RESEARCH ARTICLE

595

Development 136, 595-603 (2009) doi:10.1242/dev.026906

Notch mediates Wnt and BMP signals in the early separationof smooth muscle progenitors and blood/endothelial
common progenitors
Masahiro Shin, Hiroki Nagai and Guojun Sheng*
During embryonic development in amniotes, the extraembryonic mesoderm, where the earliest hematopoiesis and vasculogenesis
take place, also generates smooth muscle cells (SMCs). It is not well understood how the differentiation of SMCs is linked to that ofblood (BCs) and endothelial (ECs) cells. Here we show that, in the chick embryo, the SMC lineage is marked by the expression of abHLH transcription factor, dHand. Notch activity in nascent ventral mesoderm cells promotes SMC progenitor formation andmediates the separation of SMC and BC/EC common progenitors marked by another bHLH factor, Scl. This is achieved by crosstalkwith the BMP and Wnt pathways, which are involved in mesoderm ventralization and SMC lineage induction, respectively. Ourfindings reveal a novel role of the Notch pathway in early ventral mesoderm differentiation, and suggest a stepwise separation
among its three main lineages, first between SMC progenitors and BC/EC common progenitors, and then between BCs and ECs.
KEY WORDS: Chicken, Chick, Ventral mesoderm, Primitive streak, Smooth muscle cell, Blood cell, Endothelial cell, Notch, BMP, Wnt,
dHAND, Scl, Tal1, Hemangioblast, Progenitor

RIKEN Center for Developmental Biology, Laboratory for Early Embryogenesis, Kobe,
Hyogo 650-0047, Japan.
*Author for correspondence (e-mail: sheng@cdb.riken.jp)
Accepted 9 December 2008

vasculogenesis (Gridley, 2007). Its role in SMC differentiation has
not been carefully studied in early development. Later in vivo andin vitro studies have shown a clear involvement of the Notch
pathway in SMC differentiation, albeit with contradictory results(Doi et al., 2006; Doi et al., 2005; High et al., 2007; Morrow et al.,2005; Proweller et al., 2005).
In this work, we investigated the involvement of the Notch
pathway in early extraembryonic mesoderm differentiation in thechick embryo. We show that the bHLH transcription factor dHand
is a marker for both early and late SMC lineages. The segregation of
SMC progenitors and BC/EC common progenitors, mediated by
Notch activity, takes place soon after mesoderm ingression andbefore the separation of BCs and ECs. Furthermore, our data
indicate that the primary function of the Notch pathway is to mediate
the balance between SMCs and BC/ECs, instead of to induce SMC
progenitors. Finally, we provide evidence that the Notch pathway
functions in the context of two other main pathways (BMP and Wnt)
that are also active during early ventral mesoderm differentiation.
MATERIALS AND METHODSDNA constructs and embryology

Fertilized hens’ eggs, purchased from Shiroyama Farm (Kanagawa, Japan),were incubated to desired stages at 38.5°C, after which electroporation and exvivo culture was carried out as described previously (Nakazawa et al., 2006).
Fertilized quail eggs were purchased from Tokaiyuki (Toyohashi, Japan).
dENotch1 (a gift from R. Kopan, Washington University, MS, USA)
(Schroeter et al., 1998) with a 12⫻Myc-tag, DnSu(H) (a gift from Dr C.
Kintner, Salk Institute, CA, USA) (Wettstein et al., 1997) with a 6⫻Myc-tag,dHAND (a gift from M. Howard, Medical University of Ohio, OH, USA)
(Howard et al., 1999) with a 6⫻Myc-tag, and Scl (a gift from A. Chiba,
University of Tokyo Hospital, Japan) (Kunisato et al., 2004) with a 6⫻Myctag were sub-cloned into the pCAGGS vector (a gift from H. Niwa, RIKEN,
Japan) (Niwa et al., 1991), and a 3-4 μg/μl DNA concentration was used forelectroporation. The CA-ALK6 expression construct was a gift from Dr H.
Kondoh (Osaka University, Osaka, Japan) and Dr K. Miyazono (Universityof Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan). The CA-β-Catenin expression construct was a giftfrom Dr H. Kondoh (Osaka University, Osaka, Japan) and Dr A. Nagafuchi(Kumamoto University, Kumamoto, Japan). A 1.0-1.5 μg/μl final DNA
concentration of a GFP-expression construct was used in cases where lineage
distribution was revealed by co-electroporated GFP. The DNA constructs for

DEVELOPMENTINTRODUCTION
During primitive hematopoiesis, blood cells (BCs) and endothelial
cells (ECs) are generated in the extraembryonic mesoderm from acommon pool of progenitors (Baron, 2003; Lugus et al., 2005;
Robertson et al., 1999; Vogeli et al., 2006; Weng et al., 2007), hereby
called BC/EC progenitors. The extraembryonic mesoderm in birds
and mammals is composed of somatic (adjacent to ectoderm) andsplanchnic (adjacent to endoderm) parts, separated by the
extraembryonic coelom (Downs, 2004; Duval, 1889; Jollie, 1990;
Sabin, 1920) (Fig. 1A). The BC/EC progenitors aggregate to form
blood islands within the extraembryonic splanchnic mesoderm,which contains in addition vascular SMCs (Kessel and Fabian,
1985; Murphy and Carlson, 1978; Sabin, 1920). The
extraembryonic somatic mesoderm gives rise to mesothelial cells
lining the ectoderm, from which the amnionic and chorionicmembranes are derived (Adamstone, 1948; Oppenheim, 1966;
Pierce, 1933; Romanoff, 1960; Wu et al., 2001). BC/EC progenitor
markers, such as Scl (also known as Tal1) (Kallianpur et al., 1994),
start to be expressed during early cell migration to populate theextraembryonic region (Minko et al., 2003). In the chick embryo,
Scl-positive cells form soon after ventral mesoderm ingression atstage HH4. These cells aggregate to form blood islands at stage
HH6, and the separation of BC and EC lineages starts with theinitiation of globin gene expression in BCs at stage HH7 (Nakazawa
et al., 2006). It is not well understood how the differentiation of BCs
and ECs is linked to that of other cell types, mainly SMCs, in theventral mesoderm population.
The roles of the Notch pathway in ventral mesoderm
differentiation are not clear. Mouse mutant analyses of Notch
receptors and other Notch pathway components have revealed a
crucial role of the Notch pathway in angiogenic vascular remodelingand in artery/vein specification, but not in early hematopoiesis and596

