Cortical Development: Do progenitors play dice?

The wide range of cell types produced by single progenitors in the neocortex of mice may result from stochastic rather than deterministic processes.
  1. Esther Klingler
  2. Denis Jabaudon  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Geneva, Switzerland
  2. Geneva University Hospitals, Switzerland

Understanding how the many different cell types that make up an adult organism emerge from the successive divisions of a single cell is a central question in biology. In particular, given the numerous random interactions that happen between and within cells (Vogt, 2015Symmons and Raj, 2016Hiesinger and Hassan, 2018), how do these multiple cell types reproducibly organize themselves into a robust body structure?

Consider the neocortex, a region of the brain that is involved in higher-order functions such as cognition and language. The neocortex contains a large number of different types of nerve cells called neurons, which are organized into six distinct layers. Neurons within each layer express specific genes and have distinct patterns of connections, which are key features for establishing proper brain circuitry (Jabaudon, 2017).

As the embryo develops, neurons are generated from mother cells called progenitors located below the neocortex: deep-layer neurons are born first, followed by superficial-layer neurons, in an 'inside-out' pattern during neocortical development. Although molecularly distinct mature neocortical neurons have been identified within each of the six layers (Tasic et al., 2016), a corresponding set of molecularly diverse neocortical progenitors has not been found (Telley et al., 2019). Thus, it remains unclear how exactly distinct neuron types emerge from a seemingly more uniform pool of progenitor cells.

Now, in eLife, Oscar Marín from King’s College London and co-workers – including Alfredo Llorca as first author – report that stochastic, random processes may explain how single progenitors are able to generate a wide range of neuron types (Llorca et al., 2019). The team – which includes researchers at King's College, the IST in Austria, the University of Freiburg and the University of Sussex – used three different techniques to genetically label progenitor cells, and then mapped the lineages (i.e. the neocortical clone) produced by each progenitor, focusing on progenitors that started generating neurons early during neocortical development. Of the clones that Llorca et al. were able to characterize, ~80% had daughter neurons in both the deep and superficial layers of the neocortex, while only ~20% had daughter neurons restricted to one of these two tiers. The neurons generated from individual progenitors also showed various axonal projection patterns and molecular identities, which corresponded to their layer position.

While this type of analyses has been done previously (Gao et al., 2014), these results provide important and thorough cross-validations of experimentally challenging approaches. In addition, Llorca et al. went one step further and developed mathematical models that could emulate their biological observations. They found that a model containing two types of progenitor cell which could randomly generate diverse ranges of neuron types was the best fit for their experimental results. These computer simulations suggest that a limited number of progenitors with a stochastic neuronal output can in principle account for the diverse clone types observed in the adult neocortex (Figure 1).

Stochastic generation of wide ranges of neuron types by single cortical progenitors.

The path taken by a single marble as it rolls down an inclined plane through an array of pegs and into a row of bins (a device called a Galton board; see video for a live-action example) cannot be predicted (left). However, over time a distribution of marbles in the bins builds up, and when the number of marbles is large enough this distribution can be predicted. Llorca et al. propose that the diversity in the output of single progenitors in the mouse neocortex is best explained by a small number of progenitors undergoing such stochastic (i.e. random) fate choices, rather than each type of adult neuron developing in a deterministic manner from a corresponding fate-restricted progenitor (right). The distribution of progenitors within the bins reflects the experimentally observed laminar position of their daughter neurons.

Stochastic events are critical for other developmental processes (Vogt, 2015; Symmons and Raj, 2016; Hiesinger and Hassan, 2018), including the fate choices of blood cell progenitors (Chang et al., 2008). However, distinguishing genuinely stochastic processes from unidentified deterministic processes is difficult. While modern technologies are becoming more sensitive, their signal-to-noise ratio is not infinite, which means that complex deterministic processes involving multiple factors can appear to be stochastic.

Although the stochastic hypothesis of Llorca et al. is based on simulations, it is provocative and raises exciting questions that can be experimentally tested. For example, can the two progenitor subtypes proposed by the model be molecularly identified? Do stochastic events occur within progenitors themselves or in their neuronal progenies? And when it comes to shaping the fate of a neuronal cell, what are the relative contributions of stochastic and deterministic processes?

