The novel lncRNA lnc-NR2F1 is pro-neurogenic and mutated in human neurodevelopmental disorders

  1. Cheen Euong Ang
  2. Qing Ma
  3. Orly L Wapinski
  4. ShengHua Fan
  5. Ryan A Flynn
  6. Qian Yi Lee
  7. Bradley Coe
  8. Masahiro Onoguchi
  9. Victor Hipolito Olmos
  10. Brian T Do
  11. Lynn Dukes-Rimsky
  12. Jin Xu
  13. Koji Tanabe
  14. LiangJiang Wang
  15. Ulrich Elling
  16. Josef M Penninger
  17. Yang Zhao
  18. Kun Qu
  19. Evan E Eichler
  20. Anand Srivastava
  21. Marius Wernig  Is a corresponding author
  22. Howard Y Chang  Is a corresponding author
  1. Stanford University, United States
  2. Greenwood Genetic Center, United States
  3. Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of Washington, United States
  4. Clemson University, United States
  5. Institute of Molecular Biotechnology of the Austrian Academy of Science, Austria

Abstract

Long noncoding RNAs (lncRNAs) have been shown to act as important cell biological regulators including cell fate decisions but are often ignored in human genetics. Combining differential lncRNA expression during neuronal lineage induction with copy number variation morbidity maps of a cohort of children with autism spectrum disorder/intellectual disability versus healthy controls revealed focal genomic mutations affecting several lncRNA candidate loci. Here we find that a t(5:12) chromosomal translocation in a family manifesting neurodevelopmental symptoms disrupts specifically lnc-NR2F1. We further show that lnc-NR2F1 is an evolutionarily conserved lncRNA functionally enhances induced neuronal cell maturation and directly occupies and regulates transcription of neuronal genes including autism-associated genes. Thus, integrating human genetics and functional testing in neuronal lineage induction is a promising approach for discovering candidate lncRNAs involved in neurodevelopmental diseases.

Data availability

Sequencing data have been deposited in GEO under accession code GSE115079.

The following data sets were generated
The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Cheen Euong Ang

    Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Qing Ma

    Center for Personal Dynamic Regulomes, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Orly L Wapinski

    Center for Personal Dynamic Regulomes, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. ShengHua Fan

    J C Self Research Institute of Human Genetics, Greenwood Genetic Center, Greenwood, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Ryan A Flynn

    Center for Personal Dynamic Regulomes, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Qian Yi Lee

    Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9200-0910
  7. Bradley Coe

    Department of Genome Sciences, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Masahiro Onoguchi

    Center for Personal Dynamic Regulomes, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Victor Hipolito Olmos

    Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Brian T Do

    Center for Personal Dynamic Regulomes, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Lynn Dukes-Rimsky

    J C Self Research Institute of Human Genetics, Greenwood Genetic Center, Greenwood, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Jin Xu

    Center for Personal Dynamic Regulomes, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0944-9835
  13. Koji Tanabe

    Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. LiangJiang Wang

    Department of Genetics and Biochemistry, Clemson University, Clemson, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Ulrich Elling

    Vienna Biocenter, Institute of Molecular Biotechnology of the Austrian Academy of Science, Vienna, Austria
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Josef M Penninger

    Vienna Biocenter, Institute of Molecular Biotechnology of the Austrian Academy of Science, Vienna, Austria
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8194-3777
  17. Yang Zhao

    Center for Personal Dynamic Regulomes, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  18. Kun Qu

    Center for Personal Dynamic Regulomes, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  19. Evan E Eichler

    Department of Genome Sciences, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8246-4014
  20. Anand Srivastava

    J C Self Research Institute of Human Genetics, Greenwood Genetic Center, Greenwood, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  21. Marius Wernig

    Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    For correspondence
    wernig@stanford.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  22. Howard Y Chang

    Center for Personal Dynamic Regulomes, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    For correspondence
    howchang@stanford.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9459-4393

Funding

NIH Office of the Director (RC4-NS073015)

  • Marius Wernig
  • Howard Y Chang

NIH Office of the Director (P50-HG007735)

  • Howard Y Chang

California Institute for Regenerative Medicine

  • Marius Wernig
  • Howard Y Chang

NIH Office of the Director (RO1-HD39331)

  • Anand Srivastava

Self Regional Healthcare Foundation

  • Anand Srivastava

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

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All mouse work was performed according to IACUC approved protocols at Stanford University (APLAC-21565). Samples in the paper were obtained without determining their sex. All animals were housed in an animal facility with a 12hr light/dark cycle.