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Development 136 (4)making Notch1 and Delta1 probes were kindly given by S. Yasugi (Tokyo
Metropolitan University, Japan). The Nrarp probe corresponds to nucleotides
1-345 of NCBI # XM428951; the Scl probe to 717-1750 of NM205352; andthe dHand probe to 167-1135 of BBSRC chicken EST contig #333817.4. The
CA-FGFR2 expression construct, SU5402 treatment, and Lmo2, Vegfr2 andEts1 probes have been previously described (Nakazawa et al., 2006). For the
inhibition of the Notch pathway, DAPT (Calbiochem #565770) was dissolvedin DMSO and added to albumin to give a final concentration of 50 μM (100μM was used for the rescue of Scl expression in Notch-active cells). The dose
effect graph in Fig. 6E indicates the relative concentration of the dENotch1
construct compared with the CA-ALK6 construct (e.g. 3.5⫻ means 0.84 μg/μl
of CA-ALK6 and 2.9 μg/μl of dENotch1). P-values for the statistical analyses
were calculated by using a two-tailed t-test.
In situ hybridization and immunohistochemistry

Whole-mount in situ hybridization was carried out following a standard
protocol (Stern, 1998; Streit and Stern, 2001). The Cy3 TSA plus system(PerkinElmer #NEL744) was used to reveal AP/fluorescent double in situ
hybridization. The TSA system was also used for anti-pSmad1/5/8 detection.
For immunohistochemistry, the following antibodies were used: QH1(Developmental Studies Hybridoma Bank) for quail endothelial cells; antiGFP (Molecular Probes #47894A and #40351A) for GFP protein; anti-MYC(Santa Cruz Biotechnology #sc-47694 and MBL #562) for dENotch1,
dHAND and SCL; HRP-coupled secondary antibody (Santa Cruz
Biotechnology #sc-2004); Alexa 488- or Alexa 568-coupled secondary
antibodies (Invitrogen #48619A and #48029A); anti-rabbit Red Blood Cell
(Rockland #103-4139); anti-αSMA (Abcam #ab5694) and anti-phosphoSmad1/5/8 (Cell Signaling #9511). Embryos were embedded in paraffin for
7- to 10-μm thin sectioning. Sections were mounted in MountQuick(DAIDO SANGYO #DM-01) or ProLongGold (Invitrogen #P49192A), andanalyzed using an Olympus SZX12 or an Olympus FV1000 microscope.

RESULTS
Notch active cells contribute exclusively to the
SMC lineage
To investigate roles of the Notch pathway in ventral mesoderm
differentiation, we generated an expression construct for aconstitutively active Notch, dENotch1. dENotch1 has the entire
extracellular domain removed, but retains the transmembrane andintracellular domains, and thus causes ligand-binding-independent,
but secretase-mediated cleavage-dependent, activation of the Notch
pathway (Sato et al., 2008; Schroeter et al., 1998). Expression
constructs were electroporated at stage HH3, when the majority of
extraembryonic mesoderm-fated cells undergo ingression through theposterior primitive streak. The fate of electroporated cells wasanalyzed at stage HH10 when different lineages can be readily
distinguished. Control GFP-expressing cells contributed to all threelineages (Fig. 1B), as reported previously (Nakazawa et al., 2006).
dENotch1-expressing cells failed to contribute to either the BC or EC
lineage, but instead contributed predominantly to the SMC lineage(Fig. 1B). Co-staining with alpha smooth muscle actin (αSMA)
indicated that these dENotch1-positive cells initiated normal SMC
differentiation (Fig. 1B). Similarly, when tested in the quail embryo,dENotch1-expressing cells lead to exclusive SMC contribution (Fig.
1C, red arrowheads in bottom panel), whereas control GFP-expressing
cells contributed to all three lineages (Fig. 1C). Confocal microscopy
analysis revealed that dENotch1-expressing cells adjacent to forming
extraembryonic vessels are mutually exclusive with QH1-positiveECs (Fig. 1C,D). These data suggested that levels of Notch activity
might influence the segregation of SMCs and BC/ECs.

DEVELOPMENT

Fig. 1. Notch active cells are biased to become
SMCs in chick. (A) Schematics of ventral
mesoderm cell ingression from the posteriorprimitive streak at stage HH4 and their contribution
to three major lineages at HH10. (B) Cells
expressing dENotch1 become SMCs at HH10
(lower panels), compared with GFP-expressing cells,
which contribute to all three lineages (upper
panels). (Left) Whole-mount views (red, ρ-globin;
green, electroporated cells); (middle) sections
showing the contribution of electroporated cells(red arrowheads, SMCs; yellow arrowheads, ECs;
red arrows, BCs); (right) same sections as in middle
panel co-stained with αSMA. (C) A similar SMC
contribution of dENotch1-expressing cells is seen inquail embryos. Red arrowheads, SMCs; yellow
arrowheads, ECs; red arrows, BCs; green, QH1 costaining. (Upper panel) Control GFP-expressing cells
contribute to all three lineages; (lower panel)dENotch1-expressing cells have a predominant
SMC contribution. Most SMCs can be clearly
distinguished from QH1-positive ECs. (D) Magnified
view of a region in the lower panel of C. SMCs thatare closely associated with the vasculature can still
be distinguished from ECs under highmagnification.

