| 
       
 
 |  | 
 Genetic Analysis of Variation in Neuron Number
 Richelle Cutler 
      Strom
 
 
 
    
    
    
    Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION  Throughout mammalian evolution brain size has varied from a massive 6800 
    gm in whales down to a meager 0.10 gm in shrews (Count, 1947; Jerison, 1973) 
    yet the regional organization has remained virtually the same (Butler and 
    Hodos, 1996). Indeed, upon microscopic examination of the mouse and human 
    brain Ramon y Cajal, a Nobel Laureate recognized for his detailed 
    descriptions of the nervous system, stated: "In my opinion there are only 
    quantitative differences, not qualitative differences between the brain of a 
    mouse and that of a man." The genetic differences responsible for the vast 
    differences in brain size are unknown.  Differences in brain size between species ultimately depend on the 
    accumulation of micro-evolutionary changes among the individuals within a 
    species (Butler and Hodos, 1996). Variation within a species can be 
    substantial. For example, normal variation in brain weight among humans 
    ranges two-fold, from 900 to 1,800 gm (Cobb, 1965). Even among closely 
    related strains of inbred laboratory mice brain weight differs by as much as 
    13%, from 429 mg in C3H/HeJ to 490 mg in C3H/HeSnJ. Examining the genetic 
    and developmental bases for variation in brain size within a species can 
    reveal bases for the large diversity in brain size found across species. Variation in brain weight results primarily from differences in glia and 
    neuron number. This has been demonstrated by finding a high correlation 
    between brain weight and total brain DNA (Zamenhof and van Marthens, 1978). 
    Also, neocortical neuron number in humans is correlated with brain weight (r 
    = 0.56) and with neocortical volume (r = 0.69) (Pakkenberg and 
    Gundersen, 1997). Not surprisingly, estimates of neuron numbers for discrete 
    structures within the brain are also highly variable. For example, the 
    volume and cell number in the visual cortex of humans and other primates 
    ranges almost three-fold (Gilissen and Zilles, 1996; Suner and Rakic, 1996). 
    Large variation in neuron numbers have also been found among inbred mouse 
    strains in numerous cell populations, e.g., midbrain dopaminergic neurons 
    (Ross et al., 1976); forebrain cholinergic neurons (Albanese et al., 1985); 
    and granule cell number in hippocampus area dentata (Wimer et al., 1978).
     Variation in neuron number is the result of both environmental and 
    genetic factors. A key question is how much of the variation is attributed 
    to the environment and how much is attributed to genetic factors. A 
    heritability estimate expresses the magnitude of the genetic contribution 
    and is measured as the ratio of the genetic variance over the total 
    phenotypic variance (VG/VP). 
    The heritability of brain size in humans has been estimated to be as high as 
    94% (Bartley et al., 1997). Heritability estimates for brain weight and 
    neuron number in mouse, are also high, 0.67 for brain weight (Roderick et 
    al., 1973) and 0.80 for granule cell number (Wimer and Wimer, 1989). These 
    high heritability estimates indicate that variation in brain size and neuron 
    number is generated predominantly by genetic variation. Identifying the 
    genetic variation that modulates neuron number can expose specific molecules 
    and the developmental and regulatory mechanisms controlling neuron number.   Forward genetic approach The first step to determine the genetic bases of variation is to map the 
    genomic location of the genes responsible for the phenotypic variation.
    Using phenotypic variation to map the responsible genes is known as the 
    forward genetic approach. One method for mapping a gene is linkage analysis. 
    The ability to perform linkage analysis requires genetic variation between 
    individuals. The genetic sites where DNA sequences differ between 
    individuals are called polymorphic loci, with each variant form representing 
    an allele type. Linkage analysis involves testing for an association between 
    the inheritance of a particular allele and the inheritance of a particular 
    phenotype. A strong association between an allele and a particular phenotype 
    indicates that a gene that contributes to the phenotypic variation maps near 
    the allele. The ability to use alleles as genetic markers to infer the 
    presence of a nearby gene is dependent on the physical linkage of loci on 
    chromosomes. The closer the physical proximity between two loci the less 
    likely they are to form a chiasmata between them and recombine with their 
    homologous chromosome during meiosis. The frequency that genetic loci 
    recombine translates into units of genetic distance called centimorgans (cM). 
