1. Neuroscience
Download icon

Epigenetic regulation of lateralized fetal spinal gene expression underlies hemispheric asymmetries

  1. Sebastian Ocklenburg  Is a corresponding author
  2. Judith Schmitz
  3. Zahra Moinfar
  4. Dirk Moser
  5. Rena Klose
  6. Stephanie Lor
  7. Georg Kunz
  8. Martin Tegenthoff
  9. Pedro M Faustmann
  10. Clyde Francks
  11. Jörg T Epplen
  12. Robert Kumsta
  13. Onur Güntürkün
  1. Ruhr University Bochum, Germany
  2. St. Johannes Hospital, Germany
  3. University Hospital Bergmannsheil, Germany
  4. Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Netherlands
Research Article
  • Cited 50
  • Views 33,482
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2017;6:e22784 doi: 10.7554/eLife.22784

Abstract

Lateralization is a fundamental principle of nervous system organization but its molecular determinants are mostly unknown. In humans, asymmetric gene expression in the fetal cortex has been suggested as the molecular basis of handedness. However, human fetuses already show considerable asymmetries in arm movements before the motor cortex is functionally linked to the spinal cord, making it more likely that spinal gene expression asymmetries form the molecular basis of handedness. We analyzed genome-wide mRNA expression and DNA methylation in cervical and anterior thoracal spinal cord segments of five human fetuses and show development-dependent gene expression asymmetries. These gene expression asymmetries were epigenetically regulated by miRNA expression asymmetries in the TGF-β signaling pathway and lateralized methylation of CpG islands. Our findings suggest molecular mechanisms for epigenetic regulation within the spinal cord constitute the starting point for handedness, implying a fundamental shift in our understanding of the ontogenesis of hemispheric asymmetries in humans.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Sebastian Ocklenburg

    Department of Biopsychology, Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany
    For correspondence
    sebastian.ocklenburg@rub.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5882-3200
  2. Judith Schmitz

    Department of Biopsychology, Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Zahra Moinfar

    Department of Neuroanatomy and Molecular Brain Research, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Dirk Moser

    Department of Genetic Psychology, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Rena Klose

    Department of Biopsychology, Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Stephanie Lor

    Department of Biopsychology, Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Georg Kunz

    Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, St. Johannes Hospital, Dortmund, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Martin Tegenthoff

    Department of Neurology, University Hospital Bergmannsheil, Bochum, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Pedro M Faustmann

    Department of Neuroanatomy and Molecular Brain Research, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Clyde Francks

    Department of Language and Genetics, Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Jörg T Epplen

    Department of Human Genetics, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Robert Kumsta

    Department of Genetic Psychology, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Onur Güntürkün

    Department of Biopsychology, Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (Gu227/16-1)

  • Onur Güntürkün

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

Ethics

Human subjects: The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Medical Faculty of the Ruhr-University Bochum (registration number 5056-14). All fetal tissue donors signed written informed consent

Reviewing Editor

  1. Heidi Johansen-Berg, University of Oxford, United Kingdom

Publication history

  1. Received: October 29, 2016
  2. Accepted: January 31, 2017
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: February 1, 2017 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: February 7, 2017 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2017, Ocklenburg 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

  • 33,482
    Page views
  • 1,962
    Downloads
  • 50
    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. Developmental Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Shu-Min Chou et al.
    Research Article Updated

    In the postnatal brain, neurogenesis occurs only within a few regions, such as the hippocampal sub-granular zone (SGZ). Postnatal neurogenesis is tightly regulated by factors that balance stem cell renewal with differentiation, and it gives rise to neurons that participate in learning and memory formation. The Kv1.1 channel, a voltage-gated potassium channel, was previously shown to suppress postnatal neurogenesis in the SGZ in a cell-autonomous manner. In this study, we have clarified the physiological and molecular mechanisms underlying Kv1.1-dependent postnatal neurogenesis. First, we discovered that the membrane potential of neural progenitor cells is highly dynamic during development. We further established a multinomial logistic regression model for cell-type classification based on the biophysical characteristics and corresponding cell markers. We found that the loss of Kv1.1 channel activity causes significant depolarization of type 2b neural progenitor cells. This depolarization is associated with increased tropomyosin receptor kinase B (TrkB) signaling and proliferation of neural progenitor cells; suppressing TrkB signaling reduces the extent of postnatal neurogenesis. Thus, our study defines the role of the Kv1.1 potassium channel in regulating the proliferation of postnatal neural progenitor cells in mouse hippocampus.

    1. Neuroscience
    Behrad Noudoost et al.
    Research Article

    Visually guided behavior relies on the integration of sensory input and information held in working memory (WM). Yet it remains unclear how this is accomplished at the level of neural circuits. We studied the direct visual cortical inputs to neurons within a visuomotor area of prefrontal cortex in behaving monkeys. We show that the efficacy of visual input to prefrontal cortex is gated by information held in WM. Surprisingly, visual input to prefrontal neurons was found to target those with both visual and motor properties, rather than preferentially targeting other visual neurons. Furthermore, activity evoked from visual cortex was larger in magnitude, more synchronous, and more rapid, when monkeys remembered locations that matched the location of visual input. These results indicate that WM directly influences the circuitry that transforms visual input into visually guided behavior.