Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences

, Volume 70, Issue 18, pp 3365–3374 | Cite as

Novel mechanisms that pattern and shape the midbrain-hindbrain boundary

  • Sebastian DworkinEmail author
  • Stephen M. Jane


The midbrain-hindbrain boundary (MHB) is a highly conserved vertebrate signalling centre, acting to pattern and establish neural identities within the brain. While the core signalling pathways regulating MHB formation have been well defined, novel genetic and mechanistic processes that interact with these core components are being uncovered, helping to further elucidate the complicated networks governing MHB specification, patterning and shaping. Although formation of the MHB organiser is traditionally thought of as comprising three stages, namely positioning, induction and maintenance, we propose that a fourth stage, morphogenesis, should be considered as an additional stage in MHB formation. This review will examine evidence for novel factors regulating the first three stages of MHB development and will explore the evidence for regulation of MHB morphogenesis by non-classical MHB-patterning genes.


Midbrain–hindbrain boundary Isthmic organiser Neural tube Morphogenesis 


  1. 1.
    Hirth F (2010) On the origin and evolution of the tripartite brain. Brain Behav Evol 76(1):3–10PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lowery LA, Sive H (2009) Totally tubular: the mystery behind function and origin of the brain ventricular system. BioEssays: news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology 31(4):446–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Echelard Y et al (1993) Sonic hedgehog, a member of a family of putative signaling molecules, is implicated in the regulation of CNS polarity. Cell 75(7):1417–1430PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lee KJ, Jessell TM (1999) The specification of dorsal cell fates in the vertebrate central nervous system. Ann Rev Neurosci 22:261–294PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Marin F, Puelles L (1994) Patterning of the embryonic avian midbrain after experimental inversions: a polarizing activity from the isthmus. Dev Biol 163(1):19–37PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Martinez S et al (1995) Induction of ectopic engrailed expression and fate change in avian rhombomeres: intersegmental boundaries as barriers. Mech Dev 51(2–3):289–303PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Martinez S, Wassef M, Alvarado-Mallart RM (1991) Induction of a mesencephalic phenotype in the 2-day-old chick prosencephalon is preceded by the early expression of the homeobox gene en. Neuron 6(6):971–981PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Alvarado-Mallart RM (2005) The chick/quail transplantation model: discovery of the isthmic organizer center, brain research. Brain Res Rev 49(2):109–113PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rhinn M, Brand M (2001) The midbrain–hindbrain boundary organizer. Curr Opinion Neurobiol 11(1):34–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Joyner AL, Liu A, Millet S (2000) Otx2, Gbx2 and Fgf8 interact to position and maintain a mid-hindbrain organizer. Curr Opin Cell Biol 12(6):736–741PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Broccoli V, Boncinelli E, Wurst W (1999) The caudal limit of Otx2 expression positions the isthmic organizer. Nature 401(6749):164–168PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Simeone A (2000) Positioning the isthmic organizer where Otx2 and Gbx2meet. Trends Genetics : TIG 16(6):237–240PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Brand M et al (1996) Mutations in zebrafish genes affecting the formation of the boundary between midbrain and hindbrain. Development 123:179–190PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Picker A et al (2002) A novel positive transcriptional feedback loop in midbrain–hindbrain boundary development is revealed through analysis of the zebrafish pax2.1 promoter in transgenic lines. Development 129(13):3227–3239PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Borello U, Pierani A (2010) Patterning the cerebral cortex: traveling with morphogens. Curr Opin Genet Dev 20(4):408–415PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wurst W, Bally-Cuif L (2001) Neural plate patterning: upstream and downstream of the isthmic organizer. Nat Rev Neurosci 2(2):99–108PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hidalgo-Sanchez M et al (2005) Specification of the meso-isthmo-cerebellar region: the Otx2/Gbx2 boundary. Brain Res Brain Res Rev 49(2):134–149PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Barkovich AJ, Millen KJ, Dobyns WB (2009) A developmental and genetic classification for midbrain–hindbrain malformations. Brain J Neurol 132(Pt 12):3199–3230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wallingford JB (2006) Planar cell polarity, ciliogenesis and neural tube defects. Hum Mol Genet 15(Spec No 2):R227–R234Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rhinn M et al (2005) Positioning of the midbrain–hindbrain boundary organizer through global posteriorization of the neuroectoderm mediated by Wnt8 signaling. Development 132(6):1261–1272PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Klingensmith J et al (1999) Neural induction and patterning in the mouse in the absence of the node and its derivatives. Dev Biol 216(2):535–549PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Liu