Tissue growth constrained by extracellular matrix drives invagination during optic cup morphogenesis
- 681 Downloads
In the early embryo, the eyes form initially as relatively spherical optic vesicles (OVs) that protrude from both sides of the brain tube. Each OV grows until it contacts and adheres to the overlying surface ectoderm (SE) via an extracellular matrix (ECM) that is secreted by the SE and OV. The OV and SE then thicken and bend inward (invaginate) to create the optic cup (OC) and lens vesicle, respectively. While constriction of cell apices likely plays a role in SE invagination, the mechanisms that drive OV invagination are poorly understood. Here, we used experiments and computational modeling to explore the hypothesis that the ECM locally constrains the growing OV, forcing it to invaginate. In chick embryos, we examined the need for the ECM by (1) removing SE at different developmental stages and (2) exposing the embryo to collagenase. At relatively early stages of invagination (Hamburger–Hamilton stage HH14\(-\)), removing the SE caused the curvature of the OV to reverse as it ‘popped out’ and became convex, but the OV remained concave at later stages (HH15) and invaginated further during subsequent culture. Disrupting the ECM had a similar effect, with the OV popping out at early to mid-stages of invagination (HH14\(-\) to HH14\(+\)). These results suggest that the ECM is required for the early stages but not the late stages of OV invagination. Microindentation tests indicate that the matrix is considerably stiffer than the cellular OV, and a finite-element model consisting of a growing spherical OV attached to a relatively stiff layer of ECM reproduced the observed behavior, as well as measured temporal changes in OV curvature, wall thickness, and invagination depth reasonably well. Results from our study also suggest that the OV grows relatively uniformly, while the ECM is stiffer toward the center of the optic vesicle. These results are consistent with our matrix-constraint hypothesis, providing new insight into the mechanics of OC (early retina) morphogenesis.
KeywordsEye development Retina development Biomechanics Computational models Chick embryo
We are grateful to Philip Bayly, Ruth Okamoto, Kristen Naegle, and members of the LAT laboratory for helpful discussions. We thank the Department of Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science for use of the confocal microscope. This work was supported by NIH Grant R01 NS070918 (LAT) and a fellowship for AO through the Imaging Sciences Pathway at Washington University (NIH T32 EB014855).
- Davidson LA, Koehl M, Keller R, Oster GF (1995) How do sea urchins invaginate? Using biomechanics to distinguish between mechanisms of primary invagination. Development 121(7):2005–2018Google Scholar
- Hendrix RW, Zwaan J (1975) The matrix of the optic vesicle-presumptive lens interface during induction of the lens in the chicken embryo. J Embryol Exp Morphol 33(4):1023–1049Google Scholar
- Lane MC, Koehl M, Wilt F, Keller R (1993) A role for regulated secretion of apical extracellular matrix during epithelial invagination in the sea urchin. Development 117(3):1049–1060Google Scholar
- Spemann H (1901) Über Korrelationen in der Entwicklung des Auges. Verh Anat Ges 15:61–79Google Scholar
- Zwaan J, Bryan PR, Pearce TL et al (1969) Interkinetic nuclear migration during the early stages of lens formation in the chicken embryo. J Embryol Exp Morphol 21(1):71–83Google Scholar