    The frequency of recombination can be determined from the percentage of 
    non-parental allele combinations in the offspring.  Gene mapping before recombinant DNA technology required mutations that 
    exhibited prominent visible or biochemical phenotypes in the offspring to 
    carry out linkage analysis. For example, the first linkage demonstrated in 
    the mouse was between the albino (c) mutation and the pink-eyed 
    dilution (p) mutation (Haldane et al., 1915). In the last decade a 
    dense map of genetic markers called microsatellites and their ease of typing 
    by the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) has revolutionized genetic mapping. 
    Microsatellites or simple sequence repeats (SSR) consist of di- or 
    tri-nucleotide repeats, such as CACACA (Dietrich, 1992; Love, 1990) and are 
    dispersed at a high frequency throughout mammalian genomes. Over 6,000 
    microsatellites have been genetically mapped in the mouse and recently 4,000 
    of these markers were physically mapped (Dietrich et al., 1994). 
    Microsatellites have been typed in 12 inbred mouse strains and have been 
    found to be highly polymorphic between strains.  Gene mapping has been greatly facilitated by the production of genetic 
    variants produced by x-ray, chemical, and P–element induced mutations 
    (Sentry et al., 1994). In Drosophila and zebrafish, the production of 
    mutant phenotypes by mutagenesis and careful screening has lead to the 
    identification of many genes involved in neurogenesis (Sentry et al., 1994). 
    Large-scale mutagenesis screens are now underway in mouse and are expected 
    to yield a plethora of mutant phenotypes for study (Kasarskis et al., 1998). 
    However, one drawback of induced mutations that they have pleiotropic 
    effects, and many mutations will affect the viability of the animal, making 
    it difficult to study.    Exploiting natural genetic variation Of the roughly 40,000 genes expressed in the human brain, approximately 
    10–20% are expected to have multiple alleles (Silver, 1995). Almost all of 
    the heritable variation between individuals results from random segregation 
    of different alleles that produce subtle quantitative effects (Falconer and 
    Mackay, 1996). A quantitative trait, such as height, has a continuous range 
    of phenotypes in a population and is controlled by multiple genetic and 
    environmental factors. In contrast, qualitative traits have distinct 
    phenotypes, such as coat color in mice, and are controlled by one or two 
    genes with little environmental influence. Genes with allelic variants that 
    produce quantitative variation are called quantitative trait loci (QTLs). 
    Quantitative traits such as neuron number can be used in a forward genetic 
    approach to identify the location of the QTLs. Mapping a QTL is different 
    from mapping a gene with qualitative expression in that there is no 
    one-to-one relation between a genotype and a phenotype. This is because the 
    effects of other genes and environmental variation combine to produce the 
    expressed phenotype. A QTL is mapped by comparing the phenotypic means from 
    the progeny in each genotype class at every marker across the genome. 
    Linkage is suggested when there is a significant difference between the 
    means of the genotypic classes.  Mice are the ideal animal for genetic analysis, especially if the goal is 
    to extrapolate to humans. Although, the evolutionary divergence of mice and 
    humans occurred over 60 million years ago, there is still a close 
    correspondence between the genomes of mice and humans. Large segments of the 
    human and mouse genomes are conserved and the differences found today can be 
    explained by breaking the mouse genome into roughly 130 segments and 
    shuffling them into a new order (Nadeau and Taylor, 1984). The existence of 
    a great variety of inbred mouse strains, which represent a wealth of 
    quantitative variation, is crucial in a quantitative genetic analysis. Mice 
    from a particular inbred strain are genetically identical or isogenic. 
