Skeletal Myogenesis: Evidence for a Programmed Cell Lineage

  • M. Nameroff


Skeletal muscle fibers arise by the fusion of mononucleated precursor cells called myoblasts (Dienstman and Holtzer 1975). Although, for a long while, it was thought that myofibrils and their constituent, muscle-specific proteins were to be found only in multinucleated myotubes or muscle fibers, it is now clear that these structures can be found in certain mononucleated myoblasts (Holtzer et al. 1957; Keller and Nameroff 1974; Chi et al. 1975; Moss and Strohman 1976; Trotter and Nameroff 1976; Vertel and Fischman 1976; Turner 1978). These cells are post-mitotic (Holtzer et al. 1957; Nameroff et al. 1973; Turner 1978) and are capable of fusing with each other to form myotubes. Thus, it appears that fusion is not a prerequisite for either cessation of cell division or for the initiation of muscle-specific protein synthesis in myogenesis. Fusion seems to be only one property of mono-nucleated, post-mitotic myoblasts. It therefore follows that, in order to understand more about the control of skeletal muscle differentiation, we need to focus, not upon the formation of multinucleated myotubes through fusion (as interesting as this process is), but rather upon how individual myoblasts are generated from their precursor cells. Both Konigsberg (1977) and Lavie and Yaffe (1976) have attempted to examine this issue by studying the progeny of single myogenic cells in culture. Konigsberg reported that, after a mitosis, either one or both of the resulting daughter cells could fuse. In many cases, he stated that one daughter cell divided while the other fused. Lavie and Yaffe reported that cells which would have fused were induced to divide in culture medium that promoted mitosis. Both of these investigations relied upon fusion as an assay for terminal myogenic differentiation. That it is often impossible to determine with the light microscope that cells are, in fact, fused and not merely closely apposed to each other, has been reported by several laboratories (Fear 1977; Kligman and Nameroff 1980 b). Thus, an assay for differentiation based on fusion as the sole criterion is both inaccurate and imprecise. We therefore chose to examine the differentiation of daughter cells of individual mitoses by means of an assay which is independent of fusion. Using an antibody directed against the muscle-specific protein, MM-creatine phosphokinase (Puri and Turner 1978), we found, in immunocytofluorescence studies (Kligman and Nameroff 1980 a; Kligman and Nameroff 1980 b), evidence that post-mitotic myoblasts are generated from their precursors in what has been termed a “unipotent” lineage (Holtzer 1978) (Fig. 1).


Daughter Cell Skeletal Muscle Fiber Myogenic Cell Skeletal Muscle Differentiation Multinucleated Myotubes 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Chi JC, Fellini SA, Holtzer H (1975) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 72: 4999PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Deppe U, Schierenberg E, Cole T, Krieg C, Schmitt D, Yoder B, von Ehrenstein G (1978) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 75: 376PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Dienstman SR, Holtzer H (1925) In: Reinert J, Holtzer H (eds), Cell cycle and cell differentiation. Springer-Verag, Berlin Heidelberg New York, p 1Google Scholar
  4. Fear J (1977) J Anat 124: 437PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Holtzer H (1978) In: Lord BI, Potten CS, Cole RJ (eds), Stem cells and tissue homeostasis. Cambridge University, Cambridge, p 1Google Scholar
  6. Holtzer H, Marshall J, Finck H (1957) J Biochem Biophys Cytol 3: 705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Keller JM, Nameroff M (1974) Differentiation 2: 19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kligman D, Nameroff M (1980a) Exp Cell Res 125: 201PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kligman D, Nameroff M (1980b) Exp Cell Res 127: 237PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Konigsberg IR (1977) In: Rowland LP (ed), Pathogenesis of human muscular dystrophies. Excerpta Medica, Amsterdam, p 779Google Scholar
  11. Lavie G, Yaffe D (1976) In: Müller-Bérat N (ed), Progress in differentiation research. North Holland, Amsterdam, p 25Google Scholar
  12. Moss PS, Strohman RC (1976) Dev Biol 48: 431PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Nadal-Ginard B (1978) Cell 15: 855PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Nameroff M, Trotte JA, Keller JM, Munar E (1973) J Cell Biol 58: 107PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Puri EC, Turner DC (1978) Exp Cell Res 115: 159PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Sulston JE, Horwitz HR (1977) Dev Biol 56: 110PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Trotter JA, Nameroff M (1976) Dev Biol 49: 548PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Turner DC (1978) Differentiation 10: 81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Vertel BM, Fischman DA (1976) Dev Biol 48: 438PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Nameroff
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Biological Structure, School of MedicineUniversity of WashingtonSeattleUSA

Personalised recommendations