Figure 2.

Zebrafish ryk loss of function phenotype. (A–F) Evaluating CE with markers. Dorsal view, anterior to the left of krox20 expression in uninjected (A), Ryk MO–injected (B), and Ryk MO co-injected with ryk RNA (C) embryos. Dorsal view, anterior to the top of myoD expression in uninjected (D; n = 32), Ryk MO–injected (E; n = 25), and Ryk MO co-injected with ryk RNA (F; n = 29) embryos. (D–F) The white dashed lines outline the lateral border of myoD domains. (G) Quantification of the CE phenotype, including embryos co-injected with Ryk MO and ryk ICD RNA (n = 30; 2.0 pmol Ryk MO; 50 pg ryk RNA; 50 pg ryk ICD RNA). Columns display the percentage of embryos at 10–11-somite stage with normal or defective CE index. (H–J) Morphological phenotypes at 24 hpf. Control (Ctrl.) MO–injected embryos (H) with even-spaced, V-shaped somites and Ryk MO (I)–, and Wnt5b MO–injected (J) embryos with reduced posterior A–P axis (double-headed arrow), and curved, tightly packed somites (white lines). Lateral view with anterior to the left. (K–N) Transverse central retina confocal images of 3-dpf huc:GFP transgenic embryos. Control (K) and Ryk MO (L)–, Wnt5b MO (M)–, and Ryk MO with ryk RNA (N)–injected embryos. The two organized sublaminae in the wild-type IPL (K, arrows) are less organized in both the Wnt5b (M, arrowhead) and Ryk (L, arrowhead) morphants. ryk RNA co-injection partially rescues Ryk MO–induced phenotype (N, arrows). Bars: (A–F) 150 µm; (K–N) 5 µm.

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal