| Literature DB >> 29311816 |
Yan Chen1,2, Xiaoling Lu1,2, Luo Guo1,2, Wenli Ni1,2, Yanping Zhang1,2, Liping Zhao1,2, Lingjie Wu1,2, Shan Sun1,2, Shasha Zhang3, Mingliang Tang3, Wenyan Li1,2, Renjie Chai3,4,5, Huawei Li1,2,6,7,8.
Abstract
Hair cell (HC) loss is the major cause of permanent sensorineural hearing loss in mammals. Unlike lower vertebrates, mammalian cochlear HCs cannot regenerate spontaneously after damage, although the vestibular system does maintain limited HC regeneration capacity. Thus HC regeneration from the damaged sensory epithelium has been one of the main areas of research in the field of hearing restoration. Hedgehog signaling plays important roles during the embryonic development of the inner ear, and it is involved in progenitor cell proliferation and differentiation as well as the cell fate decision. In this study, we show that recombinant Sonic Hedgehog (Shh) protein effectively promotes sphere formation, proliferation, and differentiation of Lgr5+ progenitor cells isolated from the neonatal mouse cochlea. To further explore this, we determined the effect of Hedgehog signaling on cell proliferation and HC regeneration in cultured cochlear explant from transgenic R26-SmoM2 mice that constitutively activate Hedgehog signaling in the supporting cells of the cochlea. Without neomycin treatment, up-regulation of Hedgehog signaling did not significantly promote cell proliferation or new HC formation. However, after injury to the sensory epithelium by neomycin treatment, the over-activation of Hedgehog signaling led to significant supporting cell proliferation and HC regeneration in the cochlear epithelium explants. RNA sequencing and real-time PCR were used to compare the transcripts of the cochleae from control mice and R26-SmoM2 mice, and multiple genes involved in the proliferation and differentiation processes were identified. This study has important implications for the treatment of sensorineural hearing loss by manipulating the Hedgehog signaling pathway.Entities:
Keywords: Hedgehog signaling; Lgr5; differentiation; hair cell regeneration; inner ear; proliferation
Year: 2017 PMID: 29311816 PMCID: PMC5742997 DOI: 10.3389/fnmol.2017.00426
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Mol Neurosci ISSN: 1662-5099 Impact factor: 5.639
Figure 1Hedgehog signaling significantly enhanced the sphere-forming ability of isolated postnatal Lgr5+ progenitor cells in vitro. (A) Diagram of the FACS and sphere-forming assay. (B–D) Representative images of Lgr5+ spheres in the control (B), Sonic Hedgehog (Shh) protein-treated (C, 100 ng/ml) and cyclopamine-treated (D, 10 μM) groups. (E) The number of spheres increased significantly in the Shh protein-treated group and decreased significantly in the Hedgehog antagonist (cyclopamine, SANT-1, or vismodegib)-treated groups compared to the control group. (F) The average diameter of the spheres significantly increased in the Shh protein-treated group compared to the control group. Data are presented as means ± SE. N = 5, *p < 0.05 vs. the control group. Scale bars (B–D) are 100 μm.
Figure 2Hedgehog signaling enhanced the hair cell (HC) differentiation of inner ear progenitor cells in vitro. (A) Diagram of the differentiation assay in Lgr5+ cell spheres. After allowing spheres to form for 5 days, the spheres were collected and cultured in medium that is suitable for cell differentiation for a further 7 days. The cells were stained with antibodies against Myo7a and with DAPI after 12 days of culture. (B) Spheres formed by the Lgr5+ progenitor cells generated some Myo7a+ cells when cultured in differentiation medium for 7 days in the control group. (C) The Shh protein-treated spheres generated more Myo7a+ cells. (D) The total number of Myo7a+ cells per well. (E) The average number of Myo7a+ cells per sphere (30–50 μm) in the control and Shh protein-treated groups. (F) Diagram of the direct differentiation assay. A total of 2000 sorted Lgr5-EGFP+ progenitor cells were cultured on 4-well plates at a density of 20 cells/μl for 7 days in serum-free medium. (G–I) Representative images of Myo7a immunofluorescence after 7 days of culture in the control, Shh protein-treated, and cylcopamine-treated groups. (J) The number of Myo7a+ cells increased significantly in the Shh protein-treated group and decreased significantly in the Hedgehog antagonist (cyclopamine, SANT-1, or vismodegib) group when compared with the control group. Data are presented as means ± SE. N = 5, *p < 0.05 vs. the control group. Scale bars (B–C,G–I) are 50 μm.