    Phenotyping a number of isogenic mice to obtain a strain average can 
    minimize the variance due to environmental factors, measurement errors, or 
    developmental factors, resulting in a more accurate mean phenotype. Mice are 
    usually inbred by at least 20 generations of brother and sister mating. 
    Inbreeding forces the alleles to become homozygous at all loci. Finally, in 
    consideration of time and cost, mice reproduce quickly and are relatively 
    inexpensive to house.   Dissertation research In my dissertation research, I use the forward genetic approach to assess 
    and dissect genetic sources of variation in neuron number. I have focused on 
    variation in neuron number on a global scale by using the surrogate measure 
    of whole brain weight. I have also focused on variation within a discrete 
    neuron population, the retinal ganglion cells. I began my studies by 
    determining the relative proportion of variance in brain weight and ganglion 
    cell number that is due to environmental and genetic factors (Chapters 2 and 
    4). Subsequently, I used linkage analysis with composite interval mapping 
    techniques to pursue QTLs that are responsible for genetic variation in 
    brain weight and ganglion cell number (Chapters 3 and 5). To identify the 
    developmental mechanisms generating variation in neuron number I have 
    examined the role of cell production and cell death in the generation of 
    ganglion cell variation among mouse strains (Chapter 6). In the next section I address the behavioral significance of variation in 
    brain size and neuron number. Finally, I conclude this introduction with a 
    summary of molecular neural development to acquaint the reader with the 
    processes in which QTLs might be involved to produce variation in neuron 
    number.    Please note that although I present the work in Chapters 4 and 5 using 
    the first person singular pronoun, this work is actually the result of 
    collaboration with Robert Williams, Dan Goldowitz, and Dennis Rice. For the 
    most part, the methods and results in Chapters 4 and 5 match those in recent 
    published papers. Differences include the addition of new strains and larger 
    numbers of cases per strain and as a result I have also reanalyzed most of 
    the data.   Importance of neuron number Brain weight Brain tissue is metabolically costly and an increase in brain size should 
    be counterbalanced by an increased capacity for behavioral adaptations 
    (Williams and Herrup, 1988). Increased neuron number is usually associated 
    with more elaborate neural networks that have evolved for novel sensory or 
    behavioral adaptations required for exploiting new ecological niches. The 
    behavioral significance of variation in brain size is readily apparent 
    across species, where more complex behaviors are generally associated with 
    larger brains (Aboitiz, 1996). However, within species behavioral 
    associations with variation in brain size are less evident. Controversial 
    findings have been reported in humans, with positive correlation between 
    cerebral volume measured by MRI and IQ in children (Reiss et al., 1996), but 
    the absence of a correlation between forebrain volume, also measured by MRI, 
    and IQ in young adults (Tramo et al., 1998). The disparity may have to do 
    with the differences in the age of the subjects. Older subjects harbor the 
    effects of years of environmental variance, as well as an extended period of 
    brain growth, which could dissolve any initial correlation between brain 
    size and IQ. In mice, high and low brain weight lines, generated by selective 
    breeding, initially showed behavioral differences in field activity, but 
    these differences disappeared in later generations (Wimer et al., 1969). A 
    recent study with rats reported a high correlation between general 
    intelligence and brain weight (Anderson, 1993). In summary, an association 
    with brain weight and behavior within a species is inconclusive and the 
    outcome of individual studies may depend on the particular structures 
    responsible for differences in brain size and the appropriateness of the 
    behavioral tests.    Discrete populations  Behavioral associations are found with the size of discrete neuronal 
    populations. The relative size of the hippocampus has been shown to be 
    associated with spatial memory capacity in species of passerines, cowbirds 
    (Healy and Krebs, 1996; Reboreda et al., 1996), and kangaroo rats (Jacobs 
    and Spencer, 1994). In males of many seasonally breeding songbird species 
    the volume of the song nuclei, hyperstriatum ventralis, pars caudalis (HVc) 
    and archistriatum (RA), increases along with their singing ability during 
    each breeding season (Smith et al., 1997). In male zebra finches, 
    neuron number and the volume of HVc and RA in an individual correlates 
    positively with the number of tutor syllables copied (Ward et al., 1998). 