Human subjects: The study protocol, consent form, consent to publish and privacy practices were reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Self Regional Healthcare, Greenwood, SC (Reference number Pro00074882).

Copyright

© 2019, Ang 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

  • 5,483
    views
  • 869
    downloads
  • 60
    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. Cheen Euong Ang
  2. Qing Ma
  3. Orly L Wapinski
  4. ShengHua Fan
  5. Ryan A Flynn
  6. Qian Yi Lee
  7. Bradley Coe
  8. Masahiro Onoguchi
  9. Victor Hipolito Olmos
  10. Brian T Do
  11. Lynn Dukes-Rimsky
  12. Jin Xu
  13. Koji Tanabe
  14. LiangJiang Wang
  15. Ulrich Elling
  16. Josef M Penninger
  17. Yang Zhao
  18. Kun Qu
  19. Evan E Eichler
  20. Anand Srivastava
  21. Marius Wernig
  22. Howard Y Chang
(2019)
The novel lncRNA lnc-NR2F1 is pro-neurogenic and mutated in human neurodevelopmental disorders
eLife 8:e41770.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.41770

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.41770

Further reading

    1. Genetics and Genomics
    Thomas J O'Brien, Ida L Barlow ... André EX Brown
    Research Article

    There are thousands of Mendelian diseases with more being discovered weekly and the majority have no approved treatments. To address this need, we require scalable approaches that are relatively inexpensive compared to traditional drug development. In the absence of a validated drug target, phenotypic screening in model organisms provides a route for identifying candidate treatments. Success requires a screenable phenotype. However, the right phenotype and assay may not be obvious for pleiotropic neuromuscular disorders. Here, we show that high-throughput imaging and quantitative phenotyping can be conducted systematically on a panel of C. elegans disease model strains. We used CRISPR genome-editing to create 25 worm models of human Mendelian diseases and phenotyped them using a single standardised assay. All but two strains were significantly different from wild-type controls in at least one feature. The observed phenotypes were diverse, but mutations of genes predicted to have related functions led to similar behavioural differences in worms. As a proof-of-concept, we performed a drug repurposing screen of an FDA-approved compound library, and identified two compounds that rescued the behavioural phenotype of a model of UNC80 deficiency. Our results show that a single assay to measure multiple phenotypes can be applied systematically to diverse Mendelian disease models. The relatively short time and low cost associated with creating and phenotyping multiple strains suggest that high-throughput worm tracking could provide a scalable approach to drug repurposing commensurate with the number of Mendelian diseases.

    1. Genetics and Genomics
    Tade Souaiaia, Hei Man Wu ... Paul F O'Reilly
    Research Article

    The use of siblings to infer the factors influencing complex traits has been a cornerstone of quantitative genetics. Here, we utilise siblings for a novel application: the inference of genetic architecture, specifically that relating to individuals with extreme trait values (e.g. in the top 1%). Inferring the genetic architecture most relevant to this group of individuals is important because they are at the greatest risk of disease and may be more likely to harbour rare variants of large effect due to natural selection. We develop a theoretical framework that derives expected distributions of sibling trait values based on an index sibling’s trait value, estimated trait heritability, and null assumptions that include infinitesimal genetic effects and environmental factors that are either controlled for or have combined Gaussian effects. This framework is then used to develop statistical tests powered to distinguish between trait tails characterised by common polygenic architecture from those that include substantial enrichments of de novo or rare variant (Mendelian) architecture. We apply our tests to UK Biobank data here, although we note that they can be used to infer genetic architecture in any cohort or health registry that includes siblings and their trait values, since these tests do not use genetic data. We describe how our approach has the potential to help disentangle the genetic and environmental causes of extreme trait values, and to improve the design and power of future sequencing studies to detect rare variants.