That subset has self-renewal and differentiation characteristics akin to NSCs, while the second subset, with attenuated CBF1-Hes1/5 signaling, is composed of neurogenic INPs. Interestingly, shRNA-mediated knockdown of CBF1 in vivo caused a shift from NSC to INP character, suggesting that the regulation of CBF1 activity plays a causal role in the generation of INPs from NSCs. Consistent with this contention, others have shown selleck compound that blocking the processing and activation of Notch receptors via treatment of neocortical slices with DAPT (a γ-secretase inhibitor) leads to a shift from

“apical progenitors” (VZ cells) to “basal progenitors” (Tbr2+ cells) (Kawaguchi et al., 2008a). In addition, a recent study found, Selleckchem Akt inhibitor using the neurosphere assay and gene expression analysis, that deletion of CBF1 in neocortical progenitors leads to a shift from NSC to INP fate (Gao et al., 2009). In vivo, NSCs and INPs coexist in the VZ (Gal et al., 2006 and Mizutani et al., 2007), although currently little is known about how those cell types segregate during development,

how Notch signaling functions in INPs, and how INPs in the VZ are related to INPs in the SVZ. As mentioned above, disruption of Mib1 in the mammalian neocortex has suggested that INPs provide a ligand-mediated signal that can activate Notch receptors on NSCs (Yoon et al., 2008). Yoon and colleagues used the TNR line mentioned above (Mizutani et al., 2007) to segregate NSCs and INPs by flow cytometry, and showed that Tbr2 and Mib1 are highly enriched in INPs, and that when cocultured with responder cells, INPs (but not NSCs) activated Notch signaling in trans. Additional see more evidence for Notch pathway heterogeneity among neocortical VZ cells has come from single-cell gene expression profiling and cluster analysis, which identified two distinct cell types in the VZ that differ with respect to expression of Notch pathway components (Kawaguchi et al., 2008a). Furthermore, a transgenic mouse designed to express EGFP from a portion of the

Hes5 promoter exhibits heterogeneity of expression in the VZ, some of which appears columnar in nature (Basak and Taylor, 2007), consistent with our own findings suggesting that contiguous cohorts of VZ cells are heterogeneous with respect to Notch-CBF1 usage (Mizutani et al., 2007). As expression of Notch receptors and targets is largely restricted to the VZ during development (Irvin et al., 2001 and Mason et al., 2005), it seems unlikely that Notch activation plays a major role in the regulation of INPs in the SVZ. Our understanding of the roles of Notch signaling during the generation of neural stem and progenitor heterogeneity, and in differentially regulating those cells, is still in its infancy. It has become clear, however, that the traditional model of Notch as regulating the balance between proliferative cells and differentiated cells was oversimplified.