    Moreover, in humans, cerebellum volume significantly correlates with the 
    individual’s verbal memory and fine motor dexterity (Paradiso et al., 1997). 
    In conclusion, there is a strong association between the number of neurons 
    in a discrete population and its behavioral output, particularly if 
    the behavior is important for survival.  Numbers of retinal ganglion cells range from fifty thousand in nocturnal 
    rodents to several million in diurnal birds and primates (Rager and Rager, 
    1978; Rakic and Riley, 1983). Variation is also marked within species: 
    numbers range from 0.7 to 1.5 million in humans (Curcio and Allen, 1990), 
    and from 40,000 to 80,000 in mice (Williams et al., 1996). It is not known 
    whether visual acuity differs in animals with high and low ganglion 
    cell number. However, visual acuity in glaucoma patients is compromised 
    after a small decrease in ganglion cell number (Quigley et al., 1989). The 
    difference in visual acuity will depend on what classes of ganglion cells 
    are variable. There are three major morphological classes of ganglion cells 
    in the mammalian retina (alpha, beta, and gamma)(Rodieck and Brening, 1983). 
    The extent of variability within the represented classes of ganglion cells 
    has not been studied. However, the numbers of beta and gamma cells are 
    likely to be the most variable since they are the most numerous, with each 
    representing roughly 45% to 50% of the ganglion cell population in several 
    species (Wässle and Boycott, 1991; Williams et al., 1993). The high density 
    and short dendritic fields of the gamma ganglion cell class are thought to 
    set the limit for spatial resolution (Wässle and Boycott, 1991) and thus, 
    even moderate variation in the density of this class should affect visual 
    acuity. The two-fold variation in ganglion cell number among mice is 
    significantly associated with retinal area (r = 67, t = 269,
    P <0.001) (Rice et al., 1995), and thus cells per degree of visual 
    angle, the critical factor determining visual acuity, may not change with 
    increased cell number. 
 Developmental control of neuron number Neuron number in the brain  The number of neurons in the adult central nervous system results from a 
    balance between cell proliferation and developmental cell death. While there 
    is considerable cell death in most vertebrate brains, the major process 
    defining brain size in a species is neurogenesis. Neural progenitors 
    originate from the embryonic ectoderm. The neural fate is the default 
    pathway for embryonic ectoderm. The switch from the neural fate into the 
    epidermal fate is initiated by an endogenous inhibitory signal within the 
    ectoderm, possibly BMP-4 (Hemmati-Brivanlou and Melton, 1997). Release from 
    the neural inhibitory signal may be mediated by follistatin, secreted from 
    the mesoderm.  Once cells are committed to the neural fate they coalesce to form the 
    neural plate. The neural plate then invaginates along the neuroaxis, folds 
    inward, and fuses to form the neural tube. In the neural tube, 
    neuroepithelial cells divide in the ventricular zone, leave the cell cycle, 
    and migrate outward to reside in the appropriate cell layers. In 
    neurogenesis, a complex molecular cascade controls the progressive hierarchy 
    of cell fate competence that ultimately leads to a specific cell type in the 
    appropriate place and numbers.  In mice, neocortical neurons are generated from a founding population in 
    the pseudostratified ventricular epithelium (PVE) between embryonic day 11 
    (E11) and E17. During this interval of neurogenesis there are an average of 
    eleven cell cycles, which increase the number in the founding population by 
    140 fold (Takahashi et al., 1995). At the onset of neurogenesis neural 
    progenitors undergo symmetrical divisions in which both daughter cells 
    return to the cell cycle (Rakic, 1988). During this time, cells increase in 
    number exponentially. As development proceeds the neural progenitors begin 
    to divide asymmetrically, with one daughter cell leaving the cell cycle and 
    differentiating while the other daughter cell continues to divide. 
