Abstract

Contact repulsion of growing axons is an essential mechanism for spinal nerve patterning. In birds and mammals the embryonic somites generate a linear series of impenetrable barriers, forcing axon growth cones to traverse one half of each somite as they extend towards their body targets. This study shows that protein disulphide isomerase provides a key component of these barriers, mediating contact repulsion at the cell surface in chick half-somites. Repulsion is reduced both in vivo and in vitro by a range of methods that inhibit enzyme activity. The activity is critical in initiating a nitric oxide/S-nitrosylation-dependent signal transduction pathway that regulates the growth cone cytoskeleton. Rat forebrain grey matter extracts contain a similar activity, and the enzyme is expressed at the surface of cultured human astrocytic cells and rat cortical astrocytes. We suggest this system is co-opted in the brain to counteract and regulate aberrant nerve terminal growth.

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files.

The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Geoffrey MW Cook

    Physiology, Development & Neuroscience, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Catia Sousa

    Physiology, Development & Neuroscience, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Julia Schaeffer

    Physiology, Development & Neuroscience, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Katharine Wiles

    Physiology, Development & Neuroscience, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Prem Jareonsettasin

    Physiology, Development & Neuroscience, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Asanish Kalyanasundaram

    Physiology, Development & Neuroscience, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Eleanor Walder

    Physiology, Development & Neuroscience, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Catharina Casper

    Physiology, Development & Neuroscience, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Serena Patel

    Physiology, Development & Neuroscience, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Pei Wei Chua

    Physiology, Development & Neuroscience, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Gioia Riboni-Verri

    Physiology, Development & Neuroscience, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Mansoor Raza

    Physiology, Development & Neuroscience, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Nol Swaddiwudhipong

    School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Andrew Hui

    Physiology, Development & Neuroscience, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Ameer Abdullah

    Physiology, Development & Neuroscience, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Saj Wajed

    Physiology, Development & Neuroscience, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  17. Roger J Keynes

    Physiology, Development & Neuroscience, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    rjk10@cam.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1557-7684

Funding

Medical Research Council

  • Geoffrey MW Cook
  • Roger J Keynes

Wellcome

  • Geoffrey MW Cook
  • Roger J Keynes

Spinal Research

  • Julia Schaeffer

Trinity College, University of Cambridge

  • Roger J Keynes

University of Cambridge

  • Geoffrey MW Cook
  • Catia Sousa
  • Julia Schaeffer
  • Katharine Wiles
  • Prem Jareonsettasin
  • Asanish Kalyanasundaram
  • Eleanor Walder
  • Catharina Casper
  • Serena Patel
  • Pei Wei Chua
  • Gioia Riboni-Verri
  • Mansoor Raza
  • Nol Swaddiwudhipong
  • Andrew Hui
  • Ameer Abdullah
  • Saj Wajed
  • Roger J Keynes

Rosetrees Trust

  • Geoffrey MW Cook
  • Julia Schaeffer
  • Roger J Keynes

The Anatomical Society

  • Eleanor Walder

Amgen Foundation Summer Scholarship

  • Gioia Riboni-Verri

The authors declare that the funders provided research equipment and laboratory consumables, as well as salary support for Julia Schaeffer, Eleanor Walder and Gioia Riboni-Verri.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Carol A Mason, Columbia University, United States

Ethics

Animal experimentation: Chick embryos were used for this work, and all experiments were carried out at earlier developmental stages than those that require ethical approval.

Version history

  1. Received: December 19, 2019
  2. Accepted: May 23, 2020
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: May 26, 2020 (version 1)
  4. Accepted Manuscript updated: May 28, 2020 (version 2)
  5. Version of Record published: June 3, 2020 (version 3)
  6. Version of Record updated: June 12, 2020 (version 4)

Copyright

© 2020, Cook et al.

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

Metrics

  • 1,255
    Page views
  • 179
    Downloads
  • 4
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.

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. Geoffrey MW Cook
  2. Catia Sousa
  3. Julia Schaeffer
  4. Katharine Wiles
  5. Prem Jareonsettasin
  6. Asanish Kalyanasundaram
  7. Eleanor Walder
  8. Catharina Casper
  9. Serena Patel
  10. Pei Wei Chua
  11. Gioia Riboni-Verri
  12. Mansoor Raza
  13. Nol Swaddiwudhipong
  14. Andrew Hui
  15. Ameer Abdullah
  16. Saj Wajed
  17. Roger J Keynes
(2020)
Regulation of nerve growth and patterning by cell surface protein disulphide isomerase
eLife 9:e54612.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.54612

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.54612

Further reading

    1. Developmental Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Kristine B Walhovd, Stine K Krogsrud ... Didac Vidal-Pineiro
    Research Article

    Human fetal development has been associated with brain health at later stages. It is unknown whether growth in utero, as indexed by birth weight (BW), relates consistently to lifespan brain characteristics and changes, and to what extent these influences are of a genetic or environmental nature. Here we show remarkably stable and lifelong positive associations between BW and cortical surface area and volume across and within developmental, aging and lifespan longitudinal samples (N = 5794, 4–82 y of age, w/386 monozygotic twins, followed for up to 8.3 y w/12,088 brain MRIs). In contrast, no consistent effect of BW on brain changes was observed. Partly environmental effects were indicated by analysis of twin BW discordance. In conclusion, the influence of prenatal growth on cortical topography is stable and reliable through the lifespan. This early-life factor appears to influence the brain by association of brain reserve, rather than brain maintenance. Thus, fetal influences appear omnipresent in the spacetime of the human brain throughout the human lifespan. Optimizing fetal growth may increase brain reserve for life, also in aging.

    1. Developmental Biology
    2. Immunology and Inflammation
    Amir Hossein Kayvanjoo, Iva Splichalova ... Elvira Mass
    Research Article Updated

    During embryogenesis, the fetal liver becomes the main hematopoietic organ, where stem and progenitor cells as well as immature and mature immune cells form an intricate cellular network. Hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) reside in a specialized niche, which is essential for their proliferation and differentiation. However, the cellular and molecular determinants contributing to this fetal HSC niche remain largely unknown. Macrophages are the first differentiated hematopoietic cells found in the developing liver, where they are important for fetal erythropoiesis by promoting erythrocyte maturation and phagocytosing expelled nuclei. Yet, whether macrophages play a role in fetal hematopoiesis beyond serving as a niche for maturing erythroblasts remains elusive. Here, we investigate the heterogeneity of macrophage populations in the murine fetal liver to define their specific roles during hematopoiesis. Using a single-cell omics approach combined with spatial proteomics and genetic fate-mapping models, we found that fetal liver macrophages cluster into distinct yolk sac-derived subpopulations and that long-term HSCs are interacting preferentially with one of the macrophage subpopulations. Fetal livers lacking macrophages show a delay in erythropoiesis and have an increased number of granulocytes, which can be attributed to transcriptional reprogramming and altered differentiation potential of long-term HSCs. Together, our data provide a detailed map of fetal liver macrophage subpopulations and implicate macrophages as part of the fetal HSC niche.