Premium
Getting a head: changing perspectives on craniofacial development (340.1)
Author(s) -
Noden Drew
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
the faseb journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.709
H-Index - 277
eISSN - 1530-6860
pISSN - 0892-6638
DOI - 10.1096/fasebj.28.1_supplement.340.1
Subject(s) - neural crest , craniofacial , biology , anatomy , paraxial mesoderm , process (computing) , context (archaeology) , mesoderm , neuroscience , microbiology and biotechnology , computer science , embryonic stem cell , embryo , genetics , paleontology , gene , operating system
This occasion prompts reflection on questions raised related to craniofacial development. Lineage tracing methods have clarified movements and fates of paraxial and lateral mesoderms and neural crest cells in several model species. These approaches have delineated shared, conserved from specialized, derived patterns of tissue dispersal. For example, laryngeal cartilages, which traditionally were homologized with pharyngeal arch elements, receive substantial contributions from lateral mesoderm. “Migratory” is an attribute frequently applied to crest cells. However, underlying locomotory mechanisms are varied and both active locomotion and passive displacement contribute. Paraxial mesodermal cells display a panoply of behaviors, from stationary pre‐chondroblasts to directed pre‐osteoblasts to undirected, invasive movements of angioblasts. These bring mesodermal populations to the interface with crest cells, but crossing is selectively controlled. Musculoskeletal assembly is hierarchical, with crest‐derived connective tissue progenitors at the top. Executing these assemblies requires progressive interactions that bring redundancy to the process. Some of these interactions are similar to those operating in other body regions, whilst others are unique to each niche. These features of craniofacial development will be discussed in the context of questions yet unanswered.