Application of the nonradioactive in situ hybridization for the localization of acetylcholinesterase mRNA in the central nervous system of the rat; comparison to the radioactive technique

1996 ◽  
Vol 431 (S6) ◽  
pp. R309-R310 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samo Kreft ◽  
Katarina Zajc-Kreft ◽  
Marko Živin ◽  
Dušan Sket ◽  
Zoran Grubič
Keyword(s):  
Central Nervous System ◽  
Nervous System ◽  
In Situ Hybridization ◽  
The Central Nervous System ◽  
Nonradioactive In Situ Hybridization ◽  
Acetylcholinesterase Mrna

Mouse homeo-genes within a subfamily, Hox-1.4, -2.6 and -5.1, display similar anteroposterior domains of expression in the embryo, but show stage- and tissue-dependent differences in their regulation

Development ◽  
1989 ◽  
Vol 107 (1) ◽  
pp. 131-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
S.J. Gaunt ◽  
R. Krumlauf ◽  
D. Duboule
Keyword(s):  
Gene Expression ◽  
Central Nervous System ◽  
Nervous System ◽  
In Situ Hybridization ◽  
Gene Duplication ◽  
Selective Advantage ◽  
New Findings ◽  
The Central Nervous System ◽  
Embryo Sections

By use of in situ hybridization experiments on mouse embryo sections, we compare the transcript patterns of three homeo-genes from the Hox-1.4 subfamily (Hox-1.4, -2.6 and -5.1). Genes within a subfamily are true homologues, present in the genome as a result of duplication of an ancestral homeo-gene cluster. We show that Hox-1.4, -2.6 and -5.1 are similar, although apparently not identical, in the limits of their transcript domains along the anteroposterior axis. Within the prevertebral column of the 12 1/2 day embryo, for example, the anterior boundary of transcripts for each of the three genes was most obvious at the junction of the first and second prevertebrae. Similarly, all three genes showed an anterior boundary of transcripts within the central nervous system that was located in the mid-myelencephalon of the hindbrain. Both in the prevertebral column and hindbrain, however, Hox-2.6 and Hox-5.1 transcripts extended slightly anterior to the anteriormost limits detected for Hox-1.4. In spite of close similarities in the positions of their transcript domains, Hox-1.4, -2.6 and -5.1 displayed striking stage- and tissue-dependent differences in the relative abundance of their transcripts. For example, Hox-5.1 transcripts were abundant within mesoderm and ectoderm of early stages (8 1/2 and 9 1/2 days), yet were detected only weakly in mesodermal components of the lung and stomach at 10 1/2 days, and were apparently absent from these tissues at 12 1/2 days. In contrast, Hox-1.4 and Hox-2.6 transcripts were relatively weakly detected at 8 1/2 and 9 1/2 days, but were abundant within the lung and stomach at 12 1/2 days. Our findings suggest, but do not prove, that genes within the Hox-1.4 subfamily might be coordinately regulated in their expression. We discuss the patterns of mouse homeo-gene expression now observed in terms of models originally devised for Drosophila. We also propose how our new findings may help to explain any selective advantage to the vertebrates of homeo-gene duplication to form subfamilies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document