A, Joyner AL (2001) EN and GBX2 play essential roles downstream of FGF8 in patterning the mouse mid/hindbrain region. Development 128(2):181–191PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sato T, Joyner AL (2009) The duration of Fgf8 isthmic organizer expression is key to patterning different tectal-isthmo-cerebellum structures. Development 136(21):3617–3626PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Li JY, Joyner AL (2001) Otx2 and Gbx2 are required for refinement and not induction of mid-hindbrain gene expression. Development 128(24):4979–4991PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Agoston Z, Schulte D (2009) Meis2 competes with the Groucho co-repressor Tle4 for binding to Otx2 and specifies tectal fate without induction of a secondary midbrain–hindbrain boundary organizer. Development 136(19):3311–3322PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jungbluth S et al (2001) Cell mixing between the embryonic midbrain and hindbrain. Curr Biol 11(3):204–207PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Langenberg T, Brand M (2005) Lineage restriction maintains a stable organizer cell population at the zebrafish midbrain–hindbrain boundary. Development 132(14):3209–3216PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Tallafuss A, Bally-Cuif L (2003) Tracing of her5 progeny in zebrafish transgenics reveals the dynamics of midbrain–hindbrain neurogenesis and maintenance. Development 130(18):4307–4323PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tossell K et al (2011) Lrrn1 is required for formation of the midbrain–hindbrain boundary and organiser through regulation of affinity differences between midbrain and hindbrain cells in chick. Dev Biol 352(2):341–352PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Holland LZ, Short S (2008) Gene duplication, co-option and recruitment during the origin of the vertebrate brain from the invertebrate chordate brain. Brain Behav Evol 72(2):91–105PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Glavic A, Gomez-Skarmeta JL, Mayor R (2002) The homeoprotein Xiro1 is required for midbrain–hindbrain boundary formation. Development 129(7):1609–1621PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Crossley PH, Martinez S, Martin GR (1996) Midbrain development induced by FGF8 in the chick embryo. Nature 380(6569):66–68PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Reifers F et al (1998) Fgf8 is mutated in zebrafish acerebellar (ace) mutants and is required for maintenance of midbrain–hindbrain boundary development and somitogenesis. Development 125(13):2381–2395PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Leucht C et al (2008) MicroRNA-9 directs late organizer activity of the midbrain–hindbrain boundary. Nat Neurosci 11(6):641–648PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Geling A et al (2003) bHLH transcription factor Her5 links patterning to regional inhibition of neurogenesis at the midbrain–hindbrain boundary. Development 130(8):1591–1604PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Chi CL et al (2003) The isthmic organizer signal FGF8 is required for cell survival in the prospective midbrain and cerebellum. Development 130(12):2633–2644PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Badde A, Schulte D (2008) A role for receptor protein tyrosine phosphatase lambda in midbrain development. J Neurosci Off J Soc Neurosci 28(24):6152–6164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Itoh M et al (2002) A role for iro1 and iro7 in the establishment of an anteroposterior compartment of the ectoderm adjacent to the midbrain–hindbrain boundary. Development 129(10):2317–2327PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Tossell K et al (2011) Notch signalling stabilises boundary formation at the midbrain–hindbrain organiser. Development 138(17):3745–3757PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Sugiyama S, Funahashi J, Nakamura H (2000) Antagonizing activity of chick Grg4 against tectum-organizing activity. Dev Biol 221(1):168–180PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Shinga J et al (2001) Early patterning of the prospective midbrain–hindbrain boundary by the HES-related gene XHR1 in Xenopus embryos. Mech Dev 109(2):225–239PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Canning CA et al (2007) Sustained interactive Wnt and FGF signaling is required to maintain isthmic identity. Dev Biol 305(1):276–286PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Wittmann DM et al (2009) Spatial analysis of expression patterns predicts genetic interactions at the mid-hindbrain boundary. PLoS Comput Biol 5(11):e1000569PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Dworkin S et al (2012) Midbrain–hindbrain boundary patterning and morphogenesis are regulated by diverse grainy head-like 2-dependent pathways. Development 139(3):525–536PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Nakamura H, Sato T, Suzuki-Hirano A (2008) Isthmus organizer for mesencephalon and metencephalon. Dev Growth Differ 50(Suppl 1):S113–S118PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Suzuki-Hirano A, Sato T, Nakamura H (2005) Regulation of isthmic Fgf8 signal by sprouty2. Development 132(2):257–265PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Kim M, McGinnis W (2011) Phosphorylation of Grainy head by ERK is essential for wound-dependent regeneration but not for development of an epidermal barrier. