Control of dynamic cell behaviors during angiogenesis and anastomosis by Rasip1.

Organ morphogenesis is driven by a wealth of tightly orchestrated cellular behaviors, which ensure proper organ assembly and function. Many of these cell activities involve cell-cell interactions and remodeling of the F-actin cytoskeleton. Here, we analyze the requirement for Rasip1 (Ras-interacting protein 1), an endothelial-specific regulator of junctional dynamics, during blood vessel formation. Phenotype analysis of rasip1 mutants in zebrafish embryos reveals distinct functions of Rasip1 during sprouting angiogenesis, anastomosis and lumen formation. During angiogenic sprouting, loss of Rasip1 causes cell pairing defects due to a destabilization of tricellular junctions, indicating that stable tricellular junctions are essential to maintain multicellular organization within the sprout. During anastomosis, Rasip1 is required to establish a stable apical membrane compartment; rasip1 mutants display ectopic, reticulated junctions and the apical compartment is frequently collapsed. Loss of Ccm1 and Heg1 function mimics the junctional defects of rasip1 mutants. Furthermore, downregulation of ccm1 and heg1 leads to a delocalization of Rasip1 at cell junctions, indicating that junctional tethering of Rasip1 is required for its function in junction formation and stabilization during sprouting angiogenesis.

BMP-SMAD signalling output is highly regionalized in cardiovascular and lymphatic endothelial networks.

BACKGROUND: Bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) signalling has emerged as a fundamental pathway in endothelial cell biology and deregulation of this pathway is implicated in several vascular disorders. BMP signalling output in endothelial cells is highly context- and dose-dependent. Phosphorylation of the BMP intracellular effectors, SMAD1/5/9, is routinely used to monitor BMP signalling activity. To better understand the in vivo context-dependency of BMP-SMAD signalling, we investigated differences in BMP-SMAD transcriptional activity in different vascular beds during mouse embryonic and postnatal stages. For this, we used the BRE::gfp BMP signalling reporter mouse in which the BMP response element (BRE) from the ID1-promotor, a SMAD1/5/9 target gene, drives the expression of GFP. RESULTS: A mosaic pattern of GFP was present in various angiogenic sprouting plexuses and in endocardium of cardiac cushions and trabeculae in the heart. High calibre veins seemed to be more BRE::gfp transcriptionally active than arteries, and ubiquitous activity was present in embryonic lymphatic vasculature. Postnatal lymphatic vessels showed however only discrete micro-domains of transcriptional activity. Dynamic shifts in transcriptional activity were also observed in the endocardium of the developing heart, with a general decrease in activity over time. Surprisingly, proliferative endothelial cells were almost never GFP-positive. Patches of transcriptional activity seemed to correlate with vasculature undergoing hemodynamic alterations. CONCLUSION: The BRE::gfp mouse allows to investigate selective context-dependent aspects of BMP-SMAD signalling. Our data reveals the highly dynamic nature of BMP-SMAD mediated transcriptional regulation in time and space throughout the vascular tree, supporting that BMP-SMAD signalling can be a source of phenotypic diversity in some, but not all, healthy endothelium. This knowledge can provide insight in vascular bed or organ-specific diseases and phenotypic heterogeneity within an endothelial cell population.