Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Change in the differentiation pattern ofXenopus laevis ectoderm by variation of the incubation time and concentration of vegetalizing factor

  • 26 Accesses

  • 60 Citations

Summary

Early amphibian gastrula ectoderm (Xenopus laevis) has been treated with vegetalizing factor using the sandwich technique, varying the period of incubation and the inducer concentration.

The pattern of induced tissues depends on three factors: the inducer concentration, the size of inducer pellet and the time of exposure of ectodermal target cells to inducer.

Short treatment with inducer will result in the formation of blood cells and heart structures. An increase in incubation time or inducer concentration, or both, will cause the formation of increasing amounts of such dorsal mesodermal structures as pronephros, somites and notochord. Neural structures can only be observed in explants with considerable amounts of somites and notochord.

Ectoderm treated with high concentrations of vegetalizing factor for the whole period of competence will differentiate into endoderm.

Furthermore, the results show thatX. laevis ectoderm does not show any autoneuralizing tendency under our experimental conditions. It therefore seems to be a suitable tool for the study of primary embryonic induction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Asahi K, Born J, Tiedemann H, Tiedemann H (1979) Formation of mesodermal pattern by secondary inducing interactions. Wilhelm Roux' Arch 187:231–244

  2. Asashima M (1975) Inducing effects of the presumptive endoderm of successive stages in Triturus alpestris. Wilhelm Roux' Arch 177:301–308

  3. Born J, Geithe HP, Tiedemann H, Kocher-Becker U (1972) Isolation of a vegetalizing factor. Hoppe Seylers Z Physiol Chem 353:1075–1084

  4. Born J, Grunz H, Tiedemann H Tiedemann H (1980) Biological activity of the vegetalizing factor Decrease after coupling to polysaccharide matrix and enzymatic recovery of active factor. Wilhelm Roux' Arch 189:47–56

  5. Boterenbrood EC, Nieuwkopp PD (1973) The formation of the mesoderm in uredelean amphibians. V. Its regional induction by the endoderm. Wilhelm Roux' Arch 173:319–332

  6. Geithe HP, Asashima M, Born J, Tiedemann, H, Tiedemann H (1975) Isolation of a homogeneous morphogenetic factor, in ducing mesoderm and endoderm derived tissues in Triturus ectoderm. Exp Cell Res 94:447–449

  7. Grunz H (1970) Abhängigkeit der Kompetenz des Amphibien-Ektoderms von der Proteinsynthese. Wilhelm Roux' Arch 165:91–102

  8. Grunz H (1972) Einfluß von Inhibitoren der RNS- und Protein-Synthese und Induktoren auf die Zellaffinität von Amphibiengewebe. Wilhelm Roux' Arch 169:41–55

  9. Grunz H (1979) Change of the differentiation pattern of amphibian ectoderm after the increase of the initial cell mass Wilhelm Roux' Arch 187:49–57

  10. Holtfreter J (1933) Nachweis der Induktionsfähigkeit abgetöteter Keimteile. Isolations- und Transplatationsversuche. Wilhelm Roux' Arch 128:584–633

  11. Kocher-Becker U, Tiedemann H (1971) Induction of mesodermal and endodermal structures and primordial germ cells in Triturus ectoderm by a vegetalizing factor from chick embryos. Nature 233:65–66

  12. Leikola A (1963) The mesodermal and neural competence of isolated gastrula ectoderm studied by heterogeneous inductors. Ann Zool Soc Vanamo 25:2–50

  13. Leikola A (1965) On the loss of mesodermal competence of of Triturus gastrula ectoderm in vivo. Experientia, 21:458–459

  14. Lopashov GV (1935) Die Entwicklungsleistungen des Gastrulaektoderms in Abhängigkeit von Veränderungen der Masse. Biol Zentralbl 55:606–615

  15. Minuth M, Grunz H (1980) The formation of mesodermal derivatives after induction with vegetalizing factor depends on secondary cell interactions. Cell Differ 9:229–238

  16. Nieuwkoop PD (1969) The formation of the mesoderm in urodelean amphibians. II. The origin of the dorso-ventral polarity of the mesoderm. Wilhelm Roux' Arch 163:298–315

  17. Nieuwkoop PD, Faber J (1956) Normal table of Xenopus laevis (Daudin). North Holland, Amsterdam

  18. Okada, TS (1960) Epithelio-mesenchymal relationships in the regional differentiation of the digestive tract in the amphibian embryo. Wilhelm Roux' Arch 152:1–21

  19. Tiedemann H, Born J (1978) Biological activity of vegetalizing and neuralizing factors after binding to BAC-Cellulose and CNBr-Sepharose. Wilhelm Roux' Arch 184:285–299

  20. Yamada T (1940) Beeinflussung der Differenzierungsleistung des isolierten Mesoderms von Molchkeimen durch zugefügtes Chorda- und Neuralmaterial. Okajimas Folia Anat Jpn 19:131–197

Download references

Author information

Additional information

Dedicated to Professor Dr. Dr. H. Tiedemann on the occasion of his 60 th birthday

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Grunz, H. Change in the differentiation pattern ofXenopus laevis ectoderm by variation of the incubation time and concentration of vegetalizing factor. Wilhelm Roux' Archiv 192, 130–137 (1983). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00848681

Download citation

Key words

  • Vegetalizing factor
  • Inducer concentration
  • Incubation time with inducer
  • Pattern formation