Notch pathway is active during early ventral
mesoderm differentiation
We next investigated the timing of Notch function during SMC
differentiation from stage HH3 to stage HH10. In situ hybridization
analyses revealed that Notch1, Delta1, and the Notch pathway
components Hairy2, Herp2 and Lunatic-fringe (L-fringe; Fig. 2A,D;
data not shown) are expressed from stage HH3 in the posteriorprimitive streak where ventral mesoderm cells are being generated.
Some of these expression patterns had been reported previously(Caprioli et al., 2002; Jouve et al., 2002). Furthermore, a Notch
activity-regulated target gene, Nrarp (Notch-regulated ankyrin
repeat protein) (Krebs et al., 2001; Lamar et al., 2001), is alsostrongly expressed in the posterior primitive streak (Fig. 2A,D),
suggesting that the Notch pathway is active during ventral
mesoderm formation. Sections revealed a prominent non-uniform
distribution of Delta1 and L-fringe (Fig. 2B), and to a lesser degreeof other pathway members (data not shown), in the epiblast andnascent ventral mesoderm cells. Confirming the ability of thedENotch1 construct to activate the Notch pathway, ectopic
expression of dENotch1 resulted in ectopic expression of Nrarp(Fig. 2C; see also Fig. S1A in the supplementary material) and Lfringe (see Fig. S1B in the supplementary material). Treatment ofembryos from stage HH3 to stage HH4 with DAPT, a Notch
pathway inhibitor (Dovey et al., 2001), resulted in the reduction ofboth endogenous (Fig. 2C,D) and induced (Fig. 2C; Fig. S1A in the
supplementary material) Notch activity in the posterior primitive
streak. This was in contrast to Notch activity in the neuroectoderm,which did not show a prominent reduction with DAPT treatment(Fig. 2D). After ingression, ventral mesoderm cells migrate
extensively to populate the extraembryonic territory and initiate
cellular differentiation. During these processes, however, the Notch
pathway does not seem to be active, as indicated by a complete lackof expression of Delta1, L-fringe and Nrarp, and weak expressionof Notch1, Herp2 and Hairy2 in the extraembryonic regions atstages HH6-HH7 and HH10, even after an extended period of in situ
staining (see Fig. S1C in the supplementary material).
dHAND is a marker for early and late SMCs
Because the Notch pathway is active during early ventral mesoderm
formation and because dENotch1-expressing cells are biased to
become SMCs, we investigated whether a simple binary choice
between progenitors for SMCs and BC/ECs is being made based on
Notch activity. No SMC progenitor-specific marker has been
described so far in the literature. We therefore searched for early
SMC markers through an in situ-based screen and found dHand, abHLH transcription factor, to be an ideal early SMC marker (Fig.
3A). Although no detailed expression analysis has been reported for
dHand during extraembryonic mesoderm differentiation inamniotes, mice with a dHand-null mutation have severe defects inyolk sac vasculature that are due to a failure of vascular SMC
progenitors to differentiate and form proper contacts with ECs(Srivastava et al., 1997; Yamagishi et al., 2000). In the chickembryo, dHand is expressed at stage HH10 in both the vascularsmooth muscle layer and the extraembryonic somatopleural
mesoderm layer (Fig. 3A,B), with both being co-positive for αSMA
(Fig. 3C). These two smooth muscle layers line the extraembryoniccoelom and have been variably called mesothelial layers or coelom
linings. In this work, they are referred to as the somatic SMC layer(upper) and the vascular SMC layer (lower). During early ventral
mesoderm formation, dHand was seen to be expressed in a salt-andpepper pattern in nascent extraembryonic mesoderm populations(Fig. 3D; see also Fig. S2C in the supplementary material). A similar

RESEARCH ARTICLE

597

Fig. 2. The Notch pathway is active during early extraembryonicmesoderm generation. (A) Expression of Delta1, Notch1, Lunaticfringe (L-fringe) and Nrarp at HH3+. Lines indicate section levels shownin B. (B) Sections showing Delta1 and L-fringe expression at theposterior primitive streak level indicated in A. Salt-and-pepper positive
staining for Delta1 (in both the epiblast and newly ingressed cells) andL-fringe (weakly in the epiblast cells and strongly in the newly ingressed
cells) can be seen. (C) dENotch1 can induce Nrarp cell-autonomously,
and both induced and endogenous Nrarp expression can be repressedby DAPT. (Top-left panel) DMSO treatment after dENotch1
electroporation; (bottom-left panel) DAPT treatment after dENotch1
electroporation. Right panels show magnified views near the posteriorprimitive streak of embryo shown on the left. (D) Inhibition of the
Notch pathway by DAPT results in a specific reduction (right) of Notch
pathway genes in the posterior primitive streak (left). The neural plate
expression of Notch1, L-fringe and Hairy2, however, is not affected.

salt-and-pepper pattern of expression was observed for the BC/EC
marker Scl (see Fig. S2A,B in the supplementary material). Doublein situ analysis for dHand and Scl, however, revealed mutually
exclusive patterns of dHand and Scl at stage HH4-HH5 (Fig. 3D; seealso Fig. S3D in the supplementary material), suggesting thatdHand-positive SMC progenitors and Scl-positive BC/EC
progenitors are being segregated soon after ingression.
dHAND and Scl are mutually inhibitory and act
after Notch mediated segregation
We then wished to determine whether Notch activity plays a role inthe mutual exclusion of dHand and Scl expression. When thedENotch1-expression construct was electroporated into posterior
streak cells at stage HH3 and analyzed at stage HH4-HH5, mostdENotch1-positive cells were seen to be co-positive for dHand
expression; dENotch1 staining was excluded from Scl-positive cells

DEVELOPMENT

Notch mediates SMC and BC/EC separation

598

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Development 136 (4)negative, and vice versa (see Fig. S4E,F in the supplementarymaterial). At stage HH10, dHAND ectopic expression resulted
primarily in an SMC lineage contribution (n=3; Fig. 3E), whereas
Scl ectopic expression gave rise to the BC/EC lineages (n=3; Fig.
3F). When Scl and dENotch1 were co-introduced, the exclusive
SMC distribution caused by dENotch1 was completely reversed
when analyzed either at stage HH10 (see Fig. S5A-D in the
supplementary material) or at stage HH7 (see Fig. S5E,F in the
supplementary material), suggesting that Scl and dHAND mediatedrespective lineage specification acts after Notch-mediated lineage
segregation.

(see Fig. S3A,B and Fig. S4B,D in the supplementary material). This
restrictive localization of dENotch1-expressing cells in the dHandpositive lineage was maintained afterwards (HH7; see Fig. S3C inthe supplementary material). When electroporated embryos were
cultured with DAPT, dENotch1-expressing cells were seen in both
Scl-positive and Scl-negative populations (see Fig. S4C in the
supplementary material), similar to controls (see Fig. S4A in the
supplementary material). Although the Notch pathway is active
only during early phases of ventral mesoderm formation, bothdHand and Scl are expressed in their respective lineages
continuously, suggesting that dHand- and Scl-expressing cells might
reinforce an early fate choice without further input from the Notch
pathway. To test this, we introduced ectopic dHAND or Scl into
early extraembryonic fated mesoderm cells at stage HH3. When
analyzed at stage HH5, dHAND ectopic-expressing cells were Scl

Wnt pathway plays an instructive role in SMC
lineage specification
To understand what may play an instructive role in SMC lineage
specification, we investigated the involvement of the BMP and Wnt
pathways in this process. Both pathways are active in the posteriorprimitive streak, although it is not clear whether their main roles are
in dorsoventral patterning by promoting the ventralization of
mesoderm, or in lineage specification by promoting either SMC or
BC/EC formation. We introduced a constitutively active BMP
receptor 1 (CA-ALK6) (Miyagishi et al., 2000; ten Dijke et al.,1994) into the anterior primitive streak, where BMP activity is

DEVELOPMENT

Fig. 3. Mutual antagonism of dHAND and Scl. (A) dHand expression
from HH3 to HH10 in whole-mount views. Arrows indicate nascentextraembryonic mesoderm expressing dHand, which marks the SMC
lineage. (B) Sections of an HH10 embryo, indicating dHand expression
in both somatic (left and middle panels) and vascular (left and rightpanels) SMCs. (C) dHand-expressing cells are co-positive for αSMA.
(D) dHand and Scl are expressed in non-overlapping cells during early
extraembryonic mesoderm generation (HH4-HH5). (E) dHANDoverexpressing cells are Scl negative, and become SMCs. Red
arrowheads indicate regions magnified in right panels. (F) Scloverexpressing cells are dHand negative, and become mainly BCs withminor EC contribution.

