Wnt/PCP controls spreading of Wnt/β-catenin signals by cytonemes in vertebrates

  1. Benjamin Mattes
  2. Yonglong Dang
  3. Gediminas Greicius
  4. Lilian Tamara Kaufmann
  5. Benedikt Prunsche
  6. Jakob Rosenbauer
  7. Johannes Stegmaier
  8. Ralf Mikut
  9. Suat Özbek
  10. Gerd Ulrich Nienhaus
  11. Alexander Schug
  12. David M Virshup
  13. Steffen Scholpp  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Exeter, United Kingdom
  2. Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany
  3. Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore
  4. University Hospital Heidelberg, Germany
  5. John von Neumann Institute for Computing, Germany
  6. University of Heidelberg, Germany

Abstract

Signaling filopodia, termed cytonemes, are dynamic actin-based membrane structures that regulate the exchange of signaling molecules and their receptors within tissues. However, how cytoneme formation is regulated remains unclear. Here, we show that Wnt/PCP autocrine signaling controls the emergence of cytonemes, and that cytonemes subsequently control paracrine Wnt/β-catenin signal activation. Upon binding of the Wnt family member Wnt8a, the receptor tyrosine kinase Ror2 gets activated. Ror2/PCP signaling leads to induction of cytonemes, which mediate transport of Wnt8a to neighboring cells. In the Wnt receiving cells, Wnt8a on cytonemes triggers Wnt/β-catenin-dependent gene transcription and proliferation. We show that cytoneme-based Wnt transport operates in diverse processes, including zebrafish development, the murine intestinal crypt, and human cancer organoids, demonstrating that Wnt transport by cytonemes and its control via the Ror2 pathway is highly conserved in vertebrates.

Data availability

All of the data supporting this paper is available via the Dryad repository (https://dx.doi.org/10.5061/dryad.38q5pc1)

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Benjamin Mattes

    Living Systems Institute, School of Biosciences, College of Life and Environmental Science, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5286-9347
  2. Yonglong Dang

    Institute of Toxicology and Genetics, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Gediminas Greicius

    Program in Cancer and Stem Cell Biology, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Lilian Tamara Kaufmann

    Institute of Human Genetics, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Benedikt Prunsche

    Institute of Applied Physics, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Jakob Rosenbauer

    Jülich Supercomputing Centre, Forschungszentrum Jülich, John von Neumann Institute for Computing, Jülich, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Johannes Stegmaier

    Institute for Automation and Applied Informatics, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4072-3759
  8. Ralf Mikut

    Institute for Automation and Applied Informatics, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Suat Özbek

    Centre of Organismal Studies, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Gerd Ulrich Nienhaus

    Institute of Toxicology and Genetics, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5027-3192
  11. Alexander Schug

    Institute for Automation and Applied Informatics, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. David M Virshup

    Program in Cancer and Stem Cell Biology, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6976-850X
  13. Steffen Scholpp

    Living Systems Institute, School of Biosciences, College of Life and Environmental Science, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    s.scholpp@exeter.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4903-9657

Funding

Living Systems Institute (Start-up)

  • Steffen Scholpp

Boehringer Ingelheim Fonds (Exploration)

  • Steffen Scholpp

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (Scho847-5)

  • Steffen Scholpp

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

Copyright

© 2018, Mattes 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

  • 8,366
    views
  • 1,238
    downloads
  • 119
    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. Benjamin Mattes
  2. Yonglong Dang
  3. Gediminas Greicius
  4. Lilian Tamara Kaufmann
  5. Benedikt Prunsche
  6. Jakob Rosenbauer
  7. Johannes Stegmaier
  8. Ralf Mikut
  9. Suat Özbek
  10. Gerd Ulrich Nienhaus
  11. Alexander Schug
  12. David M Virshup
  13. Steffen Scholpp
(2018)
Wnt/PCP controls spreading of Wnt/β-catenin signals by cytonemes in vertebrates
eLife 7:e36953.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.36953

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.36953

Further reading

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Developmental Biology
    Sara Jaber, Eliana Eldawra ... Franck Toledo
    Research Article

    Missense ‘hotspot’ mutations localized in six p53 codons account for 20% of TP53 mutations in human cancers. Hotspot p53 mutants have lost the tumor suppressive functions of the wildtype protein, but whether and how they may gain additional functions promoting tumorigenesis remain controversial. Here, we generated Trp53Y217C, a mouse model of the human hotspot mutant TP53Y220C. DNA damage responses were lost in Trp53Y217C/Y217C (Trp53YC/YC) cells, and Trp53YC/YC fibroblasts exhibited increased chromosome instability compared to Trp53-/- cells. Furthermore, Trp53YC/YC male mice died earlier than Trp53-/- males, with more aggressive thymic lymphomas. This correlated with an increased expression of inflammation-related genes in Trp53YC/YC thymic cells compared to Trp53-/- cells. Surprisingly, we recovered only one Trp53YC/YC female for 22 Trp53YC/YC males at weaning, a skewed distribution explained by a high frequency of Trp53YC/YC female embryos with exencephaly and the death of most Trp53YC/YC female neonates. Strikingly, however, when we treated pregnant females with the anti-inflammatory drug supformin (LCC-12), we observed a fivefold increase in the proportion of viable Trp53YC/YC weaned females in their progeny. Together, these data suggest that the p53Y217C mutation not only abrogates wildtype p53 functions but also promotes inflammation, with oncogenic effects in males and teratogenic effects in females.

    1. Developmental Biology
    Mengjie Li, Aiguo Tian, Jin Jiang
    Research Advance

    Stem cell self-renewal often relies on asymmetric fate determination governed by niche signals and/or cell-intrinsic factors but how these regulatory mechanisms cooperate to promote asymmetric fate decision remains poorly understood. In adult Drosophila midgut, asymmetric Notch (N) signaling inhibits intestinal stem cell (ISC) self-renewal by promoting ISC differentiation into enteroblast (EB). We have previously shown that epithelium-derived Bone Morphogenetic Protein (BMP) promotes ISC self-renewal by antagonizing N pathway activity (Tian and Jiang, 2014). Here, we show that loss of BMP signaling results in ectopic N pathway activity even when the N ligand Delta (Dl) is depleted, and that the N inhibitor Numb acts in parallel with BMP signaling to ensure a robust ISC self-renewal program. Although Numb is asymmetrically segregated in about 80% of dividing ISCs, its activity is largely dispensable for ISC fate determination under normal homeostasis. However, Numb becomes crucial for ISC self-renewal when BMP signaling is compromised. Whereas neither Mad RNA interference nor its hypomorphic mutation led to ISC loss, inactivation of Numb in these backgrounds resulted in stem cell loss due to precocious ISC-to-EB differentiation. Furthermore, we find that numb mutations resulted in stem cell loss during midgut regeneration in response to epithelial damage that causes fluctuation in BMP pathway activity, suggesting that the asymmetrical segregation of Numb into the future ISC may provide a fail-save mechanism for ISC self-renewal by offsetting BMP pathway fluctuation, which is important for ISC maintenance in regenerative guts.