The TRIM-NHL protein NHL-2 is a co-factor in the nuclear and somatic RNAi pathways in C. elegans

  1. Gregory M Davis
  2. Shikui Tu
  3. Joshua W T Anderson
  4. Rhys N Colson
  5. Menachem J Gunzburg
  6. Michelle A Francisco
  7. Debashish Ray
  8. Sean P Shrubsole
  9. Julia A Sobotka
  10. Uri Seroussi
  11. Robert X Lao
  12. Tuhin Maity
  13. Monica Z Wu
  14. Katherine McJunkin
  15. Quaid D Morris
  16. Timothy R Hughes
  17. Jacqueline A Wilce  Is a corresponding author
  18. Julie M Claycomb  Is a corresponding author
  19. Zhiping Weng  Is a corresponding author
  20. Peter R Boag  Is a corresponding author
  1. Federation University, Australia
  2. University of Massachusetts Medical School, United States
  3. Monash University, Australia
  4. University of Toronto, Canada
  5. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, National Institutes of Health, United States

Abstract

Proper regulation of germline gene expression is essential for fertility and maintaining species integrity. In the C. elegans germline, a diverse repertoire of regulatory pathways promote the expression of endogenous germline genes and limit the expression of deleterious transcripts to maintain genome homeostasis. Here we show that the conserved TRIM-NHL protein, NHL-2, plays an essential role in the C. elegans germline, modulating germline chromatin and meiotic chromosome organization. We uncover a role for NHL-2 as a co-factor in both positively (CSR-1) and negatively (HRDE-1) acting germline 22G-small RNA pathways and the somatic nuclear RNAi pathway. Furthermore, we demonstrate that NHL-2 is a bona fide RNA binding protein and, along with RNA-seq data point to a small RNA independent role for NHL-2 in regulating transcripts at the level of RNA stability. Collectively, our data implicate NHL-2 as an essential hub of gene regulatory activity in both the germline and soma.

Data availability

All small RNA and mRNA Illumina sequencing data have been submitted to the NCBI's Sequence Read Archive (SRA), and are included under project accession number SRP115391.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Gregory M Davis

    School of Applied and Biomedical Sciences, Federation University, Gippsland, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Shikui Tu

    Program in Bioinformatics and Integrative Biology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Joshua W T Anderson

    Development and Stem Cells Program, Monash Biomedicine Discovery Institute, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Rhys N Colson

    Development and Stem Cells Program, Monash Biomedicine Discovery Institute, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Menachem J Gunzburg

    Development and Stem Cells Program, Monash Biomedicine Discovery Institute, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Michelle A Francisco

    Department of Molecular Genetics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Debashish Ray

    Department of Molecular Genetics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Sean P Shrubsole

    Development and Stem Cells Program, Monash Biomedicine Discovery Institute, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Julia A Sobotka

    Department of Molecular Genetics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Uri Seroussi

    Department of Molecular Genetics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Robert X Lao

    Department of Molecular Genetics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Tuhin Maity

    Department of Molecular Genetics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Monica Z Wu

    Department of Molecular Genetics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Katherine McJunkin

    Laboratory of Cellular and Developmental Biology, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Quaid D Morris

    Department of Molecular Genetics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Timothy R Hughes

    Department of Molecular Genetics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  17. Jacqueline A Wilce

    Development and Stem Cells Program, Monash Biomedicine Discovery Institute, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
    For correspondence
    jackie.wilce@monash.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  18. Julie M Claycomb

    Department of Molecular Genetics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
    For correspondence
    julie.claycomb@utoronto.ca
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  19. Zhiping Weng

    Program in Bioinformatics and Integrative Biology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, United States
    For correspondence
    zhiping.weng@umassmed.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  20. Peter R Boag

    Development and Stem Cells Program, Monash Biomedicine Discovery Institute, Monash University, Clayton, Australia
    For correspondence
    peter.boag@monash.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0889-0859

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council (606575)

  • Peter R Boag

Canada Research Chairs (MOP-274660)

  • Julie M Claycomb

Canadian Institutes of Health Research (MOP-125894)

  • Quaid D Morris
  • Timothy R Hughes

Connaught Fund

  • Julie M Claycomb

National Institutes of Health (HD078253)

  • Zhiping Weng

Canada Research Chairs (CAP- 783 262134)

  • Julie M Claycomb

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Oliver Hobert, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Columbia University, United States

Version history

  1. Received: January 30, 2018
  2. Accepted: December 20, 2018
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: December 21, 2018 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: January 29, 2019 (version 2)

Copyright

This is an open-access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication.

