1. Cell Biology
  2. Developmental Biology
Download icon

Developmental alterations in centrosome integrity contribute to the post-mitotic state of mammalian cardiomyocytes

  1. David C Zebrowski
  2. Silvia Vergarajauregui
  3. Chi-Chung Wu
  4. Tanja Piatkowski
  5. Robert Becker
  6. Marina Leone
  7. Sofia Hirth
  8. Filomena Ricciardi
  9. Nathalie Falk
  10. Andreas Giessl
  11. Steffen Just
  12. Thomas Braun
  13. Gilbert Weidinger
  14. Felix B Engel  Is a corresponding author
  1. Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Germany
  2. University of Ulm, Germany
  3. Max Planck Institute for Heart and Lung Research, Germany
Short Report
  • Cited 62
  • Views 6,175
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2015;4:e05563 doi: 10.7554/eLife.05563

Abstract

Mammalian cardiomyocytes become post-mitotic shortly after birth. Understanding how this occurs is highly relevant to cardiac regenerative therapy. Yet, how cardiomyocytes achieve and maintain a post-mitotic state is unknown. Here, we show that cardiomyocyte centrosome integrity is lost shortly after birth. This is coupled with relocalization of various centrosome proteins to the nuclear envelope. Consequently, postnatal cardiomyocytes are unable to undergo ciliogenesis and the nuclear envelope adopts the function as cellular microtubule organizing center. Loss of centrosome integrity is associated with, and can promote, cardiomyocyte G0/G1 cell cycle arrest suggesting that centrosome disassembly is developmentally utilized to achieve the post-mitotic state in mammalian cardiomyocytes. Adult cardiomyocytes of zebrafish and newt, which are able to proliferate, maintain centrosome integrity. Collectively, our data provide a novel mechanism underlying the post-mitotic state of mammalian cardiomyocytes as well as a potential explanation for why zebrafish and newts, but not mammals, can regenerate their heart.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. David C Zebrowski

    Experimental Renal and Cardiovascular Research, Department of Nephropathology, Institute of Pathology, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  2. Silvia Vergarajauregui

    Experimental Renal and Cardiovascular Research, Department of Nephropathology, Institute of Pathology, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  3. Chi-Chung Wu

    Institute for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  4. Tanja Piatkowski

    Department of Cardiac Development and Remodeling, Max Planck Institute for Heart and Lung Research, Bad Nauheim, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  5. Robert Becker

    Experimental Renal and Cardiovascular Research, Department of Nephropathology, Institute of Pathology, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  6. Marina Leone

    Experimental Renal and Cardiovascular Research, Department of Nephropathology, Institute of Pathology, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  7. Sofia Hirth

    Department of Medicine II, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  8. Filomena Ricciardi

    Department of Developmental Genetics, Max Planck Institute for Heart and Lung Research, Bad Nauheim, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  9. Nathalie Falk

    Department of Biology, Animal Physiology, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  10. Andreas Giessl

    Department of Biology, Animal Physiology, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  11. Steffen Just

    Department of Medicine II, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  12. Thomas Braun

    Department of Cardiac Development and Remodeling, Max Planck Institute for Heart and Lung Research, Bad Nauheim, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  13. Gilbert Weidinger

    Institute for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  14. Felix B Engel

    Experimental Renal and Cardiovascular Research, Department of Nephropathology, Institute of Pathology, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
    For correspondence
    felix.engel@uk-erlangen.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Ethics

Animal experimentation: The investigation conforms with the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals published by the Directive 2010/63/EU of the European Parliament and according to the regulations issued by the Committee for Animal Rights Protection of the State of Hessen (Regierungspraesidium Darmstadt) as well as Baden-Württemberg (Regierungspraesidium Tübingen). Extraction of organs and preparation of primary cell cultures were approved by the local Animal Ethics Committee in accordance to governmental and international guidelines on animal experimentation (protocol TS - 5/13 Nephropatho; Zebrafish protocol number o.183).

Reviewing Editor

  1. Yukiko M Yamashita, University of Michigan, United States

Publication history

  1. Received: November 11, 2014
  2. Accepted: July 30, 2015
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: August 6, 2015 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: August 19, 2015 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2015, Zebrowski et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 6,175
    Page views
  • 1,303
    Downloads
  • 62
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, Scopus, PubMed Central.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Download citations (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Categories and tags

Research organisms

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology

    Conformational specificity of opioid receptors is determined by subcellular location irrespective of agonist

    Stephanie E Crilly et al.
    Research Article Updated

    The prevailing model for the variety in drug responses is that different drugs stabilize distinct active states of their G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) targets, allowing coupling to different effectors. However, whether the same ligand generates different GPCR active states based on the immediate environment of receptors is not known. Here we address this question using spatially resolved imaging of conformational biosensors that read out distinct active conformations of the δ-opioid receptor (DOR), a physiologically relevant GPCR localized to Golgi and the surface in neuronal cells. We have shown that Golgi and surface pools of DOR both inhibit cAMP, but engage distinct conformational biosensors in response to the same ligand in rat neuroendocrine cells. Further, DOR recruits arrestins on the surface but not on the Golgi. Our results suggest that the local environment determines the active states of receptors for any given drug, allowing GPCRs to couple to different effectors at different subcellular locations.

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Developmental Biology

    Single-cell RNA-seq analysis reveals penaeid shrimp hemocyte subpopulations and cell differentiation process

    Keiichiro Koiwai et al.
    Tools and Resources

    Crustacean aquaculture is expected to be a major source of fishery commodities in the near future. Hemocytes are key players of the immune system in shrimps; however, their classification, maturation, and differentiation are still under debate. To date, only discrete and inconsistent information on the classification of shrimp hemocytes has been reported, showing that the morphological characteristics are not sufficient to resolve their actual roles. Our present study using single-cell RNA sequencing, revealed six types of hemocytes of Marsupenaeus japonicus based on their transcriptional profiles. We identified markers of each subpopulation and predicted the differentiation pathways involved in their maturation. We also predicted cell growth factors that might play crucial roles in hemocyte differentiation. Different immune roles among these subpopulations were suggested from the analysis of differentially expressed immune-related genes. These results provide a unified classification of shrimp hemocytes, which improves the understanding of its immune system.

    1. Cell Biology

    circPTPN12/miR-21–5 p/∆Np63α pathway contributes to human endometrial fibrosis

    Minmin Song et al.
    Research Article

    Emerging evidence demonstrates the important role of circular RNAs (circRNAs) in regulating pathological processes in various diseases including organ fibrosis. Endometrium fibrosis is the leading cause of uterine infertility, but the role of circRNAs in its pathogenesis is largely unknown. Here, we provide the evidence that upregulation of circPTPN12 in endometrial epithelial cells (EECs) of fibrotic endometrium functions as endogenous sponge of miR-21–5 p to inhibit miR-21–5 p expression and activity, which in turn results in upregulation of ΔNp63α to induce the epithelial mesenchymal transition (EMT) of EECs (EEC–EMT). In a mouse model of endometrium fibrosis, circPTPN12 appears to be a cofactor of driving EEC–EMT and administration of miR-21–5 p could reverse this process and improve endometrial fibrosis. Our findings revealed that the dysfunction of circPTPN12/miR-21–5 p/∆Np63α pathway contributed to the pathogenesis of endometrial fibrosis.