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 108(2):650–655PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Buckles GR et al (2004) Combinatorial Wnt control of zebrafish midbrain–hindbrain boundary formation. Mech Dev 121(5):437–447PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Adams KA et al (2000) The transcription factor Lmx1b maintains Wnt1 expression within the isthmic organizer. Development 127(9):1857–1867PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    O’Hara FP et al (2005) Zebrafish Lmx1b.1 and Lmx1b.2 are required for maintenance of the isthmic organizer. Development 132(14):3163–3173PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Guo C et al (2007) Lmx1b is essential for Fgf8 and Wnt1 expression in the isthmic organizer during tectum and cerebellum development in mice. Development 134(2):317–325PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Erickson T et al (2007) Pbx proteins cooperate with Engrailed to pattern the midbrain–hindbrain and diencephalic-mesencephalic boundaries. Developmental biology 301(2):504–517PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Koike S et al (2011) Autotaxin is required for the cranial neural tube closure and establishment of the midbrain–hindbrain boundary during mouse development. Dev Dyn Off Publ Am Assoc Anat 240(2):413–421Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Belting HG et al (2001) spiel ohne grenzen/pou2 is required during establishment of the zebrafish midbrain–hindbrain boundary organizer. Development 128(21):4165–4176PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Bouchard M et al (2005) Identification of Pax2-regulated genes by expression profiling of the mid-hindbrain organizer region. Development 132(11):2633–2643PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Xu J, Liu Z, Ornitz DM (2000) Temporal and spatial gradients of Fgf8 and Fgf17 regulate proliferation and differentiation of midline cerebellar structures. Development 127(9):1833–1843PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Xu FX, Chye ML (1999) Expression of cysteine proteinase during developmental events associated with programmed cell death in brinjal. Plant J Cell Mol Biol 17(3):321–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Panhuysen M et al (2004) Effects of Wnt1 signaling on proliferation in the developing mid-/hindbrain region. Mol Cell Neurosci 26(1):101–111PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Sgado P et al (2006) Slow progressive degeneration of nigral dopaminergic neurons in postnatal Engrailed mutant mice. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 103(41):15242–15247PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Alavian KN et al (2009) Elevated P75NTR expression causes death of engrailed-deficient midbrain dopaminergic neurons by Erk1/2 suppression. Neural Dev 4:11PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Radice GL et al (1997) Developmental defects in mouse embryos lacking N-cadherin. Dev Biol 181(1):64–78PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Lele Z et al (2002) parachute/n-cadherin is required for morphogenesis and maintained integrity of the zebrafish neural tube. Development 129(14):3281–3294PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Dworkin S et al (2007) CREB activity modulates neural cell proliferation, midbrain–hindbrain organization and patterning in zebrafish. Dev Biol 307(1):127–141PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Giraldez AJ et al (2005) MicroRNAs regulate brain morphogenesis in zebrafish. Science 308(5723):833–838PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Gutzman JH et al (2008) Formation of the zebrafish midbrain–hindbrain boundary constriction requires laminin-dependent basal constriction. Mech Dev 125(11–12):974–983PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Lowery LA, Sive H (2005) Initial formation of zebrafish brain ventricles occurs independently of circulation and requires the nagie oko and snakehead/atp1a1a.1 gene products. Development 132(9):2057–2067PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Pirone DM, Fukuhara S, Gutkind JS, Burbelo PD (2000) SPECs, small binding proteins for Cdc42. J Biol Chem 275(30):22650–22656Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Ching KH, Kisailus AE, Burbelo PD (2005) The role of SPECs, small Cdc42-binding proteins, in F-actin accumulation at the immunological synapse. J Biol Chem 280(25):23660–23667Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Ching KH, Kisailus AE, Burbelo PD (2007) Biochemical characterization of distinct regions of SPEC molecules and their role in phagocytosis. Exp Cell Res 313(1):10–21Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Mullins MC et al (1994) Large-scale mutagenesis in the zebrafish: in search of genes controlling development in a vertebrate. Curr Biol 4(3):189–202PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Kudoh T et al (2001) A gene expression screen in zebrafish embryogenesis. Genome Res 11(12):1979–1987PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Thisse B, Thisse C (2004) Fast Release Clones: A High Throughput Expression Analysis. ZFIN Direct Data Submission (

Copyright information

© Springer Basel 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of MedicineMonash University Central Clinical SchoolMelbourneAustralia
  2. 2.Alfred HospitalMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations