Probes for LGR5

The chicken yolk sac (YS) and small intestine are essential for nutrient absorption during the pre-hatch and post-hatch periods, respectively. Absorptive enterocytes and secretory cells line the intestinal villi and originate from stem cells located in the intestinal crypts. Similarly, in the YS, there are absorptive and secretory cells that presumably originate from a stem cell population. Leucine-rich repeat containing G protein-coupled receptor 5 (Lgr5) and olfactomedin 4 (Olfm4) are 2 widely used markers for intestinal stem cells. The objective of this study was to map the distribution of putative stem cells expressing LGR5 and OLFM4 mRNA in the chicken small intestine from the late embryonic period to early post hatch and the YS during embryogenesis. At embryonic d 11, 13, 15, 17, and 19, the YS was collected (n = 3), and small intestine was collected at embryonic d 19, d of hatch (doh), and d 1, 4, and 7 post hatch (n = 3). Cells expressing OLFM4 and LGR5 mRNA were identified by in situ hybridization. In the YS, cells expressing only LGR5 and not OLFM4 mRNA were localized to the vascular endothelial cells lining the blood vessels. In the small intestine, cells in the intestinal crypt expressed both LGR5 and OLFM4 mRNA. Staining for OLFM4 mRNA was more intense than LGR5 mRNA, demonstrating that Olfm4 is a more robust marker for stem cells than Lgr5. At embryonic d 19 and doh, cells staining for OLFM4 mRNA were already present in the rudimentary crypts, with the greatest staining in the duodenal crypts. The intensity of OLFM4 mRNA staining increased from doh to d 7 post hatch. Dual label staining at doh for the peptide transporter PepT1 and Olfm4 revealed a population of cells above the crypts that did not express Olfm4 or PepT1 mRNA. These cells are likely progenitor transit amplifying cells. Thus, avians and mammals share similarity in the ontogeny of stem cells in the intestinal crypts.

The canonical Wnt/β-catenin signalling pathway governs diverse developmental, homeostatic and pathological processes. Palmitoylated Wnt ligands engage cell-surface frizzled (FZD) receptors and LRP5 and LRP6 co-receptors, enabling β-catenin nuclear translocation and TCF/LEF-dependent gene transactivation. Mutations in Wnt downstream signalling components have revealed diverse functions thought to be carried out by Wnt ligands themselves. However, redundancy between the 19 mammalian Wnt proteins and 10 FZD receptors and Wnt hydrophobicity have made it difficult to attribute these functions directly to Wnt ligands. For example, individual mutations in Wnt ligands have not revealed homeostatic phenotypes in the intestinal epithelium-an archetypal canonical, Wnt pathway-dependent, rapidly self-renewing tissue, the regeneration of which is fueled by proliferative crypt Lgr5+ intestinal stem cells (ISCs). R-spondin ligands (RSPO1-RSPO4) engage distinct LGR4-LGR6, RNF43 and ZNRF3 receptor classes, markedly potentiate canonical Wnt/β-catenin signalling, and induce intestinal organoid growth in vitro and Lgr5+ ISCs in vivo. However, the interchangeability, functional cooperation and relative contributions of Wnt versus RSPO ligands to in vivo canonical Wnt signalling and ISC biology remain unknown. Here we identify the functional roles of Wnt and RSPO ligands in the intestinal crypt stem-cell niche. We show that the default fate of Lgr5+ ISCs is to differentiate, unless both RSPO and Wnt ligands are present. However, gain-of-function studies using RSPO ligands and a new non-lipidated Wnt analogue reveal that these ligands have qualitatively distinct, non-interchangeable roles in ISCs. Wnt proteins are unable to induce Lgr5+ ISC self-renewal, but instead confer a basal competency by maintaining RSPO receptor expression that enables RSPO ligands to actively drive and specify the extent of stem-cell expansion. This functionally non-equivalent yet cooperative interaction between Wnt and RSPO ligands establishes a molecular precedent for regulation of mammalian stem cells by distinct priming and self-renewal factors, with broad implications for precise control of tissue regeneration.