Single-cell transcriptome analysis of avian neural crest migration reveals signatures of invasion and molecular transitions

Abstract

Neural crest cells migrate throughout the embryo, but how cells move in a directed and collective manner has remained unclear. Here, we perform the first single-cell transcriptome analysis of cranial neural crest cell migration at three progressive stages in chick and identify and establish hierarchical relationships between cell position and time-specific transcriptional signatures. We determine a novel transcriptional signature of the most invasive neural crest Trailblazer cells that is consistent during migration and enriched for approximately 900 genes. Knockdown of several Trailblazer genes shows significant but modest changes to total distance migrated. However, in vivo expression analysis by RNAscope and immunohistochemistry reveals some salt and pepper patterns that include strong individual Trailblazer gene expression in cells within other subregions of the migratory stream. These data provide new insights into the molecular diversity and dynamics within a neural crest cell migratory stream that underlie complex directed and collective cell behaviors.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Jason A Morrison

    Stowers Institute for Medical Research, Kansas City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Rebecca McLennan

    Stowers Institute for Medical Research, Kansas City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Lauren A Wolfe

    Stowers Institute for Medical Research, Kansas City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Madelaine M Gogol

    Stowers Institute for Medical Research, Kansas City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8738-0995
  5. Samuel Meier

    Stowers Institute for Medical Research, Kansas City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Mary C McKinney

    Stowers Institute for Medical Research, Kansas City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Jessica M Teddy

    Stowers Institute for Medical Research, Kansas City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Laura Holmes

    Stowers Institute for Medical Research, Kansas City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Craig L Semerad

    University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Andrew C Box

    Stowers Institute for Medical Research, Kansas City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Hua Li

    Stowers Institute for Medical Research, Kansas City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Kathryn E Hall

    Stowers Institute for Medical Research, Kansas City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Anoja G Perera

    Stowers Institute for Medical Research, Kansas City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Paul M Kulesa

    Stowers Institute for Medical Research, Kansas City, United States
    For correspondence
    pmk@stowers.org
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6354-9904

Funding

Stowers Institute for Medical Research

  • Paul M Kulesa

National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R21NS092001)

  • Paul M Kulesa

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

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All experiments were performed according to institutional (IBC-2003-23-pmk) and federal ethical standards.

Copyright

© 2017, Morrison 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

  • 6,424
    views
  • 886
    downloads
  • 67
    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. Jason A Morrison
  2. Rebecca McLennan
  3. Lauren A Wolfe
  4. Madelaine M Gogol
  5. Samuel Meier
  6. Mary C McKinney
  7. Jessica M Teddy
  8. Laura Holmes
  9. Craig L Semerad
  10. Andrew C Box
  11. Hua Li
  12. Kathryn E Hall
  13. Anoja G Perera
  14. Paul M Kulesa
(2017)
Single-cell transcriptome analysis of avian neural crest migration reveals signatures of invasion and molecular transitions
eLife 6:e28415.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.28415

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.28415

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    Fatima Tleiss, Martina Montanari ... C Leopold Kurz
    Research Article

    Multiple gut antimicrobial mechanisms are coordinated in space and time to efficiently fight foodborne pathogens. In Drosophila melanogaster, production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) together with intestinal cell renewal play a key role in eliminating gut microbes. A complementary mechanism would be to isolate and treat pathogenic bacteria while allowing colonization by commensals. Using real-time imaging to follow the fate of ingested bacteria, we demonstrate that while commensal Lactiplantibacillus plantarum freely circulate within the intestinal lumen, pathogenic strains such as Erwinia carotovora or Bacillus thuringiensis, are blocked in the anterior midgut where they are rapidly eliminated by antimicrobial peptides. This sequestration of pathogenic bacteria in the anterior midgut requires the Duox enzyme in enterocytes, and both TrpA1 and Dh31 in enteroendocrine cells. Supplementing larval food with hCGRP, the human homolog of Dh31, is sufficient to block the bacteria, suggesting the existence of a conserved mechanism. While the immune deficiency (IMD) pathway is essential for eliminating the trapped bacteria, it is dispensable for the blockage. Genetic manipulations impairing bacterial compartmentalization result in abnormal colonization of posterior midgut regions by pathogenic bacteria. Despite a functional IMD pathway, this ectopic colonization leads to bacterial proliferation and larval death, demonstrating the critical role of bacteria anterior sequestration in larval defense. Our study reveals a temporal orchestration during which pathogenic bacteria, but not innocuous, are confined in the anterior part of the midgut in which they are eliminated in an IMD-pathway-dependent manner.

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Cell Biology
    Kourosh Hayatigolkhatmi, Chiara Soriani ... Simona Rodighiero
    Tools and Resources

    Understanding the cell cycle at the single-cell level is crucial for cellular biology and cancer research. While current methods using fluorescent markers have improved the study of adherent cells, non-adherent cells remain challenging. In this study, we addressed this gap by combining a specialized surface to enhance cell attachment, the FUCCI(CA)2 sensor, an automated image analysis pipeline, and a custom machine learning algorithm. This approach enabled precise measurement of cell cycle phase durations in non-adherent cells. This method was validated in acute myeloid leukemia cell lines NB4 and Kasumi-1, which have unique cell cycle characteristics, and we tested the impact of cell cycle-modulating drugs on NB4 cells. Our cell cycle analysis system, which is also compatible with adherent cells, is fully automated and freely available, providing detailed insights from hundreds of cells under various conditions. This report presents a valuable tool for advancing cancer research and drug development by enabling comprehensive, automated cell cycle analysis in both adherent and non-adherent cells.