Cells with high Notch activity are strongly biased
to become SMCs, but cells with low Notch activity
show only a minor bias for BC/ECs
If levels of Notch activity determine the choice of SMCs or BC/ECs
in the ventral mesoderm population, experimental reduction of
Notch activity should lead to a strong BC/EC contribution at theexpense of SMCs. When embryos were cultured from stage HH3 tostage HH10 with DAPT, which can lead to a strong reduction of
Notch activity in the ventral mesoderm population, as shown in Fig.
2, all three cell types were still present when analyzed with therelevant markers (dHand, αSMA, Lmo2 and Scl, and ρ-globin andthe RBC antigen; Fig. 4A,B; data not shown). This suggested that
although Notch activation leads to almost exclusive SMC
contribution, the lack of Notch activity does not affect the induction
or differentiation of SMCs. We then investigated whether relative
percentages of SMCs and BC/ECs are affected by changes in Notch
activity. When a control GFP-expressing construct waselectroporated into ventral mesoderm precursors at stage HH3 andanalyzed at stage HH5, about half (47%; 1005/2156) of the
precursors were seen to be co-positive for Scl (Fig. 4C), reflecting
the normal segregation of SMC progenitors and BC/EC progenitors.
By contrast, only 8.5% (98/1126) of dENotch1-expressing cells
showed Scl co-positivity (Fig. 4C), which was in agreement with ourobservation that dENotch1-positve cells at later stages have an
exclusive SMC contribution. The cell-autonomous reduction of
Notch activity in ventral mesoderm precursors with a dominantnegative Suppressor of Hairless [DnSu(H)] expression construct
resulted in a small but statistically significant increase in theircontribution to the Scl-positve lineage (57%; 1733/3057; Fig. 4C).
Because electroporation in chicken embryos generally results in asmall percentage of cells within the ventral mesoderm population
expressing exogenously introduced genes, we performed similar
statistical analysis with embryos treated with DAPT, which
presumably results in all cells having strongly reduced Notch
activity. Similar to DnSu(H) expression, DAPT treatment from stage
HH3 to stage HH10 resulted in a small but statistically significant
increase in BC contribution (DMSO control, 43%, n=904; DAPT,
61%, n=1122; Fig. 4D).

Notch mediates SMC and BC/EC separation

RESEARCH ARTICLE

599

investigated whether CA-β-Catenin in the anterior primitive streak
can induce the ectopic expression of genes involved in Notch
signaling. Indeed all three genes tested, Delta1 (n=2), L-fringe (n=3)
and Notch1 (n=4), were induced ectopically by CA-β-Catenin (Fig.
5C). This induction, however, partially requires intact Notch
signaling, as the induction of L-fringe and Notch1 was abolishedwhen embryos were treated with DAPT (n=4; see Fig. 5D for Lfringe; data not shown for Notch1).

normally inhibited by anti-BMP signals from the Hensen’s node.
Ectopic CA-ALK6 expression resulted in ectopic induction of bothScl (n=4) and dHand (n=4; Fig. 5A), suggesting that the main roleof the BMP pathway is to ventralize the mesoderm. By contrast,
when CA-β-Catenin, which leads to a constitutive activation of thecanonical Wnt pathway (Takahashi et al., 2000; Yu et al., 2008), wasintroduced ectopically, strong induction was observed only with the
SMC marker dHand (8/8; Fig. 5B). No induction was seen with anyof the markers for the BC or EC lineage, including Scl (n=3), Lmo2
(n=3), Vegfr2 (n=3) and Ets1 (n=3; Fig. 5B; see also Fig. S6 in the
supplementary material), suggesting that the activity of the Wnt
pathway plays an instructive role in SMC lineage specification.
Supporting this notion, CA-β-Catenin, when introduced in ventral
mesoderm territory, resulted in a prominent suppression of Scl
expression (n=4; Fig. 5B). Unlike ectopic CA-β-Catenin expression,
however, ectopic dENotch1 expression in the anterior primitive
streak did not lead to ectopic dHand expression (data not shown),suggesting that Notch-mediated SMC specification might act inparallel to or downstream of the Wnt pathway. We therefore

DISCUSSION
The number of cell types present in the extraembryonic mesoderm
has not been carefully investigated. Here, we show that in addition
to BCs and ECs, SMCs represent another major component of theextraembryonic mesoderm. Although other possible minor cell types
cannot be ruled out, these three lineages together can account foralmost all of the cells present in the extraembryonic mesoderm prior
to the establishment of the circulation (Fig. 7B). Our studies alsosuggest that dHAND is a molecular marker and a crucialtranscriptional regulator of the SMC lineage (Fig. 7A). The
extraembryonic SMC lineage is composed of two anatomicallydistinct layers: the vascular SMC and the somatic SMC. Although
the smooth muscle component of the extraembryonicsplanchnopleure (the vascular SMC layer) has been well described,
we show here that the extraembryonic somatopleural mesoderm isalso largely composed of smooth muscle cells. The medial part of

DEVELOPMENT

Fig. 4. Reduction of Notch activity results in a small increase in
BC/EC contribution. (A) Control DMSO treatment from HH3 to HH10.
Green indicates that GFP-expressing cells contribute to all threelineages. (B) DAPT treatment from HH3 to HH10 increases thecontribution of labeled cells to the BC lineage. Although collapsed
extraembryonic coelom makes the distinction of SMCs and ECs
difficult, the relative contribution to BCs is assessed with the help of
DAPI co-staining (top right). These BC lineage located cells are normal
blood cells as revealed by αRBC staining (bottom right).
(C) Quantification of Scl-positive lineage contribution at HH5 for cells
expressing either dENotch1 or DN-Su(H). Cell-autonomous Notch
pathway activation by dENotch1 results in a strong bias (P<0.0001)
against the Scl-positive, whereas inhibition by DN-Su(H) causes only aminor increase. (D) Quantification of the contribution of GFP-labeledcells in embryos treated with DAPT from HH3-HH10. DAPT causes asmall increase in Scl-positive BC contribution (stained with αRBC), incomparison with DMSO control.