    Gradually, as the neurogenesis proceeds, both daughter cells will cease to 
    divide and differentiate. The portion of the population that remains 
    proliferative represents the P fraction, and is equal to 1 when all cells 
    are dividing, while the portion of cells leaving the cell cycle represents 
    the Q fraction, for quiescent, and is equal to 1 when all cells have ceased 
    to divide (Takahashi et al., 1997).  Developmental mechanisms for variability. Variability in neuron 
    numbers could result from differences in the (1) number of founding neural 
    progenitors, (2) parameters of the cell cycle, and (3) duration of cell 
    proliferation. The variation of Purkinje cell number among chimeric mice 
    produced between wildtype mice and lurcher, a mouse mutant whose 
    Purkinje cell population is completely absent, appears to occur in quantum 
    units equal to 10,200 cells. The integral units suggest that variation in 
    Purkinje cell number results from differences in the initial proliferative 
    fraction of wildtype progenitors (Wetts and Herrup, 1983). Quantum 
    differences in the Purkinje cell number in chimeras made between the mouse 
    strains C57BL/6 and AKR/J has also demonstrated that variation can result 
    from differences in the initial clone size of progenitors (Herrup, 1986). 
    These studies suggest that differences in cell number can originate from 
    differences in the number of early progenitors, probably arising during 
    regionalization of the neural plate or neural tube.  Variability in parameters of the cell cycle. Variation in neuron 
    number could result from differences in the parameters of the cell cycle. 
    One such parameter is the rate at which proliferative fraction Q approaches 
    1, which could be a major factor in controlling the number of neurons 
    generated (Takahashi et al., 1997). In the mouse neocortex the Q fraction 
    equals 0.5 at cell cycle number 8. However, if the cell cycle at which Q 
    equals 0.5 were delayed from 8 to 10 the population would expand 5–fold. The 
    number of neurons generated is also determined by the progressive increase 
    in the length of the cell cycle. During the period of neocortical 
    neurogenesis in mouse, the length of the cell cycle increases from ~8.1 
    hours to ~18.4 hours. This increased cycle time is a result of a 4-fold 
    increase in the length of G1 (Takahashi et al., 1995). A broad range in the 
    length of G1 has been found among different cell populations (Jacobson, 
    1991).  In primates the striate visual cortex has a higher density of neurons 
    compared to other cortical areas. The differences in cell number between the 
    striate and extrastriate cortex was shown to result from a higher 
    proliferative fraction, but also from a higher portion of cells cycling, as 
    shown by 3H-thymidine pulse labeling (Dehay et al., 1993). The proliferative 
    portion, known as the labeling index, was 50% higher in the striate cortex 
    than in the extrastriate. The authors concluded that differences in the 
    mitotic rate must have produced the difference in the labeling index, 
    however an equally plausible explanation is a difference in the progression 
    of Q. Nevertheless, it is not known whether variability in the rate of Q or 
    variability in the length of the cell cycle contributes to variation in cell 
    number. Variability in the number of cycles can have a large impact on cell 
    number. For example, if the number of cell cycles doubled while the relative 
    progression rate of P to Q was the same, the population would increase 
    60-fold. Of course, an increase in the cell cycle number, and consequently 
    the duration of neurogenesis, means that the over all progression of Q is 
    slower. It has been known for some time that the large differences in neuron 
    number found between species is best explained by differences in the period 
    of neurogenesis (Passingham, 1975). A recent study confirmed this finding by 
    finding a high correlation between the peak day of neurogenesis and the size 
    of 51 brain structures among 7 different mammals (Finlay and Darlington, 
