1. Developmental Biology
Download icon

Yap1 promotes sprouting and proliferation of lymphatic progenitors downstream of Vegfc in the zebrafish trunk

  1. Lin Grimm
  2. Hiroyuki Nakajima
  3. Smrita Chaudhury
  4. Neil I Bower
  5. Kazuhide S Okuda
  6. Andrew G Cox
  7. Natasha L Harvey
  8. Katarzyna Koltowska
  9. Naoki Mochizuki
  10. Benjamin M Hogan  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Queensland, Australia
  2. National Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center Research Institute, Japan
  3. Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Australia
  4. University of South Australia, Australia
  5. Uppsala University, Sweden
Research Article
  • Cited 8
  • Views 1,972
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2019;8:e42881 doi: 10.7554/eLife.42881

Abstract

Lymphatic vascular development involves specification of lymphatic endothelial progenitors that subsequently undergo sprouting, proliferation and tissue growth to form a complex second vasculature. Hippo pathway and effectors Yap and Taz promote organ growth and regulate morphogenesis and cellular proliferation. Yap and Taz control angiogenesis but a role in lymphangiogenesis remains to be fully elucidated. Here we show that Yap1 displays dynamic changes in lymphatic progenitors and is essential for lymphatic vascular development in zebrafish. Maternal and Zygotic (MZ) yap1 mutants show normal specification of lymphatic progenitors, abnormal cellular sprouting and reduced numbers of lymphatic progenitors emerging from the cardinal vein during lymphangiogenesis. Furthermore, Yap1 is indispensable for Vegfc-induced proliferation in a transgenic model of Vegfc overexpression. Paracrine Vegfc-signalling ultimately increases nuclear Yap1 in lymphatic progenitors to control lymphatic development. We thus identify a role for Yap in lymphangiogenesis, acting downstream of Vegfc to promote expansion of this vascular lineage.

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Lin Grimm

    Institute of Molecular Biosciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Hiroyuki Nakajima

    Department of Cell Biology, National Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center Research Institute, Suita, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Smrita Chaudhury

    Institute of Molecular Biosciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Neil I Bower

    Institute of Molecular Biosciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Kazuhide S Okuda

    Institute of Molecular Biosciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Andrew G Cox

    Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4189-9422
  7. Natasha L Harvey

    Centre for Cancer Biology, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Katarzyna Koltowska

    Department of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Naoki Mochizuki

    Department of Cell Biology, National Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center Research Institute, Suita, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3938-9602
  10. Benjamin M Hogan

    Institute of Molecular Biosciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
    For correspondence
    b.hogan@imb.uq.edu.au
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0651-7065

Funding

National Heart Foundation of Australia (1083811)

  • Benjamin M Hogan

National Health and Medical Research Council (1155221)

  • Benjamin M Hogan

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 zebrafish work was conducted in accordance with the guidelines of the animal ethic committee guidelines at the University of Queensland and of the National Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center (No.14005 and No.15010).

Reviewing Editor

  1. Holger Gerhardt, Max Delbrück Centre for Molecular Medicine, Germany

Publication history

  1. Received: October 16, 2018
  2. Accepted: April 28, 2019
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: April 30, 2019 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: May 14, 2019 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2019, Grimm 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

  • 1,972
    Page views
  • 354
    Downloads
  • 8
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.

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)

Download citations (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Further reading

    1. Developmental Biology
    2. Stem Cells and Regenerative Medicine
    Alessandro Bonfini et al.
    Research Article

    The gut is the primary interface between an animal and food, but how it adapts to qualitative dietary variation is poorly defined. We find that the Drosophila midgut plastically resizes following changes in dietary composition. A panel of nutrients collectively promote gut growth, which sugar opposes. Diet influences absolute and relative levels of enterocyte loss and stem cell proliferation, which together determine cell numbers. Diet also influences enterocyte size. A high sugar diet inhibits translation and uncouples ISC proliferation from expression of niche-derived signals but, surprisingly, rescuing these effects genetically was not sufficient to modify diet's impact on midgut size. However, when stem cell proliferation was deficient, diet's impact on enterocyte size was enhanced, and reducing enterocyte-autonomous TOR signaling was sufficient to attenuate diet-dependent midgut resizing. These data clarify the complex relationships between nutrition, epithelial dynamics, and cell size, and reveal a new mode of plastic, diet-dependent organ resizing.

    1. Developmental Biology
    2. Physics of Living Systems
    Yonghyun Song, Changbong Hyeon
    Research Article Updated

    Spatial boundaries formed during animal development originate from the pre-patterning of tissues by signaling molecules, called morphogens. The accuracy of boundary location is limited by the fluctuations of morphogen concentration that thresholds the expression level of target gene. Producing more morphogen molecules, which gives rise to smaller relative fluctuations, would better serve to shape more precise target boundaries; however, it incurs more thermodynamic cost. In the classical diffusion-depletion model of morphogen profile formation, the morphogen molecules synthesized from a local source display an exponentially decaying concentration profile with a characteristic length λ. Our theory suggests that in order to attain a precise profile with the minimal cost, λ should be roughly half the distance to the target boundary position from the source. Remarkably, we find that the profiles of morphogens that pattern the Drosophila embryo and wing imaginal disk are formed with nearly optimal λ. Our finding underscores the cost-effectiveness of precise morphogen profile formation in Drosophila development.