Most importantly perhaps, this study highlights the limits of a reductionist, cell-by-cell description of neocortical and embryo development. If dynamic cellular features are predictable at a population rather than single-cell level, developmental processes may be most efficiently addressed by understanding the emergent properties of populations of cells rather than by a detailed account of their individual components.

References

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Esther Klingler

    Esther Klingler is in the Department of Basic Neuroscience, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland

    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-6577-1362
  2. Denis Jabaudon

    Denis Jabaudon is in the Department of Basic Neuroscience, University of Geneva and the Clinic of Neurology, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva, Switzerland

    For correspondence
    denis.jabaudon@unige.ch
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2438-4769

Publication history

  1. Version of Record published: January 17, 2020 (version 1)

Copyright

© 2020, Klingler and Jabaudon

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 1,851
    views
  • 287
    downloads
  • 12
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Esther Klingler
  2. Denis Jabaudon
(2020)
Cortical Development: Do progenitors play dice?
eLife 9:e54042.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.54042

Further reading

    1. Developmental Biology
    Siyuan Cheng, Ivan Fan Xia ... Stefania Nicoli
    Research Article

    Vascular smooth muscle cells (VSMCs) envelop vertebrate brain arteries and play a crucial role in regulating cerebral blood flow and neurovascular coupling. The dedifferentiation of VSMCs is implicated in cerebrovascular disease and neurodegeneration. Despite its importance, the process of VSMC differentiation on brain arteries during development remains inadequately characterized. Understanding this process could aid in reprogramming and regenerating dedifferentiated VSMCs in cerebrovascular diseases. In this study, we investigated VSMC differentiation on zebrafish circle of Willis (CoW), comprising major arteries that supply blood to the vertebrate brain. We observed that arterial specification of CoW endothelial cells (ECs) occurs after their migration from cranial venous plexus to form CoW arteries. Subsequently, acta2+ VSMCs differentiate from pdgfrb+ mural cell progenitors after they were recruited to CoW arteries. The progression of VSMC differentiation exhibits a spatiotemporal pattern, advancing from anterior to posterior CoW arteries. Analysis of blood flow suggests that earlier VSMC differentiation in anterior CoW arteries correlates with higher red blood cell velocity and wall shear stress. Furthermore, pulsatile flow induces differentiation of human brain PDGFRB+ mural cells into VSMCs, and blood flow is required for VSMC differentiation on zebrafish CoW arteries. Consistently, flow-responsive transcription factor klf2a is activated in ECs of CoW arteries prior to VSMC differentiation, and klf2a knockdown delays VSMC differentiation on anterior CoW arteries. In summary, our findings highlight blood flow activation of endothelial klf2a as a mechanism regulating initial VSMC differentiation on vertebrate brain arteries.

    1. Developmental Biology
    Zhimin Xu, Zhao Wang ... Yingchuan B Qi
    Research Article

    Precise developmental timing control is essential for organism formation and function, but its mechanisms are unclear. In C. elegans, the microRNA lin-4 critically regulates developmental timing by post-transcriptionally downregulating the larval-stage-fate controller LIN-14. However, the mechanisms triggering the activation of lin-4 expression toward the end of the first larval stage remain unknown. We demonstrate that the transmembrane transcription factor MYRF-1 is necessary for lin-4 activation. MYRF-1 is initially localized on the cell membrane, and its increased cleavage and nuclear accumulation coincide with lin-4 expression timing. MYRF-1 regulates lin-4 expression cell-autonomously and hyperactive MYRF-1 can prematurely drive lin-4 expression in embryos and young first-stage larvae. The tandem lin-4 promoter DNA recruits MYRF-1GFP to form visible loci in the nucleus, suggesting that MYRF-1 directly binds to the lin-4 promoter. Our findings identify a crucial link in understanding developmental timing regulation and establish MYRF-1 as a key regulator of lin-4 expression.