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.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Anne E West, Duke University School of Medicine, United States

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).

Version history

  1. Received: September 9, 2018
  2. Accepted: January 7, 2019
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: January 10, 2019 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: February 19, 2019 (version 2)

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

  • 5,317
    Page views
  • 841
    Downloads
  • 52
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Scopus, Crossref, 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)

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
    2. Immunology and Inflammation
    Jean-David Larouche, Céline M Laumont ... Claude Perreault
    Research Article

    Transposable elements (TEs) are repetitive sequences representing ~45% of the human and mouse genomes and are highly expressed by medullary thymic epithelial cells (mTECs). In this study, we investigated the role of TEs on T-cell development in the thymus. We performed multiomic analyses of TEs in human and mouse thymic cells to elucidate their role in T-cell development. We report that TE expression in the human thymus is high and shows extensive age- and cell lineage-related variations. TE expression correlates with multiple transcription factors in all cell types of the human thymus. Two cell types express particularly broad TE repertoires: mTECs and plasmacytoid dendritic cells (pDCs). In mTECs, transcriptomic data suggest that TEs interact with transcription factors essential for mTEC development and function (e.g., PAX1 and REL), and immunopeptidomic data showed that TEs generate MHC-I-associated peptides implicated in thymocyte education. Notably, AIRE, FEZF2, and CHD4 regulate small yet non-redundant sets of TEs in murine mTECs. Human thymic pDCs homogenously express large numbers of TEs that likely form dsRNA, which can activate innate immune receptors, potentially explaining why thymic pDCs constitutively secrete IFN ɑ/β. This study highlights the diversity of interactions between TEs and the adaptive immune system. TEs are genetic parasites, and the two thymic cell types most affected by TEs (mTEcs and pDCs) are essential to establishing central T-cell tolerance. Therefore, we propose that orchestrating TE expression in thymic cells is critical to prevent autoimmunity in vertebrates.

    1. Genetics and Genomics
    Pianpian Zhao, Zhifeng Sheng ... Hou-Feng Zheng
    Research Article

    The ‘diabetic bone paradox’ suggested that type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients would have higher areal bone mineral density (BMD) but higher fracture risk than individuals without T2D. In this study, we found that the genetically predicted T2D was associated with higher BMD and lower risk of fracture in both weighted genetic risk score (wGRS) and two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analyses. We also identified ten genomic loci shared between T2D and fracture, with the top signal at SNP rs4580892 in the intron of gene RSPO3. And the higher expression in adipose subcutaneous and higher protein level in plasma of RSPO3 were associated with increased risk of T2D, but decreased risk of fracture. In the prospective study, T2D was observed to be associated with higher risk of fracture, but BMI mediated 30.2% of the protective effect. However, when stratified by the T2D-related risk factors for fracture, we observed that the effect of T2D on the risk of fracture decreased when the number of T2D-related risk factors decreased, and the association became non-significant if the T2D patients carried none of the risk factors. In conclusion, the genetically determined T2D might not be associated with higher risk of fracture. And the shared genetic architecture between T2D and fracture suggested a top signal around RSPO3 gene. The observed effect size of T2D on fracture risk decreased if the T2D-related risk factors could be eliminated. Therefore, it is important to manage the complications of T2D to prevent the risk of fracture.