Craniofacial Muscle Development

Kelly, Robert G.

doi:10.1002/9781118498026.ch5

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 85 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, within the panoply of head muscles there are a great variety of initiation, dispersal, and alignment scenarios, both among and within different anatomical/functional groups (reviewed by: Kelly, ; Michailovici, Eigler, & Tzahor, ; Sambasivan, Kuratani, & Tajbakhsh, ; Tzahor, ; Wachtler & Jacob, ). Some show head‐unique features that have been highly conserved during vertebrate evolution (e.g., extraocular muscles [EOMs]); but most exhibit specialized anatomical adaptations unique to taxa (families, orders, and sometimes species), for example, masticatory, facial, and neck muscles.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neural crest and the patterning of vertebrate craniofacial muscles

Ziermann

Diogo

Noden

2018

Genesis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patterning of craniofacial muscles overtly begins with the activation of lineage-specific markers at precise, evolutionarily conserved locations within prechordal, lateral, and both unsegmented and somitic paraxial mesoderm populations. Although these initial programming events occur without influence of neural crest cells, the subsequent movements and differentiation stages of most head muscles are neural crest-dependent. Incorporating both descriptive and experimental studies, this review examines each stage of myogenesis up through the formation of attachments to their skeletal partners. We present the similarities among developing muscle groups, including comparisons with trunk myogenesis, but emphasize the morphogenetic processes that are unique to each group and sometimes subsets of muscles within a group. These groups include branchial (pharyngeal) arches, which encompass both those with clear homologues in all vertebrate classes and those unique to one, for example, mammalian facial muscles, and also extraocular, laryngeal, tongue, and neck muscles. The presence of several distinct processes underlying neural crest:myoblast/myocyte interactions and behaviors is not surprising, given the wide range of both quantitative and qualitative variations in craniofacial muscle organization achieved during vertebrate evolution.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neural crest and the patterning of vertebrate craniofacial muscles

Ziermann

Diogo

Noden

2018

Genesis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although both somitic and cranial mesoderm-derived muscles have a critical requirement for the three myogenic determination genes, the use of distinct upstream gene regulatory networks in founder stem cells (Pax3 in trunk and limbs; Tbx1 and Pitx2 in cranial mesoderm; Harel et al, 2009;Kelly, 2013;Sambasivan et al, 2009Sambasivan et al, , 2011 raises the possibility that local progenitor cell lineages might also be diverse. Given our previous genetic studies defining distinct gene regulatory networks in cranialand somite-derived muscles (Sambasivan et al, 2009), we originally performed Myf5 Cre -driven cell ablation to examine cranial muscle progenitor fates.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Variations in the Efficiency of Lineage Marking and Ablation Confound Distinctions between Myogenic Cell Populations

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The myogenic regulatory genes Myf5, Mrf4, Myod, and Myogenin likely arose by gene duplications during evolution, presumably to address the more demanding requirements of the vertebrate body plan. Two cell lineages were proposed to be regulated independently by Myf5 and Myod to safeguard against tissue failure. Here we report severe muscle loss following ablation of Myf5-expressing cells. Using both lineage-specific and ubiquitous reporter alleles, we show that the remaining muscles in Myf5(Cre)-DTA embryos arise mainly from Myf5(+) escaper cells. Elimination of Myf5(Cre)-DTA cells on a Myod null background did not result in the total absence of skeletal muscles, as would be expected if a Myod(+)/Myf5-independent cell population played a major role in this scenario. Therefore, these observations are incompatible with a previously proposed functional two-lineage model. These findings will have an impact on the interpretation of phenotypes obtained using similar strategies in other tissues.

show abstract

Craniofacial Muscle Development

Cited by 2 publications

References 85 publications

Neural crest and the patterning of vertebrate craniofacial muscles

Neural crest and the patterning of vertebrate craniofacial muscles

Variations in the Efficiency of Lineage Marking and Ablation Confound Distinctions between Myogenic Cell Populations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About