(A, B) lhx1a mRNA levels were evaluated by RT-PCR at 7 dpi. β-actin was used as a sample control. (C–H) lhx1a whole-mount in situ hybridization (WISH) showing the trunk kidney region at 7 dpi. PKI (E) or H89 (G) treatment reduced the number of lhx1a+ cell aggregates, while injection of dmPGE2 could not rescue the influence of PKI (F) or H89 (H) treatment. (I) lhx1a+ cell aggregates of whole kidney were calculated using ImageJ. n = 5–7 in each condition. Data were analyzed by ANOVA, ***p<0.001; ns, no significant difference. (J–N) Immunofluorescence staining of p-S9-GSK3β (arrowheads) in Tg(lhx1a:DsRed) zebrafish kidneys at 5 dpi. (J, K) Zebrafish injected with DMSO as a control group, and the amount of p-S9-GSK3β could be detected in lhx1a+ cell aggregates cytoplasm during RPC aggregation (J) or proliferation (K). (L) p-S9-GSK3β in lhx1a+ cell aggregates of cox2a-/- was hardly detectable, and injection of dmPGE2 (M, N) could rescue the influence of Cox2a deficiency. Injection of PKI (O) could reduce p-S9-GSK3β level in lhx1a+ cell aggregates, while injection of dmPGE2 (P) could not rescue the influence of PKI treatment. (Q–W) Immunofluorescence staining of p-S675-β-catenin in Tg(lhx1a:DsRed) zebrafish kidneys at 5 dpi. (Q, R) Injection of DMSO as a control group and amounts of p-S675-β-catenin could be detected in lhx1a+ cell aggregates during RPC aggregation (Q) or proliferation (R). (S) p-S675-β-catenin level in lhx1a+ cell aggregates of cox2a-/- was hardly detectable, and injection of dmPGE2 (T, U) could rescue the influence of Cox2a deficiency. Injection of PKI (V) could reduce p-S675-β-catenin level in lhx1a+ cell aggregates, while injection of dmPGE2 (W) could not rescue the influence of PKI treatment. Scale bar, 50 μm. (X, Y) Bar chart depicting p-S9-GSK3β (X) and p-S675-β-catenin (Y) levels following acute kidney injury (AKI) (J–W). Fluorescent intensities per unit area were measured at the lhx1a+ RPC aggregates using ImageJ. p-S9-GSK3β or p-S675-β-catenin levels of lhx1a+ RPCs during RPC aggregation normalized as 1. Ag, aggregation; Pr, proliferation. n = 3–6 in each condition. Data were analyzed by ANOVA, ***p<0.001; ns, no significant difference.
Acknowledgments
This image is the copyrighted work of the attributed author or publisher, and
ZFIN has permission only to display this image to its users.
Additional permissions should be obtained from the applicable author or publisher of the image.
Full text @ Elife