BackgroundAmeloblasts are epithelially derived cells responsible for enamel formation through a process known as amelogenesis. Amongst the several transcription factors that are expressed during amelogenesis, both Msx2 and Sp6 transcription factors play important role. Msx2 and Sp6 mouse mutants, exhibit similar amelogenesis defects, namely enamel hypoplasia, while humans with amelogenesis imperfecta (AI) carry mutations in the human homologues of MSX2 or SP6 genes. These across species similarities in function indicate that these two transcription factors may reside in the same developmental pathway. In this paper, we test whether they work in a coordinated manner to exert their effect during amelogenesis.MethodsTwo different dental epithelial cell lines, the mouse LS8 and the rat G5 were used for either overexpression or silencing of Msx2 or Sp6 or both. Msx2 mutant mouse embryos or pups were used for in vivo studies. In situ hybridization, semi-quantitative and quantitative real time PCR were employed to study gene expression pattern. MatInspector was used to identify several potential putative Msx2 binding sites upstream of the murine Sp6 promoter region. Chromatin Immunoprecipitation (chIP) was used to confirm the binding of Msx2 to Sp6 promoter at the putative sites.ResultsUsing the above methods we identified that (i) Msx2 and Sp6 exhibit overlapping expression in secretory ameloblasts, (ii) Sp6 expression is reduced in the Msx2 mouse mutant secretoty ameloblasts, and (iii) that Msx2, like Sp6 inhibits follistatin expression. Specifically, our loss-of function studies by silencing Msx2 and/or Sp6 in mouse dental epithelial (LS8) cells showed significant downregulation of Sp6 but upregulation of Fst expression. Transient transfection of Msx2 overexpression plasmid, up-regulated Sp6 and downregulated Fst expression. Additionally, using MatInspector, we identified several potential putative Msx2 binding sites, 3.5 kb upstream of the murine Sp6 promoter region. By chIP, we confirmed the binding of Msx2 to Sp6 promoter at these sites, thus suggesting that Sp6 is a direct target of Msx2.ConclusionCollectively, these results show that Sp6 and Msx2 work in a concerted manner to form part of a network of transcription factors that operate during later stages of tooth development controlling ameloblast life cycle and amelogenesis.

Mice lacking amelogenin (KO) have hypoplastic enamel. Overexpression of the most abundant amelogenin splice variant M180 and LRAP transgenes can substantially improve KO enamel, but only ~40% of the incisor thickness is recovered and the prisms are not as tightly woven as in WT enamel. This implies that the compositional complexity of the enamel matrix is required for different aspects of enamel formation, such as organizational structure and thickness. The question arises, therefore, how important the ratio of different matrix components, and in particular amelogenin splice products, is in enamel formation. Can optimal expression levels of amelogenin transgenes representing both the most abundant splice variants and cleavage product at protein levels similar to that of WT improve the enamel phenotype of KO mice? Addressing this question, our objective was here to understand dosage effects of amelogenin transgenes (Tg) representing the major splice variants M180 and LRAP and cleavage product CTRNC on enamel properties. Amelogenin KO mice were mated with M180Tg, CTRNCTg and LRAPTg mice to generate M180Tg and CTRNCTg double transgene and M180Tg, CTRNCTg, LRAPTg triple transgene mice with transgene hemizygosity (on one allelle) or homozygosity (on both alleles). Transgene homo- vs. hemizygosity was determined by qPCR and relative transgene expression confirmed by Western blot. Enamel volume and mineral density were analyzed by microCT, thickness and structure by SEM, and mechanical properties by Vickers microhardness testing. There were no differences in incisor enamel thickness between amelogenin KO mice with three or two different transgenes, but mice homozygous for a given transgene had significantly thinner enamel than mice hemizygous for the transgene (p < 0.05). The presence of the LRAPTg did not improve the phenotype of M180Tg/CTRNCTg/KO enamel. In the absence of endogenous amelogenin, the addition of amelogenin transgenes representing the most abundant splice variants and cleavage product can rescue abnormal enamel properties and structure, but only up to a maximum of ~80% that of molar and ~40% that of incisor wild-type enamel.

Amelogenin is the most abundant enamel protein involved in enamel mineralization. Our goal was to determine whether all three regions of amelogenin (N-terminus, C-terminus, central core) are required for enamel formation. Amelogenin RNA is alternatively spliced, resulting in at least 16 different amelogenin isoforms in mice, with M180 and LRAP expressed most abundantly. Soon after secretion by ameloblasts, M180 is cleaved by MMP20 resulting in C-terminal truncated (CTRNC) amelogenin. We aimed to determine whether the 2 transgenes (Tg), LRAP and CTRNC together, can improve LRAPTg/Amelx-/- and CTRNCTg/Amelx-/- enamel thickness and prism organization, which were not rescued in Amelx-/- enamel. We generated CTRNCTg/LRAPTg/Amelx-/- mice and analyzed developing and mature incisor and molar enamel histologically, by microCT, SEM and microhardness testing. CTRNCTg and LRAPTg overexpression together significantly improved the enamel phenotype of LRAPTg/Amelx-/- and CTRNCTg/Amelx-/- mouse enamel, however enamel microhardness was recovered only when M180Tg was expressed, alone or with LRAPTg. We determined that both LRAP and CTRNC, which together express all three regions of the amelogenin protein (N-terminus, C-terminus and hydrophobic core) contribute to the final enamel thickness and prism organization in mice.

Bmp4 expression is tightly regulated during embryonic tooth development, with early expression in the dental epithelial placode leading to later expression in the dental mesenchyme. Msx1 is among several transcription factors that are induced by epithelial Bmp4 and that, in turn, are necessary for the induction and maintenance of dental mesenchymal Bmp4 expression. Thus, Msx1-/- teeth arrest at early bud stage and show loss of Bmp4 expression in the mesenchyme. Ectopic expression of Bmp4 rescues this bud stage arrest. We have identified Tbx2 expression in the dental mesenchyme at bud stage and show that this can be induced by epithelial Bmp4. We also show that endogenous Tbx2 and Msx1 can physically interact in mouse C3H10T1/2 cells. In order to ascertain a functional relationship between Msx1 and Tbx2 in tooth development, we crossed Tbx2 and Msx1 mutant mice. Our data show that the bud stage tooth arrest in Msx1-/- mice is partially rescued in Msx1-/-;Tbx2+/- compound mutants. This rescue is accompanied by formation of the enamel knot (EK) and by restoration of mesenchymal Bmp4 expression. Finally, knockdown of Tbx2 in C3H10T1/2 cells results in an increase in Bmp4 expression. Together, these data identify a novel role for Tbx2 in tooth development and suggest that, following their induction by epithelial Bmp4, Msx1 and Tbx2 in turn antagonistically regulate odontogenic activity that leads to EK formation and to mesenchymal Bmp4 expression at the key bud-to-cap stage transition.