1. Genetics and Genomics
  2. Neuroscience
Download icon

Hypothalamic transcriptomes of 99 mouse strains reveal trans eQTL hotspots, splicing QTLs and novel non-coding genes

Tools and Resources
  • Cited 21
  • Views 2,516
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2016;5:e15614 doi: 10.7554/eLife.15614

Abstract

Previous studies had shown that integration of genome wide expression profiles, in metabolic tissues, with genetic and phenotypic variance, provided valuable insight into the underlying molecular mechanisms. We used RNA-Seq to characterize hypothalamic transcriptome in 99 inbred strains of mice from the Hybrid Mouse Diversity Panel (HMDP), a reference resource population for cardiovascular and metabolic traits. We report numerous novel transcripts supported by proteomic analyses, as well as novel non coding RNAs. High resolution genetic mapping of transcript levels in HMDP, reveals both local and trans expression Quantitative Trait Loci (eQTLs) demonstrating 2 trans eQTL 'hotspots' associated with expression of hundreds of genes. We also report thousands of alternative splicing events regulated by genetic variants. Finally, comparison with about 150 metabolic and cardiovascular traits revealed many highly significant associations. Our data provides a rich resource for understanding the many physiologic functions mediated by the hypothalamus and their genetic regulation.

Data availability

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Yehudit Hasin-Brumshtein

    Department of Human Genetics, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States
    For correspondence
    yehudit.hasin@gmail.com
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7528-603X
  2. Arshad H Khan

    Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Farhad Hormozdiari

    Department of Computer Science, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Calvin Pan

    Department of Human Genetics, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Brian W Parks

    Department of Human Genetics, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Vladislav A Petyuk

    Biological Sciences Division, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Paul D Piehowski

    Biological Sciences Division, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Anneke Bruemmer

    Department of Integrative Biology and Physiology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Matteo Pellegrini

    Department of Molecular, Cell, and Developmental Biology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Xinshu Xiao

    Department of Integrative Biology and Physiology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Eleazar Eskin

    Department of Computer Science, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Richard D Smith

    Biological Sciences Division, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Aldons J Lusis

    Department of Human Genetics, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Desmond J Smith

    Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Funding

National Institutes of Health (R01HG006264)

  • Xinshu Xiao

National Institutes of Health (R01GM098273)

  • Yehudit Hasin-Brumshtein
  • Arshad H Khan
  • Calvin Pan
  • Vladislav A Petyuk
  • Paul D Piehowski
  • Richard D Smith
  • Aldons J Lusis
  • Desmond J Smith

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Ethics

Animal experimentation: The animal protocol for the study was approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) at University of California, Los Angeles.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Joel K Elmquist, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, United States

Publication history

  1. Received: February 27, 2016
  2. Accepted: September 12, 2016
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: September 13, 2016 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: October 6, 2016 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2016, Hasin-Brumshtein 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

  • 2,516
    Page views
  • 479
    Downloads
  • 21
    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)

Further reading

    1. Genetics and Genomics
    Jose D Aponte et al.
    Research Article Updated

    Realistic mappings of genes to morphology are inherently multivariate on both sides of the equation. The importance of coordinated gene effects on morphological phenotypes is clear from the intertwining of gene actions in signaling pathways, gene regulatory networks, and developmental processes underlying the development of shape and size. Yet, current approaches tend to focus on identifying and localizing the effects of individual genes and rarely leverage the information content of high-dimensional phenotypes. Here, we explicitly model the joint effects of biologically coherent collections of genes on a multivariate trait – craniofacial shape – in a sample of n = 1145 mice from the Diversity Outbred (DO) experimental line. We use biological process Gene Ontology (GO) annotations to select skeletal and facial development gene sets and solve for the axis of shape variation that maximally covaries with gene set marker variation. We use our process-centered, multivariate genotype-phenotype (process MGP) approach to determine the overall contributions to craniofacial variation of genes involved in relevant processes and how variation in different processes corresponds to multivariate axes of shape variation. Further, we compare the directions of effect in phenotype space of mutations to the primary axis of shape variation associated with broader pathways within which they are thought to function. Finally, we leverage the relationship between mutational and pathway-level effects to predict phenotypic effects beyond craniofacial shape in specific mutants. We also introduce an online application that provides users the means to customize their own process-centered craniofacial shape analyses in the DO. The process-centered approach is generally applicable to any continuously varying phenotype and thus has wide-reaching implications for complex trait genetics.

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Yekaterina Shulgina, Sean R Eddy
    Research Article Updated

    The genetic code has been proposed to be a ‘frozen accident,’ but the discovery of alternative genetic codes over the past four decades has shown that it can evolve to some degree. Since most examples were found anecdotally, it is difficult to draw general conclusions about the evolutionary trajectories of codon reassignment and why some codons are affected more frequently. To fill in the diversity of genetic codes, we developed Codetta, a computational method to predict the amino acid decoding of each codon from nucleotide sequence data. We surveyed the genetic code usage of over 250,000 bacterial and archaeal genome sequences in GenBank and discovered five new reassignments of arginine codons (AGG, CGA, and CGG), representing the first sense codon changes in bacteria. In a clade of uncultivated Bacilli, the reassignment of AGG to become the dominant methionine codon likely evolved by a change in the amino acid charging of an arginine tRNA. The reassignments of CGA and/or CGG were found in genomes with low GC content, an evolutionary force that likely helped drive these codons to low frequency and enable their reassignment.