The relationship between the BMP and Notch
pathways in SMC and BC/EC segregation
As we have mentioned earlier (Fig. 5A), the main role of BMP
pathway activity is in the ventralization of mesoderm, leading to the
induction of both SMC and BC/EC populations, either directly or
indirectly. In support of this, CA-ALK6 electroporated cells in theventral mesoderm were shown to have the ability to contribute later
on to all three lineages (data not shown). In normal gastrulation stageembryos, BMP pathway activity, as revealed by phospho-Smad1/5/8
staining (see Materials and methods), could be detected in all ventral
mesoderm cells (see Fig. S7A in the supplementary material).
Ectopic CA-ALK6 in the anterior primitive streak resulted in strongectopic phospho-Smad1/5/8 staining together with staining for coelectroporated GFP (see Fig. S7B in the supplementary material).
We next investigated the relationship between BMP-mediatedinduction of SMC and BC/EC populations, and Notch-mediatedsegregation of these two populations. In normal stage HH10
embryos, few Scl-positive cells could be detected in medial regionsof the embryos (corresponding to the medial part of lateral plate
mesoderm; Fig. 6A,E; 0%, n=13), whereas strong dHand expression
can be observed in this region (Fig. 3A). Ectopic CA-ALK6
expression resulted in a large increase in the percentage of embryoswith Scl-positive cells in medial regions at stage HH10 (Fig. 6B,E;77%, n=31). This is in agreement with the fact that high BMP
activity can promote the induction of BC/ECs, in addition to SMCs,
which are already abundantly present in this region in normal
embryos. This increase, however, could be effectively blocked by
the co-expression of dENotch1 (Fig. 6C,E; CA-ALK6+dENotch1;
27%, n=33) and re-rescued by culturing in the presence of DAPT
(Fig. 6D,E; CA-ALK6+dENotch1+DAPT; 90%, n=10). Thissuggested that BMP activity-induced ventralization of mesoderm ismodulated by Notch activity levels, leading to a strong preference
for the SMC lineage when Notch activity is high. Supporting this,
we observed that CA-ALK6-induced ectopic Scl expression was
further enhanced in the presence of DAPT treatment (Fig. 6E; CAALK6+DAPT; 94%, n=16).

600

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Development 136 (4)Fig. 5. Roles of BMP and Wnt in SMC and
BC/EC induction. Chick embryos were
electroporated with expression constructs at HH3
and analyzed at HH4. Brown, cells expressing
electroporated genes; blue, in situ staining withindicated genes. (A) Ectopic activation of the BMP
pathway by CA-ALK6 leads to the ectopic
expression of both Scl and dHand (red arrows).
(B) Ectopic activation of the Wnt pathway by CAβ-Catenin results in ectopic dHand, but not Scl,
expression. CA-β-Catenin overexpression in theendogenous Scl-expressing region results in its
inhibition. Dotted line indicates the level of thesection shown in the inset. (C) Ectopic Wnt
pathway activation upregulates Notch pathway
genes. (Top panels) Control GFP electroporation;(bottom panels) CA-β-Catenin electroporation.
Insets indicate whole-embryo views. Yellow
arrowhead in insets indicates magnified region.
Red arrowheads indicate ectopic induction.
(D) CA-β-Catenin induction of Notch pathway
genes, L-fringe, shown here, is abolished by DAPT
treatment (compare red arrowheads in top andbottom panels). Yellow arrowheads indicate theinhibition of endogenous L-fringe in the posteriorprimitive streak by DAPT.

of SMCs might be there. With the SMC markers used in our studies,
we could not distinguish either between the vascular SMC and thesomatic SMC, or between the medial and lateral parts of the somatic
SMC.
In chickens, two Notch genes (Notch1 and Notch2) have beenreported so far. This is supported by our genomic and transcriptomic
analyses. We show in this study that Notch1 is the main receptor
mediating Notch signaling during early ventral mesoderm
Fig. 6. BMP-induced ectopic medial Scl
expression is regulated by Notch activity.
(A) Control GFP expression does not change Scl
expression, which progressively weakens more
medially. The presence of faint staining in part of thedorsal aorta is normal. (Left) Whole embryo view
before anti-GFP staining, but after in situ analysis with
Scl; (right) magnified view of the electroporated
region after GFP staining of the embryo shown in theleft panel. Arrow indicates the electroporated region
with no Scl induction. Letter next to the arrowcorresponds to the statistical analysis in E. (B) CAALK6 induces strong ectopic Scl expression medially(arrows in right panel), which is also prominent in thewhole embryo view shown in the left panel. (C) CAALK6-induced ectopic Scl expression is abolished bydENotch1 co-expression. (D) DAPT treatment rescues
induction by CA-ALK6. (E) Quantification of Sclectopic induction by CA-ALK6. The dose effect ofdENotch1 is indicated by the number reflecting thedENotch1 construct concentration (see also Materials
and methods).

DEVELOPMENT

extraembryonic somatopleure is known to contribute to theamnionic membrane, the rhythmic contraction of which is attributed
to its smooth muscle cells (Adamstone, 1948; Oppenheim, 1966;
Pierce, 1933; Romanoff, 1960; Wu et al., 2001). The lateral part ofthe extraembryonic somatopleure gives rise to the chorionicmembrane, with the majority of its mesoderm component later onfusing with the mesoderm component of the allantois to form thechorioallantoic membrane. It is therefore unclear what the functionsdifferentiation. Other Notch pathway components, including Delta1,
Hariy2, Herp2, L-fringe and Nrarp, are also expressed in theposterior primitive streak. Most of these genes, however, aredownregulated during active migration and later differentiation,suggesting that the pathway is active only during ventral mesoderm
formation and early migration. Nevertheless, it has been well
documented that the Notch pathway also plays a role in endothelial
cell differentiation, arterial/venous vessel specification and SMC/EC
interaction. These aspects appear to take place after the initial
lineage specification of SMC, EC and BC, and are not addressed inthis study. Indeed, later on, after the lineage specification but before
the initiation of circulation, we detected an upregulation of Notch2
and Delta4 in yolk sac tissues in our transcriptomic analysis,suggesting that the Notch pathway, albeit utilizing different
members, is being reactivated for later functions.
Our data indicate that lineage specification among the ventral
mesoderm population involves first the separation of SMC and
BC/EC progenitors mediated by the Notch pathway (Fig. 7A). We
have previously reported that the FGF pathway plays a crucial rolein the separation of BCs and ECs from the BC/EC lineage(Nakazawa et al., 2006). The FGF pathway does not appear to playa prominent role in the early separation of the SMC and BC/EC
lineages, as neither constitutively active FGFR nor inhibition of the
FGF pathway exhibits any discernable effect on Scl or dHand
expression (see Fig. S6 in the supplementary material; data notshown). We propose that three main cell types in the extraembryonicmesoderm are generated by a two-step binary choice among
multipotential ventral mesoderm progenitors: first between SMCs
and BC/ECs, and then between BCs and ECs (Fig. 7A,B). A
stochastic difference in Notch activities can be reinforced by themutual inhibition of dHAND and Scl, resulting in the separation of
the SMC and BC/EC lineages. A similar model for the early
separation of cells contributing to the BC/EC lineage and cells
contributing to the extraembryonic coelomic linings was proposedby Sabin (Sabin, 1920), although the SMC nature of coelomic lining
cells was not clearly mentioned in that report. The generalanatomical organization, proposed in this work, of theextraembryonic mesoderm in the chick embryo, is also supported byultrastructural studies (Kessel and Fabian, 1985; Murphy andCarlson, 1978).
Molecularly, the antagonistic action of Scl and dHAND (twobHLH transcription factors) seen in our experimental system is
supported by several recent findings in other systems. The role of
Scl in promoting BC/EC differentiation and in inhibiting vascular
SMC differentiation has been reported in a mouse embryoid bodydifferentiation assay (Ema et al., 2003). The mutually antagonistic
action of dHAND and Scl in muscle and endothelial lineages,
respectively, was reported in zebrafish heart development(Schoenebeck et al., 2007). Furthermore, the mutually antagonistic
specification of muscle and BC/EC lineages, with the Notch
pathway involved in promoting the muscle lineage, has beenreported in several recent in vitro and in vivo studies (Ben-Yair andKalcheim, 2008; Chen et al., 2008; Cheng et al., 2008; Cohen et al.,2008; Tang et al., 2008; Varadkar et al., 2008; Wang et al., 2007).
The precise function of the Notch pathway in the process ofmuscle and BC/EC lineage separation, however, remains to beelucidated. Our data suggest that, during chick ventral mesoderm
differentiation, the Notch pathway acts together with the BMP and
Wnt pathways, and that it plays a ‘permissive’, rather than an‘instructive’, role in mediating the separation of SMCs and BC/ECs.
The Notch pathway does not control the induction of but rather thebalance between these two populations. We provide evidence thatRESEARCH ARTICLE

