A community effect in animal development

In animal development, the first tissues to be formed include such major components as muscle, nerve cord, notochord and the eye. In the vertebrates, all of these tissues are formed by embryonic induction, a process by which some of the cells within a mass of tissue are caused to change their direction of differentiation as a result of close proximity to cells of another kind1–3. The induced cells typically form a solid coherent mass with a distinct border between them and the remaining uninduced cells (Fig. 1a). This clean separation between induced and uninduced cells is much sharper than can readily be explained as a result of the induction process. We describe here the culture of amphibian cell and tissue recombinations in solid gels containing cytochalasin in which cell division and cell movement is inhibited during response to induction. This has revealed an effect in which the ability of a cell to respond to induction by differentiating as muscle is enhanced by, or even dependent on, other neighbouring cells differentiating in the same way at the same time. This seems to be a newly described process in animal development, termed the community effect. It helps to explain the formation of blocks of tissue from sheets of cells, and could be of widespread occurrence and significance in morphogenesis resulting from embryonic induction.

[1]  J. Gurdon Embryonic induction--molecular prospects. , 1987, Development.

[2]  N E Baker,et al.  Role of segment polarity genes in the definition and maintenance of cell states in the Drosophila embryo. , 1988, Development.

[3]  J. Brockes,et al.  Monoclonal antibodies identify blastemal cells derived from dedifferentiating muscle in newt limb regeneration , 1984, Nature.

[4]  J. Priess,et al.  Cellular interactions in early C. elegans embryos , 1987, Cell.

[5]  E. Jones,et al.  Development of the ectoderm in Xenopus: Tissue specification and the role of cell association and division , 1986, Cell.

[6]  I. Dawid,et al.  Cell interactions and the control of gene activity during early development of Xenopus laevis. , 1986, Developmental biology.

[7]  J. Smith,et al.  Fates and states of determination of single vegetal pole blastomeres of X. laevis , 1984, Cell.

[8]  Anita B. Roberts,et al.  Autocrine growth factors and cancer , 1985, Nature.

[9]  Lauri Saxén,et al.  Primary embryonic induction , 1962 .

[10]  J. Gurdon,et al.  Activation of muscle-specific actin genes in xenopus development by an induction between animal and vegetal cells of a blastula , 1985, Cell.

[11]  E. Hay,et al.  Control of corneal differentiation by extracellular materials. Collagen as a promoter and stabilizer of epithelial stroma production. , 1974, Developmental biology.

[12]  W. B. Muchmore Differentiation of the trunk mesoderm in Ambystoma maculatum. II. Relation of the size of presumptive somite explants to subsequent differentiation. , 1957, The Journal of experimental zoology.

[13]  W. Farrar,et al.  The Biochemistry, Biology, and Role of Interleukin 2 in the Induction of Cytotoxic T Cell and Antibody‐Forming B Cell Responses , 1982, Immunological reviews.

[14]  J. Smith,et al.  The origin of the mesoderm in an anuran, Xenopus laevis, and a urodele, Ambystoma mexicanum. , 1983, Developmental biology.

[15]  Kenneth M. Yamada,et al.  Cell interactions and development : molecular mechanisms , 1983 .

[16]  I. Dawid,et al.  Epidermal keratin gene expressed in embryos of Xenopus laevis. , 1985, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[17]  Z. Nevo,et al.  Stimulation of chondromucoprotein synthesis in chondrocytes by extracellular chondromucoprotein. , 1972, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[18]  N. Douarin Cell migrations in embryos , 1984, Cell.

[19]  O. Nakamura,et al.  Formation of the Organizer from Combinations of Presumptive Ectoderm and Endoderm. I , 1971 .