Cilia-mediated Hedgehog signaling controls form and function in the mammalian larynx

  1. Jacqueline M Tabler
  2. Maggie M Rigney
  3. Gordon J Berman
  4. Swetha Gopalakrishnan
  5. Eglantine Heude
  6. Hadeel A Al-Lami
  7. Basil Z Yannakoudakis
  8. Rebecca D Fitch
  9. Christopher M Carter
  10. Steven A Vokes
  11. Karen J Liu
  12. Shahragim Tajbakhsh
  13. SE Roian Egnor
  14. John B Wallingford  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Texas at Austin, United States
  2. Emory University, United States
  3. CNRS UMR3738, Institut Pasteur, France
  4. King's College London, United Kingdom
  5. Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, United States

Abstract

Acoustic communication is fundamental to social interactions among animals, including humans. In fact, deficits in voice impair the quality of life for a large and diverse population of patients. Understanding the molecular genetic mechanisms of development and function in the vocal apparatus is thus an important challenge with relevance both to the basic biology of animal communication and to biomedicine. However, surprisingly little is known about the developmental biology of the mammalian larynx. Here, we used genetic fate mapping to chart the embryological origins of the tissues in the mouse larynx, and we describe the developmental etiology of laryngeal defects in mice with disruptions in cilia-mediated Hedgehog signaling. In addition, we show that mild laryngeal defects correlate with changes in the acoustic structure of vocalizations. Together, these data provide key new insights in the molecular genetics of form and function in the mammalian vocal apparatus.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Jacqueline M Tabler

    Department of Molecular Biosciences, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Maggie M Rigney

    Department of Molecular Biosciencesc, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Gordon J Berman

    Department of Biology, Emory University, Atlanta, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Swetha Gopalakrishnan

    Stem Cells and Development, CNRS UMR3738, Institut Pasteur, Paris, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Eglantine Heude

    Stem Cells and Development, CNRS UMR3738, Institut Pasteur, Paris, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Hadeel A Al-Lami

    Department of Craniofacial Development and Stem Cell Biology, King's College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Basil Z Yannakoudakis

    Department of Craniofacial Development and Stem Cell Biology, King's College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Rebecca D Fitch

    Department of Molecular Biosciences, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Christopher M Carter

    Department of Molecular Biosciences, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Steven A Vokes

    Department of Molecular Biosciences, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Karen J Liu

    Department of Craniofacial Development and Stem Cell Biology, King's College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Shahragim Tajbakhsh

    Stem Cells and Development, CNRS UMR3738, Institut Pasteur, Paris, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. SE Roian Egnor

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. John B Wallingford

    Department of Molecular Biosciences, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, United States
    For correspondence
    wallingford@austin.utexas.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-6280-8625

Funding

Howard Hughes Medical Institute

  • SE Roian Egnor
  • John B Wallingford

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

Ethics

Animal experimentation: This work was performed by protocols approved by UT Austin (IACUC protocol # AUP-2015-00105) and by King's College London (Animal Use Protocol PPL 70/7441).

Copyright

© 2017, Tabler 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

  • 3,805
    views
  • 792
    downloads
  • 71
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

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)

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

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

  1. Jacqueline M Tabler
  2. Maggie M Rigney
  3. Gordon J Berman
  4. Swetha Gopalakrishnan
  5. Eglantine Heude
  6. Hadeel A Al-Lami
  7. Basil Z Yannakoudakis
  8. Rebecca D Fitch
  9. Christopher M Carter
  10. Steven A Vokes
  11. Karen J Liu
  12. Shahragim Tajbakhsh
  13. SE Roian Egnor
  14. John B Wallingford
(2017)
Cilia-mediated Hedgehog signaling controls form and function in the mammalian larynx
eLife 6:e19153.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.19153

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.19153

Further reading

    1. Developmental Biology
    Adriana K Alexander, Karina F Rodriguez ... Humphrey HC Yao
    Research Article

    Accurate specification of female and male germ cells during embryonic development is critical for sexual reproduction. Primordial germ cells (PGCs) are the bipotential precursors of mature gametes that commit to an oogenic or spermatogenic fate in response to sex-determining cues from the fetal gonad. The critical processes required for PGCs to integrate and respond to signals from the somatic environment in gonads are not well understood. In this study, we developed the first single-nucleus multiomics map of chromatin accessibility and gene expression during murine PGC development in both XX and XY embryos. Profiling of cell-type-specific transcriptomes and regions of open chromatin from the same cell captured the molecular signatures and gene networks underlying PGC sex determination. Joint RNA and ATAC data for single PGCs resolved previously unreported PGC subpopulations and cataloged a multimodal reference atlas of differentiating PGC clusters. We discovered that regulatory element accessibility precedes gene expression during PGC development, suggesting that changes in chromatin accessibility may prime PGC lineage commitment prior to differentiation. Similarly, we found that sexual dimorphism in chromatin accessibility and gene expression increased temporally in PGCs. Combining single-nucleus sequencing data, we computationally mapped the cohort of transcription factors that regulate the expression of sexually dimorphic genes in PGCs. For example, the gene regulatory networks of XX PGCs are enriched for the transcription factors, TFAP2c, TCFL5, GATA2, MGA, NR6A1, TBX4, and ZFX. Sex-specific enrichment of the forkhead-box and POU6 families of transcription factors was also observed in XY PGCs. Finally, we determined the temporal expression patterns of WNT, BMP, and RA signaling during PGC sex determination, and our discovery analyses identified potentially new cell communication pathways between supporting cells and PGCs. Our results illustrate the diversity of factors involved in programming PGCs toward a sex-specific fate.

    1. Developmental Biology
    Jiayin Gao, Jiawei Wang ... Keliang Wu
    Research Article

    The first cell-fate decision is the process by which cells of an embryo take on distinct lineage identities for the first time, thus representing the beginning of developmental patterning. Here, we demonstrate that the molecular chaperone heat shock protein A2 (HSPA2), a member of the 70 kDa heat shock protein (HSP70) family, is asymmetrically expressed in the late 2-cell stage of mouse embryos. The knockdown of Hspa2 in one of the 2-cell blastomeres prevented its progeny predominantly towards the inner cell mass (ICM) fate. In contrast, the overexpression of Hspa2 in one of the 2-cell blastomeres did not induce the blastomere to differentiate towards the ICM fate. Furthermore, we demonstrated that HSPA2 interacted with CARM1 and its levels correlated with ICM-associated genes. Collectively, our results identify HSPA2 as a critical early regulator of the first cell-fate decision in mammalian 2-cell embryos.