Pericytes are progenitors for coronary artery smooth muscle

  1. Katharina S Volz
  2. Andrew H Jacobs
  3. Heidi I Chen
  4. Aruna Poduri
  5. Andrew S McKay
  6. Daniel P Riordan
  7. Natalie Kofler
  8. Jan Kitajewski
  9. Irving Weissman
  10. Kristy Red-Horse  Is a corresponding author
  1. Stanford University, United States
  2. Stanford Universitiy, United States
  3. Columbia University Medical Center, United States

Abstract

Epicardial cells on the heart's surface give rise to coronary artery smooth muscle cells (caSMCs) located deep in the myocardium. However, the differentiation steps between epicardial cells and caSMCs are unknown as are the final maturation signals at coronary arteries. Here, we use clonal analysis and lineage tracing to show that caSMCs derive from pericytes, mural cells associated with microvessels, and that these cells are present in adults. During development following the onset of blood flow, pericytes at arterial remodeling sites upregulate Notch3 while endothelial cells express Jagged-1. Deletion of Notch3 disrupts caSMC differentiation. Our data support a model wherein epicardial-derived pericytes populate the entire coronary microvasculature, but differentiate into caSMCs at arterial remodeling zones in response to Notch signaling. Our data is the first demonstration that pericytes are progenitors for smooth muscle, and their presence in adult hearts reveal a new potential cell type for targeting during cardiovascular disease.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Katharina S Volz

    Stem Cell and Regenerative Medicine PhD Program, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Andrew H Jacobs

    Department of Biological Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Heidi I Chen

    Department of Biological Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Aruna Poduri

    Department of Biological Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Andrew S McKay

    Department of Biological Sciences, Stanford Universitiy, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Daniel P Riordan

    Department of Biochemistry, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Natalie Kofler

    Columbia University Medical Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Jan Kitajewski

    Columbia University Medical Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Irving Weissman

    Institute for Stem Cell and Regenerative Medicine, Ludwig Center, Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Kristy Red-Horse

    Department of Biological Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    For correspondence
    kredhors@stanford.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Giulio Cossu, University of Manchester, United Kingdom

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All animal experiments were performed according to protocols approved by the Stanford University Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) under the protocol #26923 (Assurance #A3213-01). The laboratory animal care program at Stanford University is fully accredited by the Association for Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care International (AAALAC).

Version history

  1. Received: July 13, 2015
  2. Accepted: October 12, 2015
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: October 19, 2015 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: December 23, 2015 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2015, Volz 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

  • 6,035
    views
  • 1,415
    downloads
  • 142
    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. Katharina S Volz
  2. Andrew H Jacobs
  3. Heidi I Chen
  4. Aruna Poduri
  5. Andrew S McKay
  6. Daniel P Riordan
  7. Natalie Kofler
  8. Jan Kitajewski
  9. Irving Weissman
  10. Kristy Red-Horse
(2015)
Pericytes are progenitors for coronary artery smooth muscle
eLife 4:e10036.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.10036

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.10036

Further reading

    1. Developmental Biology
    Edgar M Pera, Josefine Nilsson-De Moura ... Ivana Milas
    Research Article

    We previously showed that SerpinE2 and the serine protease HtrA1 modulate fibroblast growth factor (FGF) signaling in germ layer specification and head-to-tail development of Xenopus embryos. Here, we present an extracellular proteolytic mechanism involving this serpin-protease system in the developing neural crest (NC). Knockdown of SerpinE2 by injected antisense morpholino oligonucleotides did not affect the specification of NC progenitors but instead inhibited the migration of NC cells, causing defects in dorsal fin, melanocyte, and craniofacial cartilage formation. Similarly, overexpression of the HtrA1 protease impaired NC cell migration and the formation of NC-derived structures. The phenotype of SerpinE2 knockdown was overcome by concomitant downregulation of HtrA1, indicating that SerpinE2 stimulates NC migration by inhibiting endogenous HtrA1 activity. SerpinE2 binds to HtrA1, and the HtrA1 protease triggers degradation of the cell surface proteoglycan Syndecan-4 (Sdc4). Microinjection of Sdc4 mRNA partially rescued NC migration defects induced by both HtrA1 upregulation and SerpinE2 downregulation. These epistatic experiments suggest a proteolytic pathway by a double inhibition mechanism:

    SerpinE2 ┤HtrA1 protease ┤Syndecan-4 → NC cell migration.

    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.