Advertisement

Wilhelm Roux's archives of developmental biology

, Volume 190, Issue 6, pp 305–307 | Cite as

Modulatory action of 12-O-tetradecanoylphorbol-13-acetate on bud production inHydra

  • Yoshiki Shiba
Article

Summary

A low concentration of 12-O-tetradecanoylphorbol-13-acetate (TPA, 1.0 ng/ml) induced a transient inhibition of bud production in hydra which were fed daily. However, when hydra were starved following TPA-treatment, they produced further buds. Phorbol (1.0 ng/ml) and dimethyl sulfoxide (0.001%) did not influence bud production under either feeding or starvation conditions. These results indicate that TPA modulates asexual reproduction in hydra.

Key words

Hydra Budding Tumor promoter Phorbol 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Berking S, Gierer A (1977) Analysis of early stages of budding in hydra by means of an endogenous inhibitor. Wilhelm Roux's Arch 182:117–129Google Scholar
  2. Berking S (1979) Control of nerve cell formation from multipotent stem cell in hydra. J Cell Sci 40:193–205PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bisbee JW (1973) Size determination in hydra: The roles of growth and budding. j Embryol Exp Morphol 30:1–19PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bresh H, Arendt U (1978) Disturbances of early sea-urchin development by the tumor promoter TPA (phorbol ester). Naturwissenschaften 65:660–662PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Browne CL, Davis LE (1978) The role of nerve cell-density in the regulation of bud production in hydra. Wilhelm Roux's Arch 184:95–108Google Scholar
  6. Diamond L, O'Brien TG, Rovera G (1977) Inhibition of adipose conversion of 3T3 fibroblasts by tumor promoters. Nature 269:247–249PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Diehl FA (1973) The developmental significance of interstitial cells during regeneration and budding. In: Burnett AL (ed) Biology of hydra. Academic Press, New York, pp 109–141Google Scholar
  8. Fibach E, Yamasaki H, Weinstein IB, Marks PA, Rifkind RA (1978) Heterogeneity of murine erythroleukemia cells with respect to tumor promoter-mediated inhibition of cell differentiation. Cancer Res 38:3685–3688PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Graf L, Giere A (1980) Size, shape and orientation of cells in budding hydra and regulation of regeneration in cell aggregates. Wilhelm Roux's Arch 188:141–151Google Scholar
  10. Ito T (1974) Two new species of fresh water polyp from Japan. Sci Rep Tohoku Univ Ser 4, 18:17–23Google Scholar
  11. Marcum BA, Campbell RD (1978) Development of hydra lacking nerve and interstitial cells. J Cell Sci 29:17–33PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Miao RM, Fiedsteel AH, Fodge DW (1978) Opposing effects of tumor promoters on erythroid differentiation. Nature 274:271–272PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Miwa J, Tabuse Y, Nishiwaki S, Furusawa M, Yamasaki H (1980) Effects of tumor promoters on the nematodeCaenorhabditis elegans. Igaku No Ayumi 114:910–912 (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  14. Schaller HC, Schmidt T, Grimmelikhuijzen CJP (1979) Separation and specificity of action of four morphogens from hydra. Wilhelm Roux's Arch 186:139–149Google Scholar
  15. Scribner JD, Süss R (1978) Tumor initiation and promotion. Int Rev Exp Pathol 18:137–198PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Sivak A, Van Duuren BL (1967) Phenotypic expression of transformation: Induction in cell culture by a phorbol ester. Science 157:1443–1444PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Yamasaki H, Weinstein IB, Fibach E, Rifkind RA, Marks PA (1979) Tumor promoter-induced adhesion of the DS19 clone of murine erythroleukemia cells. Cancer Res 39:1989–1994PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yoshiki Shiba
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PhysiologyHiroshima University School of DentistryHiroshimaJapan

Personalised recommendations