2011
DOI: 10.1002/dvdy.22616
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Detection of isoform‐specific fibroblast growth factor receptors by whole‐mount in situ hybridization in early chick embryos

Abstract: We have developed ''b'' and ''c'' isoform-specific chicken fibroblast growth factor (FGF) receptor 1-3 probes for in situ hybridization. We rigorously demonstrate the specificity of these probes by using both dot blot hybridization and whole-mount in situ hybridization during neurulation and early postneurulation stages, and we compare expression patterns of each of the three isoform-specific probes to one another and to generic probes to each of the three (non-isoform-specific) FGF receptors. We show that the… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
10
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
1
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The boundary expression of FGFRs 1–3 has been demonstrated (Nishita et al, 2011; Walshe and Mason, 2000; Weisinger et al, 2010) and is also shown here, together with the expression of FGFR4, which is demonstrated at hindbrain boundaries for the first time. While FGFRs 1 , 3 , 4 (Fig.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 75%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The boundary expression of FGFRs 1–3 has been demonstrated (Nishita et al, 2011; Walshe and Mason, 2000; Weisinger et al, 2010) and is also shown here, together with the expression of FGFR4, which is demonstrated at hindbrain boundaries for the first time. While FGFRs 1 , 3 , 4 (Fig.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 75%
“…This suggests that some receptors are more prominent than others at different parts of the boundaries. Unravelling which of the FGFRs (and their precise spliced isoforms; Nishita et al, 2011) are indeed active at hindbrain boundaries will be necessary.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The most likely explanation for this species difference is that some of the receptors binding FGF2 are only weakly expressed in the chick telencephalon at the age when we inject exogenous FGF2 (33,34). We also note that the rodent studies focused exclusively on neocortical development, leaving some uncertainty about whether FGF2 affects mammalian midbrain development.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…This differential effect is unlikely to be caused by a difference in FGF2 levels, as the embryonic tectum produces very little endogenous FGF2 (32) and the injected FGF2 appears to diffuse homogeneously through the cerebral ventricles. However, the differential FGF2 effect could be related to spatial differences in FGF2 receptor distribution (33,34) or to the normal rostroventral to caudodorsomedial gradient of neurogenesis observed within the avian tectum (35). Alternatively, the effects of FGF2 on tectal morphology may depend on interactions between the developing tectal surface and overlying nonneural tissues.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although the receptor affinities for FGF molecules have been reported for the mouse, they have not been reported in the chick and it is, therefore, not clear if the affinities are comparable. A recent detailed chick FGF receptor expression study provides some insight into potentially important regions of ligand-receptor interaction (Nishita et al, 2011). For example, FGF5 and FGF6 act mainly through FGFR1c and 2c, whereas FGF7 acts through FGFR2b.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%