A non-mosaic transchromosomic mouse model of Down syndrome carrying the long arm of human chromosome 21

  1. Yasuhiro Kazuki  Is a corresponding author
  2. Feng J Gao
  3. Yicong Li
  4. Anna J Moyer
  5. Benjamin Devenney
  6. Kei Hiramatsu
  7. Sachiko Miyagawa-Tomita
  8. Satoshi Abe
  9. Kanako Kazuki
  10. Naoyo Kajitani
  11. Narumi Uno
  12. Shoko Takehara
  13. Masato Takiguchi
  14. Miho Yamakawa
  15. Atsushi Hasegawa
  16. Ritsuko Shimizu
  17. Satoko Matsukura
  18. Naohiro Noda
  19. Narumi Ogonuki
  20. Kimiko Inoue
  21. Shogo Matoba
  22. Atsuo Ogura
  23. Liliana D Florea
  24. Alena Savonenko
  25. Meifang Xiao
  26. Dan Wu
  27. Denise AS Batista
  28. Junhua Yang
  29. Zhaozhu Qiu
  30. Nandini Singh
  31. Joan T Richtsmeier
  32. Takashi Takeuchi
  33. Mitsuo Oshimura
  34. Roger H Reeves  Is a corresponding author
  1. Tottori University, Japan
  2. Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, United States
  3. Yamazaki University of Animal Health Technology, Japan
  4. Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Japan
  5. National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology, Japan
  6. RIKEN BioResource Research Center, Japan
  7. Zhejiang University, China
  8. John Hopkins University School of Medicine, United States
  9. California State University, United States
  10. Pennsylvania State University, United States

Abstract

Animal models of Down syndrome (DS), trisomic for human chromosome 21 (HSA21) genes or orthologs, provide insights into better understanding and treatment options. The only existing transchromosomic (Tc) mouse DS model, Tc1, carries a HSA21 with over 50 protein coding genes (PCGs) disrupted. Tc1 is mosaic, compromising interpretation of results. Here, we 'clone' the 34 MB long arm of HSA21 (HSA21q) as a mouse artificial chromosome (MAC). Through multiple steps of microcell-mediated chromosome transfer, we created a new Tc DS mouse model, Tc(HSA21q;MAC)1Yakaz ('TcMAC21'). TcMAC21 is not mosaic and contains 93% of HSA21q PCGs that are expressed and regulatable. TcMAC21 recapitulates many DS phenotypes including anomalies in heart, craniofacial skeleton and brain, molecular/cellular pathologies, and impairments in learning, memory and synaptic plasticity. TcMAC21 is the most complete genetic mouse model of DS extant and has potential for supporting a wide range of basic and preclinical research.

Data availability

All raw read data of TcMAC21 WGS were deposited to DDBJ Sequence Read Archive (DRA) under accession number DRA008337 and DRA008342

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Yasuhiro Kazuki

    Institute of Regenerative Medicine and Biofunction, Tottori University, Yonago, Japan
    For correspondence
    kazuki@tottori-u.ac.jp
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Feng J Gao

    Physiology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Yicong Li

    Physiology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Anna J Moyer

    Physiology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Benjamin Devenney

    Physiology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Kei Hiramatsu

    Institute of Regenerative Medicine and Biofunction, Tottori University, Yonago, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Sachiko Miyagawa-Tomita

    Yamazaki University of Animal Health Technology, Tokyo, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Satoshi Abe

    Chromosome Engineering Research Center, Tottori University, Yonago, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Kanako Kazuki

    Chromosome Engineering Research Center, Tottori University, Yonago, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Naoyo Kajitani

    Chromosome Engineering Research Center, Tottori University, Yonago, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Narumi Uno

    Institute of Regenerative Medicine and Biofunction, Tottori University, Yonago, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Shoko Takehara

    Chromosome Engineering Research Center, Tottori University, Yonago, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Masato Takiguchi

    Institute of Regenerative Medicine and Biofunction, Tottori University, Yonago, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Miho Yamakawa

    Chromosome Engineering Research Center, Tottori University, Yonago, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Atsushi Hasegawa

    Molecular Hematology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Ritsuko Shimizu

    Molecular Hematology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  17. Satoko Matsukura

    Biomedical Research Institute, National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology, Tsukuba, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  18. Naohiro Noda

    Biomedical Research, National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology, Tsukuba, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  19. Narumi Ogonuki

    Bioresource Engineering Division, RIKEN BioResource Research Center, Tsukuba, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  20. Kimiko Inoue

    Bioresource Engineering Division, RIKEN BioResource Research Center, Tsukuba, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  21. Shogo Matoba

    Bioresource Engineering Division, RIKEN BioResource Research Center, Tsukuba, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  22. Atsuo Ogura

    Bioresource Engineering Division, RIKEN BioResource Research Center, Tsukuba, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0447-1988
  23. Liliana D Florea

    Genetic Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  24. Alena Savonenko

    Pathology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  25. Meifang Xiao

    Department of Neuroscience, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  26. Dan Wu

    Department of Biomedical Engineering, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  27. Denise AS Batista

    Pathology, John Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  28. Junhua Yang

    Physiology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  29. Zhaozhu Qiu

    Pathology, John Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  30. Nandini Singh

    Department of Anthropology, California State University, Sacramento, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  31. Joan T Richtsmeier

    Pennsylvania State University, University Park, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0239-5822
  32. Takashi Takeuchi

    Division of Biosignaling, Tottori University, Yonago, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  33. Mitsuo Oshimura

    Department of Biomedical Science, Tottori University, Yonago, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  34. Roger H Reeves