    1995).  Extrinsic signals in cell cycle control. Although much is known about 
    cell cycle mechanics and the molecular components, little is known about the 
    regulatory mechanisms governing variation in the exit from the cell cycle 
    (Ross, 1996). In vertebrates the decision of a neural precursor to leave the 
    cell cycle during development involves the Notch signaling pathway (Beatus 
    and Lendahl, 1998). Notch, a transmembrane protein, and its ligands, Delta 
    and Serrate, are the mediators of cell-cell interactions that control the 
    competence of neighboring cells. Through a process called lateral 
    inhibition, a prospective neuron expressing Delta or Serrate on its cell 
    surface binds the Notch receptor on a neighboring cell thereby activating 
    the cell’s Notch pathway, which inhibits cell differentiation and holds them 
    in a proliferative state. Growth factors may regulate the expression of 
    genes in the Notch pathway. For example, the epidermal growth factor (EGF), 
    which can induce widespread proliferation of neuronal precursors in the 
    brain (Kuhn et al., 1997), was recently shown in the developing retina to 
    down regulate Mash-1, a proneural factor within the Notch signaling pathway 
    (Ahmad et al., 1998). A connection between EGF and Notch suggests that one 
    way growth factors may act is by down regulating the Notch pathway, thereby 
    holding cells in a proliferative state. Other extrinsic factors such as 
    retinoic acid and thyroid hormone influence the extent of cell proliferation 
    in the brain by inducing the withdrawal from the cell cycle and subsequent 
    differentiation (Jacobson, 1991; Kelley et al., 1994). How the expression 
    patterns and concentration levels of specific growth factors and hormones 
    are regulated to set proliferative limits to defined populations of neurons 
    is not known.  Finally, extrinsic factors ultimately regulate the progression of the 
    cell cycle by inhibiting or promoting the build up of cyclins and the 
    activity of their dependent kinases (Hutchinson and Glover, 1995). The 
    complete pathway between the proliferative effects of growth factors and 
    hormones and their effectors within the cell cycle during neurogenesis 
    remain to be mapped out. In summary, the developmental control of neuron 
    number involves a complex collaboration of molecular pathways that converge 
    to determine the progression of the cell cycle through specific checkpoints.   Retinal ganglion cell development In mouse the neural retina is part of the brain, comprising ~0.4% of the 
    brain’s weight. The eyes begin to form in the mouse around E9 with the 
    bilateral out-pocketing of the forebrain into a structure called the optic 
    vesicle (Mann, 1964; Pei and Rhodin, 1970). The optic vesicle grows outward 
    toward the surface ectoderm and then invaginates to form the optic cup. The 
    optic cup then separates into an inner portion, the neural retina and an 
    outer portion, the pigment epithelium.  Proliferating retinal cells migrate in a to-and-fro pattern, moving to 
    the inner retina to synthesize DNA and then back to the outer retina to 
    divide. During retinal development the percentage of proliferating cells (P) 
    decreases as cells from asymmetric divisions leave the cell cycle, migrate 
    toward the vitreal surface and differentiate. The neural retina develops 
    into three distinct cell layers, a ganglion cell layer, a bipolar layer and 
    an inner photoreceptor layer. The onset of differentiation for retinal cells 
    occurs in a temporally-ordered manner, with retinal ganglion cells, amacrine 
    cells, and horizontal cells beginning to differentiate early, while 
    photoreceptors, bipolar cells and Müller glia cells begin to differentiate 
    later (Sidman, 1961). Although the generation of cell types begin and peak 
    at different times the cell types are being generated simultaneously 
    throughout most of the developmental period. In mouse, ganglion cells start 
    to differentiate on E11 and continue until just before birth (Dräger, 1985). 
