Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About MCB
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Molecular and Cellular Biology
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About MCB
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
MAMMALIAN GENETIC MODELS WITH MINIMAL OR COMPLEX PHENOTYPES

TIEG1 Null Mouse-Derived Osteoblasts Are Defective in Mineralization and in Support of Osteoclast Differentiation In Vitro

Malayannan Subramaniam, Genevieve Gorny, Steven A. Johnsen, David G. Monroe, Glenda L. Evans, Daniel G. Fraser, David J. Rickard, Kay Rasmussen, Jan M. A. van Deursen, Russell T. Turner, Merry Jo Oursler, Thomas C. Spelsberg
Malayannan Subramaniam
1Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: subramaniam.malayannan@mayo.edu
Genevieve Gorny
1Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Steven A. Johnsen
2Zentrum für Molekulare Neurobiologie, Universität Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
David G. Monroe
1Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Glenda L. Evans
3Orthopedic Research
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Daniel G. Fraser
4Department of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
David J. Rickard
5Musculoskeletal Diseases Biology, GlaxoSmithKline, Collegeville, Pennsylvania
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kay Rasmussen
1Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jan M. A. van Deursen
6Division of Endocrinology, Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Russell T. Turner
3Orthopedic Research
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Merry Jo Oursler
4Department of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Thomas C. Spelsberg
1Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1128/MCB.25.3.1191-1199.2005
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • FIG. 1.
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG. 1.

    Mouse knockout construct and verification of TIEG1 null mutation. (A) Generation of the TIEG1 null allele (bottom panel) by homologous recombination between the targeting vector (middle panel) and wild-type allele (top panel). In the recombinant allele, the 1.8-kb Neor cassette replaces ca. 5.5 kb of genomic TIEG1 sequence, including exons 1 and 2. The locations of the 5′ and 3′ probes used in Southern analysis screening of transfected ES cell clones are indicated in the top panel. (B) PCR genotyping of mice generated from the mating of heterozygous TIEG1 mutant mice. The arrows indicate the products produced from the wild-type and mutant alleles. (C) Southern blot analysis was performed on genomic DNA from wild-type (TIEG+/+), heterozygous (TIEG+/−), and homozygous (TIEG−/−) TIEG1 mutant mice to verify genotypes. (D) In order to verify loss of TIEG1 expression, Northern analysis was performed as described in Materials and Methods. RNA was extracted from OBs grown in serum-free medium and treated with 2 ng of TGF-β/ml indicated times. (E) Immunoprecipitation analysis was performed from 35S-labeled cell lysates with TIEG-specific polyclonal antibody to demonstrate that TIEG−/− mice did not express TIEG1 protein.

  • FIG. 2.
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG. 2.

    Histomorphometric analysis of mice. (A) Cell count for osteoblast and osteoclasts per surface area in cancellous bone (in millimeters). (B) Tissue and cellular measurements. The units differ for each data set and were as follows: LS/BS, the percentage of labeled cancellous bone surface per total measured cancellous bone surface; BFR/BS, the amount of new bone formed per week expressed as the percentage of bone surface; BFR/TV, the amount of new bone formed per week expressed as a percentage of total tissue volume; BV/TV, the percentage of cancellous bone volume per measured tissue volume; MAR, mineral apposition rate (>1 μm/week). Data are the means of 5 (+/+) or 6 (−/−) animals ± the SEM. ❋, P < 0.05.

  • FIG. 3.
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG. 3.

    TIEG+/+ and TIEG−/− OBs were plated onto 96-well plates and the cells were grown for 24, 48, and 72 h at 37°C. The proliferation of these cells were measured by using cell titer 96 “the Aqueous One solution for cell proliferation assay” as described in Materials and Methods. An average of six replicates of each were graphed.

  • FIG. 4.
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG. 4.

    TIEG+/+ and TIEG−/− OBs were grown in differentiation medium with or without BMP2 for 18 days and stained with alizarin red to visualize the bone nodules.

  • FIG. 5.
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG. 5.

