Modeling Edar expression reveals the hidden dynamics of tooth signaling center patterning
When patterns are set during embryogenesis, it is expected that they are straightly established rather than subsequently modified. The patterning of the three mouse molars is, however, far from straight, likely as a result of mouse evolutionary history. The first-formed tooth signaling centers, call...
Saved in:
Published in | PLoS biology Vol. 17; no. 2; p. e3000064 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
United States
Public Library of Science
07.02.2019
Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | When patterns are set during embryogenesis, it is expected that they are straightly established rather than subsequently modified. The patterning of the three mouse molars is, however, far from straight, likely as a result of mouse evolutionary history. The first-formed tooth signaling centers, called MS and R2, disappear before driving tooth formation and are thought to be vestiges of the premolars found in mouse ancestors. Moreover, the mature signaling center of the first molar (M1) is formed from the fusion of two signaling centers (R2 and early M1). Here, we report that broad activation of Edar expression precedes its spatial restriction to tooth signaling centers. This reveals a hidden two-step patterning process for tooth signaling centers, which was modeled with a single activator-inhibitor pair subject to reaction-diffusion (RD). The study of Edar expression also unveiled successive phases of signaling center formation, erasing, recovering, and fusion. Our model, in which R2 signaling center is not intrinsically defective but erased by the broad activation preceding M1 signaling center formation, predicted the surprising rescue of R2 in Edar mutant mice, where activation is reduced. The importance of this R2-M1 interaction was confirmed by ex vivo cultures showing that R2 is capable of forming a tooth. Finally, by introducing chemotaxis as a secondary process to RD, we recapitulated in silico different conditions in which R2 and M1 centers fuse or not. In conclusion, pattern formation in the mouse molar field relies on basic mechanisms whose dynamics produce embryonic patterns that are plastic objects rather than fixed end points. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | new_version ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 14 content type line 23 Current address: Observatoire Océanologique de Banyuls-sur-Mer, UMR CNRS 7232 BIOM, Sorbonne Université, Banyuls-sur-Mer, France Current address: Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, United States of America The authors have declared that no competing interests exist. |
ISSN: | 1545-7885 1544-9173 1545-7885 |
DOI: | 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000064 |