    Developmental cell death of ganglion cells begins at, or just before, 
    birth, peaks between postnatal days 4–6, and is essentially complete by P12 
    (Linden and Pinto, 1985; Young, 1984). Variation in ganglion cell number 
    could result from differences in the extent of ganglion cell production or 
    ganglion cell death. Variability in ganglion cell production. Variation in ganglion cell 
    production could result from differences in: (1) numbers of retinal 
    progenitor cells, (2) the kinetics and duration of progenitor cell 
    proliferation, or (3) bias in cell fate determination in progenitors. The 
    variance of retinal cell numbers in embryonic chick to peaked during the 
    exponential phase of cell division and were lowest after cell 
    differentiation (Morris and Cowan, 1984). A regression analysis of the 
    variance in cell number at the start of incubation and growth rate indicated 
    that the variation in the exponential phase was due mostly to the variance 
    in the number of retinal progenitors at the start of incubation. However, 
    variation in retinal cell number at the start of incubation could result 
    from subtle differences in the correspondence of the developmental stage and 
    not necessarily to the variability in the number of retinal progenitors Variance in numbers of multipotent retinal progenitors should have 
    consistent effects on the number of many retinal cell types. However, a 
    comparison of horizontal cell and ganglion cell numbers for six strains has 
    demonstrated that ratios in these early-generated cell types are not always 
    matched (Williams et al., 1998). In fact, preliminary data indicates a weak 
    negative correlation exists between the number of ganglion cells and 
    photoreceptors within inbred strains (Williams et al., 1998). If true, that 
    would suggest that a reciprocal relationship exists between early- and 
    late-generated retinal cell types and that variation in ganglion cell number 
    is produced by differentiation bias. An example of the reciprocal 
    relationship between retinal cell types is found when the inhibition of 
    Notch signaling results in an increase of early-generated cell types at the 
    expense of later-generated cell types (Dorsky et al., 1997). It is possible 
    that a genetic bias in the Notch signaling pathway may play a role in 
    executing the differentiation ratios of retinal cell types.  Variation in the ganglion cell number could result from differences in 
    the proliferation kinetics of progenitors that give rise to ganglion cells. 
    The rates of mitosis may be influenced through inhibitory molecules and 
    pathways. One example is dopa—a tyrosine metabolite that normally has 
    inhibitory effects on cell genesis in the retina. The absence of dopa in 
    albino rats leads to an anomalous up-regulation of ganglion cell production 
    followed by an increase in the severity of cell death (Ilia and Jeffery, 
    1999). Finally, as with brain weight, large differences between 
    species within a defined population is best explained by differences in the 
    duration of neurogenesis. For example, a two-fold difference in the duration 
    of retinal neurogenesis can explain the near two-fold difference in retinal 
    ganglion cell number between gerbil and hamster (Wikler et al., 1989).  Variability in ganglion cell death. Differences in cell death can 
    produce large differences in cell number across species. Estimates of 
    retinal ganglion cell death range from none at all in fish to 40% in 
    chicken, 50–60% in rat (Lam et al., 1982), and up to 80% in cat (Williams et 
    al., 1986). The ganglion cell population in the domestic cat is 30% lower 
    than that of wildcat —the species from which the domestic cat has evolved. 
    Retinal ganglion cell number in a Spanish wildcat fetus and domestic cat 
    fetus obtained at E38, were remarkably close, suggesting that cell death 
    rather than cell production generates the marked species differences 
    (Williams et al., 1993). Variation in the severity of cell death may result from differences in 
    titers of neurotrophic factors. The neurotrophins—BDNF and 
    neurotrophin-3/4—have been found to increase survival of retinal ganglion 
    cells in chicken and rat (Ma et al., 1998; Rosa et al., 1993). Neuregulin, 
    found on the cell surface and as a secreted protein, can also increase 
    survival of neonatal rat retinal ganglion cells (Bermingham-McDonogh 
    et al., 1996). Differences in the concentration or expression time of these 
    neurotrophic factors, their receptors, or components within their signaling 
    pathways could produce variation in the severity of naturally occurring 
    ganglion cell death.  In summary, the generation of variation in cell number could involve any 
    of the molecular processes described above. Determining the genetic bases of 
    variation in neuron number could identify key regulatory genes in 
    neurogenesis, which may lead to a greater understanding of cell-cycle 
    regulation. In addition, examining the molecular variants in the QTLs that 
    produce natural variation in neuron number will lead to a better 
    understanding of the genetic bases of quantitative variation and provide 
    insight into the molecular nature of brain evolution. 
 
    Return to Table of Contents
     |  |  |