    Total RNA was isolated from TIEG+/+ and TIEG−/− OBs grown in culture, and RT-PCR was performed for osteoblast-specific marker genes. (A) Agarose gel of the RT-PCR products as visualized with ethidium bromide. (B) RT-PCR was performed on five separate calvarial RNA isolates, and the results were scanned and quantitated by using NIH Image. The data are the means ± the SEM of these analyses normalized to GAPDH expression. ❋, P < 0.05 (comparing TIEG+/+ to TIEG−/− OBs).

  • FIG. 6.
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG. 6.

    Knockout OBs are impaired in supporting osteoclast differentiation. Neonatal calvarium-derived osteoblasts from TIEG+/+ and TIEG−/− mice were cultured with either marrow or spleen osteoclast precursors from TIEG+/+ mice in the presence of vitamin D and dexamethasone for 9 days as described in the text. The data are means ± the SEM of three replicate wells from one experiment. The experiment was performed four times, and these data are representative of the results. ❋, P < 0.05 (comparing TIEG+/+ to TIEG−/− calvarial cells).

  • FIG. 7.
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG. 7.

    The RANKL/OPG ratio is lower in TIEG−/− cells than in TIEG+/+ cells. Calvarial cells were cultured with (treated) vitamin D and dexamethasone or without treatment (control), followed by RNA isolation as described in the text. Real-time PCR was performed to quantitate the M-CSF, RANKL, and OPG expression relative to tubulin, and the ratio of RANKL to OPG was determined. ❋, P < 0.05 (comparing TIEG+/+ to TIEG−/− calvarial cells).

  • FIG. 8.
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG. 8.

    RANKL partly, but not completely, restores TIEG−/− calvarial cell ability to support osteoclast differentiation. TIEG+/+ and TIEG−/− calvarial cells were cultured with TIEG+/+ marrow in the presence of the hormones and/or growth factors indicated at the bottom of the figure. ❋, P < 0.05 (comparing TIEG+/+ to TIEG−/− calvarial OB cells); §, P < 0.05 [comparing vitamin D and dexamethasone alone to addition of the indicated growth factor(s)].

PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
TIEG1 Null Mouse-Derived Osteoblasts Are Defective in Mineralization and in Support of Osteoclast Differentiation In Vitro
Malayannan Subramaniam, Genevieve Gorny, Steven A. Johnsen, David G. Monroe, Glenda L. Evans, Daniel G. Fraser, David J. Rickard, Kay Rasmussen, Jan M. A. van Deursen, Russell T. Turner, Merry Jo Oursler, Thomas C. Spelsberg
Molecular and Cellular Biology Jan 2005, 25 (3) 1191-1199; DOI: 10.1128/MCB.25.3.1191-1199.2005

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this Molecular and Cellular Biology article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
TIEG1 Null Mouse-Derived Osteoblasts Are Defective in Mineralization and in Support of Osteoclast Differentiation In Vitro
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Molecular and Cellular Biology
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Molecular and Cellular Biology.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
TIEG1 Null Mouse-Derived Osteoblasts Are Defective in Mineralization and in Support of Osteoclast Differentiation In Vitro
Malayannan Subramaniam, Genevieve Gorny, Steven A. Johnsen, David G. Monroe, Glenda L. Evans, Daniel G. Fraser, David J. Rickard, Kay Rasmussen, Jan M. A. van Deursen, Russell T. Turner, Merry Jo Oursler, Thomas C. Spelsberg
Molecular and Cellular Biology Jan 2005, 25 (3) 1191-1199; DOI: 10.1128/MCB.25.3.1191-1199.2005
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

KEYWORDS

Bone Morphogenetic Proteins
cell differentiation
DNA-Binding Proteins
osteoblasts
Osteoclasts
transcription factors
Transforming Growth Factor beta

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About MCB
  • Editor in Chief
  • Editorial Board
  • Policies
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Article Types
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #MCBJournal

@ASMicrobiology

       

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

Print ISSN: 0270-7306; Online ISSN: 1098-5549