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

  • 4,051
    views
  • 623
    downloads
  • 39
    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
    Wenyue Guan, Ziyan Nie ... Jonathan Enriquez
    Research Article

    Neuronal stem cells generate a limited and consistent number of neuronal progenies, each possessing distinct morphologies and functions, which are crucial for optimal brain function. Our study focused on a neuroblast (NB) lineage in Drosophila known as Lin A/15, which generates motoneurons (MNs) and glia. Intriguingly, Lin A/15 NB dedicates 40% of its time to producing immature MNs (iMNs) that are subsequently eliminated through apoptosis. Two RNA-binding proteins, Imp and Syp, play crucial roles in this process. Imp+ MNs survive, while Imp−, Syp+ MNs undergo apoptosis. Genetic experiments show that Imp promotes survival, whereas Syp promotes cell death in iMNs. Late-born MNs, which fail to express a functional code of transcription factors (mTFs) that control their morphological fate, are subject to elimination. Manipulating the expression of Imp and Syp in Lin A/15 NB and progeny leads to a shift of TF code in late-born MNs toward that of early-born MNs, and their survival. Additionally, introducing the TF code of early-born MNs into late-born MNs also promoted their survival. These findings demonstrate that the differential expression of Imp and Syp in iMNs links precise neuronal generation and distinct identities through the regulation of mTFs. Both Imp and Syp are conserved in vertebrates, suggesting that they play a fundamental role in precise neurogenesis across species.

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Developmental Biology
    Juan Manuel Gomez, Hendrik Nolte ... Maria Leptin
    Research Article Updated

    The initially homogeneous epithelium of the early Drosophila embryo differentiates into regional subpopulations with different behaviours and physical properties that are needed for morphogenesis. The factors at top of the genetic hierarchy that control these behaviours are known, but many of their targets are not. To understand how proteins work together to mediate differential cellular activities, we studied in an unbiased manner the proteomes and phosphoproteomes of the three main cell populations along the dorso-ventral axis during gastrulation using mutant embryos that represent the different populations. We detected 6111 protein groups and 6259 phosphosites of which 3398 and 3433 were differentially regulated, respectively. The changes in phosphosite abundance did not correlate with changes in host protein abundance, showing phosphorylation to be a regulatory step during gastrulation. Hierarchical clustering of protein groups and phosphosites identified clusters that contain known fate determinants such as Doc1, Sog, Snail, and Twist. The recovery of the appropriate known marker proteins in each of the different mutants we used validated the approach, but also revealed that two mutations that both interfere with the dorsal fate pathway, Toll10B and serpin27aex do this in very different manners. Diffused network analyses within each cluster point to microtubule components as one of the main groups of regulated proteins. Functional studies on the role of microtubules provide the proof of principle that microtubules have different functions in different domains along the DV axis of the embryo.