JCB logo
  Home | Help | Feedback | Subscriptions | Archive | Search | Table of Contents

Published 21 July 2003. doi:10.1083/jcb1622iti4
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF, 793K)
Right arrow PPT slides of all figures
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Services
Right arrow Email this article
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new content in the JCB
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by LeBrasseur, N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by LeBrasseur, N.
Related Collections
Right arrowRelated Article
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

© The Rockefeller University Press, 0021-9525/2003/7/167-a $5.00
The Journal of Cell Biology, Volume 162, Number 2, 167-a-167


In This Issue

Neural cells turn and run



Migrating trunk cells (green) avoid Slit- expressing cells (red).

When your gut tells you to run, it is wise to listen. Embryonic neural precursor cells do just that, according to De Bellard et al. (page 269), who identify the basis of an avoidance mechanism for migrating neural crest cells.

Groups of embryonic neural precursors take separate paths on their way to forming the peripheral nervous system. Vagal cells, which emerge from the neck region, migrate long distances to enter the gut. Cells in the trunk originate closer to the gut yet never enter this region. The new results show that the gut is off limits because trunk cells sense Slit proteins, chemorepellents involved in axon guidance in flies and vertebrates.

In chick embryos, Slit expression marked the entrance to the gut. The group injected Slit- expressing cells into embryos and found that trunk cells stopped in their tracks to avoid migrating through regions containing the chemorepellent. Vagal cells, in contrast, were unaffected by Slit proteins, as trunk but not vagal cells express the Slit receptors Robo1 and Robo2.

Repulsion required contact between trunk cells and cells expressing surface-bound Slit. Slit administered in vitro is reused uniformily, so a simple repulsion effect is not obvious. But this form of Slit does cause trunk cells to migrate faster than vagal cells. In vivo, these two effects may combine to turn trunk cells away from the gut and speed their migration in the other direction. {blacksquare}



Nicole LeBrasseur

lebrasn{at}rockefeller.edu


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?

Related Article

Dual function of Slit2 in repulsion and enhanced migration of trunk, but not vagal, neural crest cells
Maria Elena De Bellard, Yi Rao, and Marianne Bronner-Fraser
J. Cell Biol. 2003 162: 269-279. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF, 793K)
Right arrow PPT slides of all figures
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Services
Right arrow Email this article
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new content in the JCB
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by LeBrasseur, N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by LeBrasseur, N.
Related Collections
Right arrowRelated Article
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?


  Home | Help | Feedback | Subscriptions | Archive | Search | Table of Contents