    Department of Physiology and Institute for Genetic Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, United States
    For correspondence
    rreeves@jhmi.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3581-0850

Funding

Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R21HD098540-01)

  • Roger H Reeves

Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD038384)

  • Roger H Reeves

Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (25221308)

  • Mitsuo Oshimura

Core Research for Evolutional Science and Technology (JPMJCR18S4)

  • Yasuhiro Kazuki

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Susan L Ackerman, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of California, San Diego, United States

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 animal experiments were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) protocols of Johns Hopkins University (#MO18M291), Tottori University (Permit Number: 06-S-102, 08-Y-69, 09-Y-24,11-Y-52, 13-Y-19, 14-Y-23, 15-Y-31, 16-Y-20, 17-Y-28, 19-Y-22, 20-Y-13), RIKEN BioResource Research Center (Permit Number: 08-005, 09-005, 10-005), and Tohoku University (Permit Number: 2013MdA-424)..

Version history

  1. Received: February 20, 2020
  2. Accepted: June 28, 2020
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: June 29, 2020 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: July 13, 2020 (version 2)
  5. Version of Record updated: July 14, 2020 (version 3)

Copyright

© 2020, Kazuki 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

  • 6,042
    views
  • 693
    downloads
  • 69
    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. Yasuhiro Kazuki
  2. Feng J Gao
  3. Yicong Li
  4. Anna J Moyer
  5. Benjamin Devenney
  6. Kei Hiramatsu
  7. Sachiko Miyagawa-Tomita
  8. Satoshi Abe
  9. Kanako Kazuki
  10. Naoyo Kajitani
  11. Narumi Uno
  12. Shoko Takehara
  13. Masato Takiguchi
  14. Miho Yamakawa
  15. Atsushi Hasegawa
  16. Ritsuko Shimizu
  17. Satoko Matsukura
  18. Naohiro Noda
  19. Narumi Ogonuki
  20. Kimiko Inoue
  21. Shogo Matoba
  22. Atsuo Ogura
  23. Liliana D Florea
  24. Alena Savonenko
  25. Meifang Xiao
  26. Dan Wu
  27. Denise AS Batista
  28. Junhua Yang
  29. Zhaozhu Qiu
  30. Nandini Singh
  31. Joan T Richtsmeier
  32. Takashi Takeuchi
  33. Mitsuo Oshimura
  34. Roger H Reeves
(2020)
A non-mosaic transchromosomic mouse model of Down syndrome carrying the long arm of human chromosome 21
eLife 9:e56223.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.56223

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.56223

Further reading

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Ardalan Naseri, Degui Zhi, Shaojie Zhang
    Research Article Updated

    Runs-of-homozygosity (ROH) segments, contiguous homozygous regions in a genome were traditionally linked to families and inbred populations. However, a growing literature suggests that ROHs are ubiquitous in outbred populations. Still, most existing genetic studies of ROH in populations are limited to aggregated ROH content across the genome, which does not offer the resolution for mapping causal loci. This limitation is mainly due to a lack of methods for the efficient identification of shared ROH diplotypes. Here, we present a new method, ROH-DICE (runs-of-homozygous diplotype cluster enumerator), to find large ROH diplotype clusters, sufficiently long ROHs shared by a sufficient number of individuals, in large cohorts. ROH-DICE identified over 1 million ROH diplotypes that span over 100 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and are shared by more than 100 UK Biobank participants. Moreover, we found significant associations of clustered ROH diplotypes across the genome with various self-reported diseases, with the strongest associations found between the extended human leukocyte antigen (HLA) region and autoimmune disorders. We found an association between a diplotype covering the homeostatic iron regulator (HFE) gene and hemochromatosis, even though the well-known causal SNP was not directly genotyped or imputed. Using a genome-wide scan, we identified a putative association between carriers of an ROH diplotype in chromosome 4 and an increase in mortality among COVID-19 patients (p-value = 1.82 × 10−11). In summary, our ROH-DICE method, by calling out large ROH diplotypes in a large outbred population, enables further population genetics into the demographic history of large populations. More importantly, our method enables a new genome-wide mapping approach for finding disease-causing loci with multi-marker recessive effects at a population scale.

    1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Lisa Baumgartner, Jonathan J Ipsaro ... Julius Brennecke
    Research Advance

    Members of the diverse heterochromatin protein 1 (HP1) family play crucial roles in heterochromatin formation and maintenance. Despite the similar affinities of their chromodomains for di- and tri-methylated histone H3 lysine 9 (H3K9me2/3), different HP1 proteins exhibit distinct chromatin-binding patterns, likely due to interactions with various specificity factors. Previously, we showed that the chromatin-binding pattern of the HP1 protein Rhino, a crucial factor of the Drosophila PIWI-interacting RNA (piRNA) pathway, is largely defined by a DNA sequence-specific C2H2 zinc finger protein named Kipferl (Baumgartner et al., 2022). Here, we elucidate the molecular basis of the interaction between Rhino and its guidance factor Kipferl. Through phylogenetic analyses, structure prediction, and in vivo genetics, we identify a single amino acid change within Rhino’s chromodomain, G31D, that does not affect H3K9me2/3 binding but disrupts the interaction between Rhino and Kipferl. Flies carrying the rhinoG31D mutation phenocopy kipferl mutant flies, with Rhino redistributing from piRNA clusters to satellite repeats, causing pronounced changes in the ovarian piRNA profile of rhinoG31D flies. Thus, Rhino’s chromodomain functions as a dual-specificity module, facilitating interactions with both a histone mark and a DNA-binding protein.