Figure 3Forced activation of Hedgehog signaling did not trigger cell proliferation or new HC formation in the cochlear epithelium without neomycin treatment. (A) The diagram for the assay. Cochlear epithelium samples were dissected from P2 Smo-OE and control mice and then cultured in DMEM/F12 media with N2 and B27. 4-OH tamoxifen (Tm) and EdU were added throughout the culture period. At the end of 7 days of culture, the tissues were fixed and immunostained for Myo7a, Sox2 and EdU. (B,C) Representative immunofluorescence images of the supporting cell layer in the control and Smo-OE cochlear epithelia without neomycin treatment. No difference in the number of EdU+Sox2+ cells was seen between the Smo-OE and control groups. (D,E) Representative immunofluorescence images of the HC layer in the control and Smo-OE cochlear epithelia without neomycin treatment. No EdU+Myo7a+ HCs were observed in either group. Scale bars (B–E) are 20 μm.
Figure 4Forced activation of Hedgehog signaling promoted in situ supporting cell proliferation and HC regeneration after neomycin treatment. (A) The diagram for the assay. Cochlear epithelium samples were dissected from P2 Smo-OE and control mice and then cultured in DMEM/F12 media with N2 and B27. The explanted cochleae were treated with 0.5 mM neomycin sulfate (Neo) for 24 h. 4-OH tamoxifen (Tm) and EdU were added to the culture media throughout the entire culture period to induce the Cre activity and to label proliferating cells, respectively. (B,C) Representative immunofluorescence images of the supporting cell layer in the control and Smo-OE cochlear epithelia after neomycin treatment. (D,E) Representative immunofluorescence images of the HC layer in the control and Smo-OE cochlear epithelia after neomycin treatment. (F) The number of EdU+Sox2+ cells significantly increased in the Smo-OE group compared with the control group. (G) The number of EdU+Myo7a+ cells significantly increased in the Smo-OE group compared with the control group. (H) The ratio of EdU+Myo7a+ cells to EdU+Sox2+ cells in the Smo-OE and control groups. (I) The total number of Sox2+ supporting cells (SCs). Data are presented as means ± SE. N = 5, *p < 0.05 vs. the control group with neomycin treatment. Scale bars (B–E) are 20 μm.
Figure 5The differentially expressed genes in the Smo-OE and control cochlear epithelium. (A) Scatter plot for expressed genes (Log10(FKPM + 1)) in the Smo-OE and control cochlear epithelium. The dots represent differentially expressed genes between the two groups (fold change >1.5 and p < 0.05). The blue dots represent the highly differentially expressed genes in the Smo-OE group. The red dots represent the highly differentially expressed genes in the control group. (B) The top 100 highly differentially expressed genes in the Smo-OE cochlear epithelium ranked in descending order. The number on the right side of each panel represents the fold difference in expression for the Smo-OE group vs. the control group. (C) The top 100 highly differentially expressed genes in control cochlear epithelium ranked in descending order. The number on the right side of each panel represents the fold difference in expression for the control group vs. the Smo-OE group.
Figure 6Gene ontology and signaling pathway analysis of the genes that are differentially expressed in the Smo-OE and control cochlear epithelium. (A) Gene ontology of the genes that are differentially expressed in the Smo-OE and control cochlear epithelium. (B) Signaling pathway genes in the Smo-OE and control cochlear epithelium. (C) q-PCR analysis of Wnt signaling pathway genes. (D) q-PCR analysis of cell cycle genes. (E) q-PCR analysis of Notch signaling pathway genes. (F) q-PCR analysis of Hedgehog signaling pathway genes. *p < 0.05.