye evolution and development, which apparently modified a genetic program through intercalation of genes between the master control genes on the top (Pax6, Eya1, Six1) of the hierarchy and the structural genes (rhodopsin) at the bottom, the as yet molecularly unknown mechanosensory channel precludes such a firm conclusion for mechanosensors. However, recent years have seen the identification of several structural genes which are involved in mechanosensory tethering and several transcription factors controlling mechanosensory cell and organ development; these warrant the interpretation of available data in very much the same fashion as for eye evolution: molecular homology combined with potential morphological parallelism. This assertion of molecular homology is strongly supported by recent findings of a highly conserved set of microRNAs that appear to be associated with mechanosensory cell development across phyla. The conservation of transcription factors and their regulators fits very well to the known or presumed mechanosensory specializations which can be mostly grouped as variations of a common cellular theme. Given the widespread distribution of the molecular ability to form mechanosensory cells, it comes as no surprise that structurally different mechanosensory organs evolved in different phyla, presenting a variation of a common theme specified by a conserved set of transcription factors in their cellular development. Within vertebrates and arthropods, some mechanosensory organs evolved into auditory organs, greatly increasing sensitivity to sound through modifications of accessory structures to direct sound to the specific sensory epithelia. However, while great attention has been paid to the evolution of these accessory structures in vertebrate fossils, comparatively less attention has been spent on the evolution of the inner ear and the central auditory system. Recent advances in our molecular understanding of ear and brain development provide novel avenues to this neglected aspect of auditory neurosensoy evolution.