Metrics

  • 2,267
    views
  • 293
    downloads
  • 10
    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. Gregory M Davis
  2. Shikui Tu
  3. Joshua W T Anderson
  4. Rhys N Colson
  5. Menachem J Gunzburg
  6. Michelle A Francisco
  7. Debashish Ray
  8. Sean P Shrubsole
  9. Julia A Sobotka
  10. Uri Seroussi
  11. Robert X Lao
  12. Tuhin Maity
  13. Monica Z Wu
  14. Katherine McJunkin
  15. Quaid D Morris
  16. Timothy R Hughes
  17. Jacqueline A Wilce
  18. Julie M Claycomb
  19. Zhiping Weng
  20. Peter R Boag
(2018)
The TRIM-NHL protein NHL-2 is a co-factor in the nuclear and somatic RNAi pathways in C. elegans
eLife 7:e35478.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.35478

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.35478

Further reading

    1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    Allison Coté, Aoife O'Farrell ... Arjun Raj
    Research Article

    Splicing is the stepwise molecular process by which introns are removed from pre-mRNA and exons are joined together to form mature mRNA sequences. The ordering and spatial distribution of these steps remain controversial, with opposing models suggesting splicing occurs either during or after transcription. We used single-molecule RNA FISH, expansion microscopy, and live-cell imaging to reveal the spatiotemporal distribution of nascent transcripts in mammalian cells. At super-resolution levels, we found that pre-mRNA formed clouds around the transcription site. These clouds indicate the existence of a transcription-site-proximal zone through which RNA move more slowly than in the nucleoplasm. Full-length pre-mRNA undergo continuous splicing as they move through this zone following transcription, suggesting a model in which splicing can occur post-transcriptionally but still within the proximity of the transcription site, thus seeming co-transcriptional by most assays. These results may unify conflicting reports of co-transcriptional versus post-transcriptional splicing.

    1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Maria L Adelus, Jiacheng Ding ... Casey E Romanoski
    Research Article

    Heterogeneity in endothelial cell (EC) sub-phenotypes is becoming increasingly appreciated in atherosclerosis progression. Still, studies quantifying EC heterogeneity across whole transcriptomes and epigenomes in both in vitro and in vivo models are lacking. Multiomic profiling concurrently measuring transcriptomes and accessible chromatin in the same single cells was performed on six distinct primary cultures of human aortic ECs (HAECs) exposed to activating environments characteristic of the atherosclerotic microenvironment in vitro. Meta-analysis of single-cell transcriptomes across 17 human ex vivo arterial specimens was performed and two computational approaches quantitatively evaluated the similarity in molecular profiles between heterogeneous in vitro and ex vivo cell profiles. HAEC cultures were reproducibly populated by four major clusters with distinct pathway enrichment profiles and modest heterogeneous responses: EC1-angiogenic, EC2-proliferative, EC3-activated/mesenchymal-like, and EC4-mesenchymal. Quantitative comparisons between in vitro and ex vivo transcriptomes confirmed EC1 and EC2 as most canonically EC-like, and EC4 as most mesenchymal with minimal effects elicited by siERG and IL1B. Lastly, accessible chromatin regions unique to EC2 and EC4 were most enriched for coronary artery disease (CAD)-associated single-nucleotide polymorphisms from Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS), suggesting that these cell phenotypes harbor CAD-modulating mechanisms. Primary EC cultures contain markedly heterogeneous cell subtypes defined by their molecular profiles. Surprisingly, the perturbations used here only modestly shifted cells between subpopulations, suggesting relatively stable molecular phenotypes in culture. Identifying consistently heterogeneous EC subpopulations between in vitro and ex vivo models should pave the way for improving in vitro systems while enabling the mechanisms governing heterogeneous cell state decisions.