1. Developmental Biology
Download icon

Spatiotemporal dynamics and heterogeneity of renal lymphatics in mammalian development and cystic kidney disease

  1. Daniyal J Jafree
  2. Dale Moulding
  3. Maria Kolatsi-Joannou
  4. Nuria Perretta Tejedor
  5. Karen L Price
  6. Natalie J Milmoe
  7. Claire L Walsh
  8. Rosa Maria Correra
  9. Paul JD Winyard
  10. Peter C Harris
  11. Christiana Ruhrberg
  12. Simon Walker-Samuel
  13. Paul R Riley
  14. Adrian S Woolf
  15. Peter Scambler
  16. David A Long  Is a corresponding author
  1. University College London, United Kingdom
  2. Mayo Clinic, United States
  3. University of Oxford, United Kingdom
  4. University of Manchester, United Kingdom
Short Report
  • Cited 3
  • Views 2,726
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2019;8:e48183 doi: 10.7554/eLife.48183

Abstract

Heterogeneity of lymphatic vessels during embryogenesis is critical for organ-specific lymphatic function. Little is known about lymphatics in the developing kidney, despite their established roles in pathology of the mature organ. We performed three-dimensional imaging to characterize lymphatic vessel formation in the mammalian embryonic kidney at single-cell resolution. In mouse, we visually and quantitatively assessed the development of kidney lymphatic vessels, remodeling from a ring-like anastomosis under the nascent renal pelvis, a site of VEGF-C expression, to form a patent vascular plexus. We identified a heterogenous population of lymphatic endothelial cell clusters in mouse and human embryonic kidneys. Exogenous VEGF-C expanded the lymphatic population in explanted mouse embryonic kidneys. Finally, we characterized complex kidney lymphatic abnormalities in a genetic mouse model of polycystic kidney disease. Our study provides novel insights into the development of kidney lymphatic vasculature; a system which likely has fundamental roles in renal development, physiology and disease.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Daniyal J Jafree

    Developmental Biology and Cancer Programme, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8235-0394
  2. Dale Moulding

    Developmental Biology and Cancer Programme, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Maria Kolatsi-Joannou

    Developmental Biology and Cancer Programme, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Nuria Perretta Tejedor

    Developmental Biology and Cancer Programme, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Karen L Price

    Developmental Biology and Cancer Programme, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Natalie J Milmoe

    Developmental Biology and Cancer Programme, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Claire L Walsh

    Centre for Advanced Biomedical Imaging, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Rosa Maria Correra

    UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Paul JD Winyard

    Developmental Biology and Cancer Programme, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Peter C Harris

    Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Christiana Ruhrberg

    UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Simon Walker-Samuel

    Centre for Advanced Biomedical Imaging, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Paul R Riley

    Department of Physiology, Anatomy and Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9862-7332
  14. Adrian S Woolf

    School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5541-1358
  15. Peter Scambler

    Developmental Biology and Cancer Programme, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. David A Long

    Developmental Biology and Cancer Programme, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    d.long@ucl.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6580-3435

Funding

UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health (Child Health Research Studentship)

  • Daniyal J Jafree
  • Peter Scambler
  • David A Long

British Heart Foundation (RG/15/14/31880)

  • Peter Scambler

Kidney Research UK (Paed_RP_10_2018)

  • Daniyal J Jafree
  • Adrian S Woolf
  • David A Long

Kidney Research UK (IN_012_2019)

  • Daniyal J Jafree
  • David A Long

University College London MB/PhD Programme (MB/PhD Studentship)

  • Daniyal J Jafree

Medical Research Council (MR/P018629/1)

  • David A Long

Medical Research Council (MR/L002744/1)

  • Adrian S Woolf

Medical Research Council (MR/K026739/1)

  • Adrian S Woolf

British Heart Foundation (FS/19/14/34170)

  • Rosa Maria Correra

Diabetes UK (15/0005283)

  • David A Long

NIHR Great Ormond Street Hospital Biomedical Research Centre Award (17DD08)

  • Dale Moulding

British Heart Foundation (CH/11/1/28798)

  • Paul R Riley

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 experiments were carried out according to a UK Home Office project license (PPL: PE52D8C09) and were compliant with the UK Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986.

Human subjects: Human fetal kidneys were obtained from the Human Developmental Biology Resource (http://www.hdbr.org), which obtains written consent from donors to collect, store and distribute human fetal material between 4-20PCW.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Kari Alitalo, Wihuri Research Institute, Finland

Publication history

  1. Received: May 3, 2019
  2. Accepted: November 30, 2019
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: December 6, 2019 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: January 8, 2020 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2019, Jafree 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

  • 2,726
    Page views
  • 364
    Downloads
  • 3
    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. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    2. Developmental Biology
    Rozenn Riou et al.
    Research Article

    Erythropoietin (EPO) is a key regulator of erythropoiesis. The embryonic liver is the main site of erythropoietin synthesis, after which the kidney takes over. The adult liver retains the ability to express EPO, and we discovered here new players of this transcription, distinct from the classical hypoxia-inducible factor pathway. In mice genetically-invalidated in hepatocytes for the chromatin remodeler Arid1a, and for Apc, the major silencer of Wnt pathway, chromatin was more accessible and histone marks turned into active ones at the Epo downstream enhancer. Activating β-catenin signaling increased binding of Tcf4/β-catenin complex and upregulated its enhancer function. The loss of Arid1a together with β-catenin signaling, resulted in cell-autonomous EPO transcription in mouse and human hepatocytes. In mice with Apc-Arid1a gene invalidations in single hepatocytes, Epo de novo synthesis led to its secretion, to splenic erythropoiesis and to dramatic erythrocytosis. Thus, we identified new hepatic EPO regulation mechanism stimulating erythropoiesis.

    1. Developmental Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Amir Rattner et al.
    Tools and Resources

    In the hippocampus, a widely accepted model posits that the dentate gyrus improves learning and memory by enhancing discrimination between inputs. To test this model, we studied conditional knockout mice in which the vast majority of dentate granule cells (DGCs) fail to develop – including nearly all DGCs in the dorsal hippocampus – secondary to eliminating Wntless (Wls) in a subset of cortical progenitors with Gfap-Cre. Other cells in the Wlsfl/-;Gfap-Cre hippocampus were minimally affected, as determined by single nucleus RNA sequencing. CA3 pyramidal cells, the targets of DGC-derived mossy fibers, exhibited normal morphologies with a small reduction in the numbers of synaptic spines. Wlsfl/-;Gfap-Cre mice have a modest performance decrement in several complex spatial tasks, including active place avoidance. They were also modestly impaired in one simpler spatial task, finding a visible platform in the Morris water maze. These experiments support a role for DGCs in enhancing spatial learning and memory.