Cell type composition and circuit organization of clonally related excitatory neurons in the juvenile mouse neocortex

  1. Cathryn R Cadwell  Is a corresponding author
  2. Federico Scala
  3. Paul G Fahey
  4. Dmitry Kobak
  5. Shalaka Mulherkar
  6. Fabian H Sinz
  7. Stelios Papadopoulos
  8. Zheng H Tan
  9. Per Johnsson
  10. Leonard Hartmanis
  11. Shuang Li
  12. Ronald J Cotton
  13. Kimberley F Tolias
  14. Rickard Sandberg
  15. Philipp Berens
  16. Xialong Jiang  Is a corresponding author
  17. Andreas Savas Tolias  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of California, San Francisco, United States
  2. Baylor College of Medicine, United States
  3. University of Tübingen, Germany
  4. Karolinska Institutet, Sweden

Abstract

Clones of excitatory neurons derived from a common progenitor have been proposed to serve as elementary information processing modules in the neocortex. To characterize the cell types and circuit diagram of clonally related neurons, we performed multi-cell patch clamp recordings and Patch-seq on neurons derived from Nestin-positive progenitors labeled by tamoxifen induction at embryonic day 10.5. The resulting clones are derived from two radial glia on average, span cortical layers 2-6, and are composed of a random sampling of transcriptomic cell types. We find an interaction between shared lineage and connectivity: related neurons are more likely to be connected vertically across cortical layers, but not laterally within the same layer. These findings challenge the view that related neurons show uniformly increased connectivity and suggest that integration of vertical intra-clonal input with lateral inter-clonal input may represent a developmentally programmed connectivity motif supporting the emergence of functional circuits.

Data availability

Sequencing data have been deposited in GEO under accession code GSE140946. All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files. Source data files have been provided for Figures 1, 2, 3 and 4. The source data provided for Figure 4 also apply to Figure 5 and Table 1.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Cathryn R Cadwell

    Anatomic Pathology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    For correspondence
    Cathryn.Cadwell@ucsf.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1963-8285
  2. Federico Scala

    Neuroscience, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Paul G Fahey

    Neuroscience, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Dmitry Kobak

    Institute for Ophthalmic Research, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Shalaka Mulherkar

    Department of Neuroscience, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8736-527X
  6. Fabian H Sinz

    Neuroscience, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Stelios Papadopoulos

    Neuroscience, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Zheng H Tan

    Neuroscience, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Per Johnsson

    Department of Cell and Molecular Biology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Leonard Hartmanis

    Department of Cell and Molecular Biology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Shuang Li

    Neuroscience, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Ronald J Cotton

    Neuroscience, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Kimberley F Tolias

    Department of Neuroscience, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-2092-920X
  14. Rickard Sandberg

    Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Philipp Berens

    Institute for Ophthalmic Research, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0199-4727
  16. Xialong Jiang

    Department of Neuroscience, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    For correspondence
    xiaolonj@bcm.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  17. Andreas Savas Tolias

    Neuroscience, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    For correspondence
    astolias@bcm.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4305-6376

Funding

Baylor College of Medicine (Optical Imaging and Vital Microscopy Core)

  • Andreas Savas Tolias

Baylor College of Medicine (Faculty start-up fund)

  • Xialong Jiang

National Institutes of Health (F30MH095440,T32GM007330)

  • Cathryn R Cadwell

National Institutes of Health (F30MH112312)

  • Paul G Fahey

Baylor Research Advocates for Student Scientists (BRASS Scholar Award)

  • Cathryn R Cadwell
  • Paul G Fahey

National Institutes of Health (R01MH103108,R01DA028525,DP1EY023176,P30EY002520,T32EY07001,DP1OD008301)

  • Andreas Savas Tolias

National Science Foundation (707359)

  • Andreas Savas Tolias

Svenska Forskningsrådet Formas

  • Rickard Sandberg

Vallee Foundation

  • Rickard Sandberg

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (EXC 2064,BE5601/4-1)

  • Philipp Berens

Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (FKZ 01GQ1601)

  • Philipp Berens

McKnight Foundation (McKnight Scholar Award)

  • Andreas Savas Tolias

Arnold and Mabel Beckman Foundation (Young Investigator Award)

  • Andreas Savas Tolias

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

Ethics

Animal experimentation: This study was performed in strict accordance with the recommendations in the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals of the National Institutes of Health. All of the animals were handled according to an approved institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC) protocol of Baylor College of Medicine (protocol # AN-4703). Every effort was made to minimize suffering.