601

Fig. 7. A model for the separation of SMC, EC and BC lineages,
and the role of Notch activity in separating SMC and BC/EC
lineages in relationship with those of the BMP and Wnt
pathways. (A) In this model, the main role of the BMP pathway is toventralize mesoderm. Wnt pathway activation leads to SMC induction.
The balance between SMCs and BC/ECs is mediated by the Notch
pathway. After multipotential ventral mesoderm progenitors aresegregated into dHAND-positive SMC progenitors and Scl-positive
BC/EC progenitors, mutual inhibition of dHAND and Scl leads to fate
reinforcement. BC/EC progenitors are further segregated into BCs andECs, mediated by the FGF pathway. (B) A developmental view of how
SMC, BC and EC lineages form between HH3 and HH10 in the chickembryo (colors as in A). Soon after the ingression of ventral mesoderm
progenitors through the posterior part of the primitive streak (B1), cells
are separated into Notch-activity-high and Notch-activity-low types(B2). This separation coordinates with the BMP- and Wnt-mediatedinduction of BC/EC and SMC progenitors to ensure the proper balanceof these two lineages. BC/EC progenitors coalesce to form blood
islands (B3). Blood island cells further differentiate into BCs and ECs,
and SMC progenitors form both somatic and vascular SMCs (B4).

the induction of these lineages is controlled by the activities of boththe BMP pathway, as a general ventral mesoderm inducer, and thecanonical Wnt pathway, as a strong SMC lineage inducer. Ectopic
activation of the BMP pathway can induce both SMC and BC/EC
lineages, with the balance of SMCs and BC/ECs being regulated by
Notch activity. It is not clear whether the induction of SMCs by the
BMP pathway is a direct or indirect process, or whether it requires
an active Wnt pathway. In our analysis, we observed a stronger andwider ectopic dHand induction by CA-β-Catenin than by CA-ALK6
around the anterior primitive streak where BMP antagonists arehighly expressed, which suggests that the induction of SMCs by theWnt pathway does not require active BMP signaling. A recent invitro study suggested that Notch activity promotes the degradationof Scl by facilitating its ubiquitination, and that this process requires
the transcriptional regulation of Notch pathway activity throughSuppressor of Hairless (Nie et al., 2008). Although we do not havedirect evidence in support of a similar phenomenon in our system,
it could in principle act as a possible mechanism for the Notch

DEVELOPMENT

Notch mediates SMC and BC/EC separation

RESEARCH ARTICLE

activity-mediated segregation of SMCs and BC/ECs. Furthermore,
Nrarp, in addition to serving as a Notch-activity readout and a
feedback regulator of the Notch pathway, has also been shown topositively regulate the canonical Wnt pathway by blocking theubiquitination and increasing the stability of Lef1 in zebrafish(Ishitani et al., 2005). This might also serve as a possible mechanism
for the Notch and Wnt pathway-mediated SMC specification
observed in our system.
These observations, however, leave unanswered the question,
what controls the induction of the BC/EC lineage? Two possible
scenarios could explain the obvious lack of a specific BC/ECinducing signal. One possibility is that, during normal development,
once ventral mesoderm is specified by active BMP signaling,
BC/EC differentiation takes place as a default choice. SMC
differentiation is promoted by canonical Wnt signaling and thebalance of SMCs and BC/ECs is mediated by Notch signaling. The
other possibility is that graded levels of BMP pathway activity might
have a qualitative difference in whether to induce more SMCs ormore BC/ECs. This possibility is supported by the fact that withinlateral plate and extraembryonic mesoderm, progressively moredHand-positive SMCs and less Scl-positive BC/ECs are present
dorsally (medially located), where BMP signaling becomes
progressively weaker. However, in our analysis, we did not observea correlation between phospho-Smad1/5/8 signal levels in ventral
mesoderm and either dHand- or Scl-positive signals, nor was thephospho-Smad1/5/8 level changed by either dENotch1 or DNSu(H) expression.
Taken together, we show that chick extraembryonic SMC and
BC/EC lineages are segregated early, and are marked by two bHLH
factors, dHAND and Scl, respectively. The segregation involves theNotch pathway. The Notch pathway acts together with the BMP and
Wnt pathways in coordinating mesoderm ventralization, ventral
mesoderm lineage induction and lineage segregation events.
Amniotes exhibit high degrees of conservation in mesoderm
patterning and specification. These molecular and cellular events
leading to the specification of extraembryonic lineages therefore
might not be unique to avian embryos. It will be interesting toinvestigate whether mammalian extraembryonic mesoderm
differentiation involves similar mechanisms.
We thank Drs C. Stern, S. Nishikawa, K. Choi, R. Ladher, B. McIntyre and W.
Weng for critical comments on an earlier version of the manuscript; Dr C. Alev
for sharing unpublished transcriptomic data; and Drs S. Yasugi, H. Kondoh, R.
Kopan, C. Kintner, K. Miyazono, A. Nagafuchi, C. Stern, A. Chiba, H. Niwa
and M. Howard for sharing reagents. This work was supported by an internal
grant to G.S. from RIKEN Center for Developmental Biology.
Supplementary material
Supplementary material for this article is available at
http://dev.biologists.org/cgi/content/full/136/4/595/DC1
References
Adamstone, F. B. (1948). Experiments on the development of the amnion in thechick. J. Morphol. 83, 359-371.
Baron, M. H. (2003). Embryonic origins of mammalian hematopoiesis. Exp.
Hematol. 31, 1160-1169.
Ben-Yair, R. and Kalcheim, C. (2008). Notch and bone morphogenetic protein
differentially act on dermomyotome cells to generate endothelium, smooth, andstriated muscle. J. Cell Biol. 180, 607-618.
Caprioli, A., Goitsuka, R., Pouget, C., Dunon, D. and Jaffredo, T. (2002).
Expression of Notch genes and their ligands during gastrulation in the chicken
embryo. Mech. Dev. 116, 161-164.
Chen, V. C., Stull, R., Joo, D., Cheng, X. and Keller, G. (2008). Notch signaling
respecifies the hemangioblast to a cardiac fate. Nat. Biotechnol. 26, 1169-1178.
Cheng, X., Huber, T. L., Chen, V. C., Gadue, P. and Keller, G. M. (2008). Numb
mediates the interaction between Wnt and Notch to modulate primitive
erythropoietic specification from the hemangioblast. Development 135, 34473458.

Development 136 (4)Cohen, E. D., Tian, Y. and Morrisey, E. E. (2008). Wnt signaling: an essential
regulator of cardiovascular differentiation, morphogenesis and progenitor selfrenewal. Development 135, 789-798.
Doi, H., Iso, T., Yamazaki, M., Akiyama, H., Kanai, H., Sato, H., KawaiKowase, K., Tanaka, T., Maeno, T., Okamoto, E. et al. (2005). HERP1 inhibits
myocardin-induced vascular smooth muscle cell differentiation by interferingwith SRF binding to CArG box. Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol. 25, 2328-2334.
Doi, H., Iso, T., Sato, H., Yamazaki, M., Matsui, H., Tanaka, T., Manabe, I.,
Arai, M., Nagai, R. and Kurabayashi, M. (2006). Jagged1-selective notch
signaling induces smooth muscle differentiation via a RBP-Jkappa-dependent
pathway. J. Biol. Chem. 281, 28555-28564.
Dovey, H. F., John, V., Anderson, J. P., Chen, L. Z., de Saint Andrieu, P., Fang,
L. Y., Freedman, S. B., Folmer, B., Goldbach, E., Holsztynska, E. J. et al.
(2001). Functional gamma-secretase inhibitors reduce beta-amyloid peptide
levels in brain. J. Neurochem. 76, 173-181.
Downs, K. M. (2004). Extraembryonic tissues. In Gastrulation (ed. C. D. Stern), pp.
449-459. Cold Spring Harbor, New York: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press.
Duval, M. (1889). Atlas D’embryologie. Paris, France: Libraire de l’academie demedecine.
Ema, M., Faloon, P., Zhang, W. J., Hirashima, M., Reid, T., Stanford, W. L.,
Orkin, S., Choi, K. and Rossant, J. (2003). Combinatorial effects of Flk1 andTal1 on vascular and hematopoietic development in the mouse. Genes Dev. 17,
380-393.
Gridley, T. (2007). Notch signaling in vascular development and physiology.
Development 134, 2709-2718.
High, F. A., Zhang, M., Proweller, A., Tu, L., Parmacek, M. S., Pear, W. S. andEpstein, J. A. (2007). An essential role for Notch in neural crest during
cardiovascular development and smooth muscle differentiation. J. Clin. Invest.
117, 353-363.
Howard, M., Foster, D. N. and Cserjesi, P. (1999). Expression of HAND geneproducts may be sufficient for the differentiation of avian neural crest-derived
cells into catecholaminergic neurons in culture. Dev. Biol. 215, 62-77.
Ishitani, T., Matsumoto, K., Chitnis, A. B. and Itoh, M. (2005). Nrarp functions
to modulate neural-crest-cell differentiation by regulating LEF1 protein stability.
Nat. Cell Biol. 7, 1106-1112.
Jollie, W. P. (1990). Development, morphology, and function of the yolk-sac
placenta of laboratory rodents. Teratology 41, 361-381.
Jouve, C., Iimura, T. and Pourquie, O. (2002). Onset of the segmentation clockin the chick embryo: evidence for oscillations in the somite precursors in theprimitive streak. Development 129, 1107-1117.
Kallianpur, A. R., Jordan, J. E. and Brandt, S. J. (1994). The SCL/TAL-1 gene isexpressed in progenitors of both the hematopoietic and vascular systems during
embryogenesis. Blood 83, 1200-1208.
Kessel, J. and Fabian, B. C. (1985). Graded morphogenetic patterns during thedevelopment of the extraembryonic blood system and coelom of the chickblastoderm: a scanning electron microscope and light microscope study. Am. J.
Anat. 173, 99-112.
Krebs, L. T., Deftos, M. L., Bevan, M. J. and Gridley, T. (2001). The Nrarp geneencodes an ankyrin-repeat protein that is transcriptionally regulated by thenotch signaling pathway. Dev. Biol. 238, 110-119.
Kunisato, A., Chiba, S., Saito, T., Kumano, K., Nakagami-Yamaguchi, E.,
Yamaguchi, T. and Hirai, H. (2004). Stem cell leukemia protein directs
hematopoietic stem cell fate. Blood 103, 3336-3341.
Lamar, E., Deblandre, G., Wettstein, D., Gawantka, V., Pollet, N., Niehrs, C.
and Kintner, C. (2001). Nrarp is a novel intracellular component of the Notch
signaling pathway. Genes Dev. 15, 1885-1899.
Lugus, J. J., Park, C. and Choi, K. (2005). Developmental relationship between
hematopoietic and endothelial cells. Immunol. Res. 32, 57-74.
Minko, K., Bollerot, K., Drevon, C., Hallais, M. F. and Jaffredo, T. (2003). From
mesoderm to blood islands: patterns of key molecules during yolk sac
erythropoiesis. Gene Expr. Patterns 3, 261-272.
Miyagishi, M., Fujii, R., Hatta, M., Yoshida, E., Araya, N., Nagafuchi, A.,
Ishihara, S., Nakajima, T. and Fukamizu, A. (2000). Regulation of Lefmediated transcription and p53-dependent pathway by associating beta-cateninwith CBP/p300. J. Biol. Chem. 275, 35170-35175.
Morrow, D., Scheller, A., Birney, Y. A., Sweeney, C., Guha, S., Cummins, P.
M., Murphy, R., Walls, D., Redmond, E. M. and Cahill, P. A. (2005). Notchmediated CBF-1/RBP-J{kappa}-dependent regulation of human vascular smoothmuscle cell phenotype in vitro. Am J. Physiol. Cell Physiol. 289, C1188-C1196.
Murphy, M. E. and Carlson, E. C. (1978). An ultrastructural study of developing
extracellular matrix in vitelline blood vessels of the early chick embryo. Am. J.
Anat. 151, 345-375.
Nakazawa, F., Nagai, H., Shin, M. and Sheng, G. (2006). Negative regulation ofprimitive hematopoiesis by the FGF signaling pathway. Blood 108, 3335-3343.
Nie, L., Wu, H. and Sun, X. H. (2008). Ubiquitination and degradation of
Tal1/SCL are induced by notch signaling and depend on Skp2 and CHIP. J. Biol.
Chem. 283, 684-692.
Niwa, H., Yamamura, K. and Miyazaki, J. (1991). Efficient selection for highexpression transfectants with a novel eukaryotic vector. Gene 108, 193-199.