Copyright

© 2020, Cadwell 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

  • 4,088
    views
  • 628
    downloads
  • 40
    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. Cathryn R Cadwell
  2. Federico Scala
  3. Paul G Fahey
  4. Dmitry Kobak
  5. Shalaka Mulherkar
  6. Fabian H Sinz
  7. Stelios Papadopoulos
  8. Zheng H Tan
  9. Per Johnsson
  10. Leonard Hartmanis
  11. Shuang Li
  12. Ronald J Cotton
  13. Kimberley F Tolias
  14. Rickard Sandberg
  15. Philipp Berens
  16. Xialong Jiang
  17. Andreas Savas Tolias
(2020)
Cell type composition and circuit organization of clonally related excitatory neurons in the juvenile mouse neocortex
eLife 9:e52951.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.52951

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.52951

Further reading

    1. Developmental Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Xingsen Zhao, Qihang Sun ... Xuekun Li
    Research Article

    Williams syndrome (WS; OMIM#194050) is a rare disorder, which is caused by the microdeletion of one copy of 25–27 genes, and WS patients display diverse neuronal deficits. Although remarkable progresses have been achieved, the mechanisms for these distinct deficits are still largely unknown. Here, we have shown that neural progenitor cells (NPCs) in WS forebrain organoids display abnormal proliferation and differentiation capabilities, and synapse formation. Genes with altered expression are related to neuronal development and neurogenesis. Single cell RNA-seq (scRNA-seq) data analysis revealed 13 clusters in healthy control and WS organoids. WS organoids show an aberrant generation of excitatory neurons. Mechanistically, the expression of transthyretin (TTR) are remarkably decreased in WS forebrain organoids. We have found that GTF2IRD1 encoded by one WS associated gene GTF2IRD1 binds to TTR promoter regions and regulates the expression of TTR. In addition, exogenous TTR can activate ERK signaling and rescue neurogenic deficits of WS forebrain organoids. Gtf2ird1-deficient mice display similar neurodevelopmental deficits as observed in WS organoids. Collectively, our study reveals critical function of GTF2IRD1 in regulating neurodevelopment of WS forebrain organoids and mice through regulating TTR-ERK pathway.

    1. Developmental Biology
    Laurel A Rohde, Arianne Bercowsky-Rama ... Andrew C Oates
    Research Article

    Rhythmic and sequential segmentation of the growing vertebrate body relies on the segmentation clock, a multi-cellular oscillating genetic network. The clock is visible as tissue-level kinematic waves of gene expression that travel through the presomitic mesoderm (PSM) and arrest at the position of each forming segment. Here, we test how this hallmark wave pattern is driven by culturing single maturing PSM cells. We compare their cell-autonomous oscillatory and arrest dynamics to those we observe in the embryo at cellular resolution, finding similarity in the relative slowing of oscillations and arrest in concert with differentiation. This shows that cell-extrinsic signals are not required by the cells to instruct the developmental program underlying the wave pattern. We show that a cell-autonomous timing activity initiates during cell exit from the tailbud, then runs down in the anterior-ward cell flow in the PSM, thereby using elapsed time to provide positional information to the clock. Exogenous FGF lengthens the duration of the cell-intrinsic timer, indicating extrinsic factors in the embryo may regulate the segmentation clock via the timer. In sum, our work suggests that a noisy cell-autonomous, intrinsic timer drives the slowing and arrest of oscillations underlying the wave pattern, while extrinsic factors in the embryo tune this timer’s duration and precision. This is a new insight into the balance of cell-intrinsic and -extrinsic mechanisms driving tissue patterning in development.