DEVELOPMENT

602

Oppenheim, R. W. (1966). Amniotic contraction and embryonic motility in thechick embryo. Science 152, 528-529.
Pierce, M. E. (1933). The amnion of the chick as a independent effector. J. Exp.
Zool. 65, 443-473.
Proweller, A., Pear, W. S. and Parmacek, M. S. (2005). Notch signaling represses
myocardin-induced smooth muscle cell differentiation. J. Biol. Chem. 280, 89949004.
Robertson, S., Kennedy, M. and Keller, G. (1999). Hematopoietic commitment
during embryogenesis. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 872, 9-15.
Romanoff, A. L. (1960). The Avian Embryo; Structural and Functional
Development. New York: Macmillan.
Sabin, F. R. (1920). Studies on the origin of blood-vessels and of red bloodcorpuscles as seen in the living blastderm of chicks during the second day of
incubation. Carnegie Inst. Wash. Publ. Contribs. Embryol. 9, 213-262.
Sato, Y., Watanabe, T., Saito, D., Takahashi, T., Yoshida, S., Kohyama, J.,
Ohata, E., Okano, H. and Takahashi, Y. (2008). Notch mediates thesegmental specification of angioblasts in somites and their directed migration
toward the dorsal aorta in avian embryos. Dev. Cell 14, 890-901.
Schoenebeck, J. J., Keegan, B. R. and Yelon, D. (2007). Vessel and blood
specification override cardiac potential in anterior mesoderm. Dev. Cell 13, 254267.
Schroeter, E. H., Kisslinger, J. A. and Kopan, R. (1998). Notch-1 signalling requires
ligand-induced proteolytic release of intracellular domain. Nature 393, 382-386.
Srivastava, D., Thomas, T., Lin, Q., Kirby, M. L., Brown, D. and Olson, E. N.
(1997). Regulation of cardiac mesodermal and neural crest development by thebHLH transcription factor, dHAND. Nat. Genet. 16, 154-160.
Stern, C. D. (1998). Detection of multiple gene products simultaneously by in situ
hybridization and immunohistochemistry in whole mounts of avian embryos.
Curr. Top. Dev. Biol. 36, 223-243.
Streit, A. and Stern, C. D. (2001). Combined whole-mount in situ hybridizationand immunohistochemistry in avian embryos. Methods 23, 339-344.
Takahashi, N., Ishihara, S., Takada, S., Tsukita, S. and Nagafuchi, A. (2000).
Posttranscriptional regulation of alpha-catenin expression is required for Wnt
signaling in L cells. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 277, 691-698.

RESEARCH ARTICLE

603

Tang, Y., Urs, S. and Liaw, L. (2008). Hairy-related transcription factors inhibit
Notch-induced smooth muscle alpha-actin expression by interfering with Notch
intracellular domain/CBF-1 complex interaction with the CBF-1-binding site. Circ.
Res. 102, 661-668.
ten Dijke, P., Yamashita, H., Sampath, T. K., Reddi, A. H., Estevez, M., Riddle,
D. L., Ichijo, H., Heldin, C. H. and Miyazono, K. (1994). Identification of type
I receptors for osteogenic protein-1 and bone morphogenetic protein-4. J. Biol.
Chem. 269, 16985-16988.
Varadkar, P., Kraman, M., Despres, D., Ma, G., Lozier, J. and McCright, B.
(2008). Notch2 is required for the proliferation of cardiac neural crest-derived
smooth muscle cells. Dev. Dyn. 237, 1144-1152.
Vogeli, K. M., Jin, S. W., Martin, G. R. and Stainier, D. Y. (2006). A common
progenitor for haematopoietic and endothelial lineages in the zebrafish gastrula.
Nature 443, 337-339.
Wang, H., Gilner, J. B., Bautch, V. L., Wang, D. Z., Wainwright, B. J., Kirby, S.
L. and Patterson, C. (2007). Wnt2 coordinates the commitment of mesoderm
to hematopoietic, endothelial, and cardiac lineages in embryoid bodies. J. Biol.
Chem. 282, 782-791.
Weng, W., Sukowati, E. W. and Sheng, G. (2007). On hemangioblasts inchicken. PLoS ONE 2, e1228.
Wettstein, D. A., Turner, D. L. and Kintner, C. (1997). The Xenopus homolog of
Drosophila Suppressor of Hairless mediates Notch signaling during primaryneurogenesis. Development 124, 693-702.
Wu, K. C., Streicher, J., Lee, M. L., Hall, B. K. and Muller, G. B. (2001). Role ofmotility in embryonic development I: Embryo movements and amnion
contractions in the chick and the influence of illumination. J. Exp. Zool. 291,186-194.
Yamagishi, H., Olson, E. N. and Srivastava, D. (2000). The basic helix-loop-helix
transcription factor, dHAND, is required for vascular development. J. Clin. Invest.
105, 261-270.
Yu, P. B., Hong, C. C., Sachidanandan, C., Babitt, J. L., Deng, D. Y., Hoyng, S.
A., Lin, H. Y., Bloch, K. D. and Peterson, R. T. (2008). Dorsomorphin inhibits
BMP signals required for embryogenesis and iron metabolism. Nat. Chem. Biol.
4, 33-41.

DEVELOPMENT

Notch mediates SMC and BC/EC separation