Regulation of Nodal signaling propagation by receptor interactions and positive feedback

  1. Hannes Preiß
  2. Anna C Kögler  Is a corresponding author
  3. David Mörsdorf
  4. Daniel Čapek
  5. Gary H Soh
  6. Katherine W Rogers
  7. Hernán Morales-Navarrete
  8. María Almuedo-Castillo
  9. Patrick Müller  Is a corresponding author
  1. Friedrich Miescher Laboratory of the Max Planck Society, Germany
  2. University of Konstanz, Germany
  3. University of Vienna, Austria
  4. Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, United States
  5. Centro Andaluz de Biología del Desarrollo, Spain

Abstract

During vertebrate embryogenesis, the germ layers are patterned by secreted Nodal signals. In the classical model, Nodals elicit signaling by binding to a complex comprising Type I/II Activin receptors (Acvr) and the co-receptor Tdgf1. However, it is currently unclear whether receptor binding can also affect the distribution of Nodals themselves through the embryo, and it is unknown which of the putative Acvr paralogs mediate Nodal signaling in zebrafish. Here, we characterize three Type I (Acvr1) and four Type II (Acvr2) homologs and show that - except for Acvr1c - all receptor-encoding transcripts are maternally deposited and present during zebrafish embryogenesis. We generated mutants and used them together with combinatorial morpholino knockdown and CRISPR F0 knockout (KO) approaches to assess compound loss-of-function phenotypes. We discovered that the Acvr2 homologs function partly redundantly and partially independently of Nodal to pattern the early zebrafish embryo, whereas the Type I receptors Acvr1b-a and Acvr1b-b redundantly act as major mediators of Nodal signaling. By combining quantitative analyses with expression manipulations, we found that feedback-regulated Type I receptors and co-receptors can directly influence the diffusion and distribution of Nodals, providing a mechanism for the spatial restriction of Nodal signaling during germ layer patterning.

Data availability

Figure 1 - Source Data, Figure 2 - Source Data, Figure 2 - Figure Supplement 1 - Source Data, Figure 2 - Figure Supplement 2 - Source Data, Figure 2 - Figure Supplement 3 - Source Data, Figure 3 - Source Data, Figure 3 - Figure Supplement 1 - Source Data, Figure 3 - Figure Supplement 2 - Source Data, Figure 3 - Figure Supplement 3 - Source Data, Figure 4 - Source Data, Figure 4 - Figure Supplement 1 - Source Data, Figure 5 - Source Data, Figure 6 - Source Data, Figure 6 - Figure Supplement 1 - Source Data and Figure 6 - Figure Supplement 2 - Source Data contain the numerical data used to generate the figures.

The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Hannes Preiß

    Systems Biology of Development, Friedrich Miescher Laboratory of the Max Planck Society, Tübingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6873-9440
  2. Anna C Kögler

    University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany
    For correspondence
    anna.koegler@uni-konstanz.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. David Mörsdorf

    Department of Neurosciences and Developmental Biology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8982-2155
  4. Daniel Čapek

    University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Gary H Soh

    Systems Biology of Development, Friedrich Miescher Laboratory of the Max Planck Society, Tübingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Katherine W Rogers

    Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Bethesda, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5700-2662
  7. Hernán Morales-Navarrete

    University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. María Almuedo-Castillo

    Centro Andaluz de Biología del Desarrollo, Seville, Spain
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Patrick Müller

    University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany
    For correspondence
    p.mueller@uni.kn
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0702-6209

Funding

International Max Planck Research School From Molecules to Organisms"" (Graduate Student Fellowship)

  • Hannes Preiß
  • David Mörsdorf
  • Patrick Müller

Max Planck Society (Max Planck Research Group)

  • Patrick Müller

European Research Council (Grant agreement No 637840 (QUANTPATTERN))

  • Patrick Müller

European Research Council (Grant agreement No 863952 (ACE-OF-SPACE))

  • Patrick Müller

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 procedures were executed in accordance with the guidelines of the State of Baden-Württemberg and approved by the Regierungspräsidium Tübingen and the Regierungspräsidium Freiburg.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Lilianna Solnica-Krezel, Washington University School of Medicine, United States

Version history

  1. Received: January 9, 2021
  2. Accepted: September 19, 2022
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: September 23, 2022 (version 1)
  4. Accepted Manuscript updated: October 5, 2022 (version 2)
  5. Version of Record published: October 27, 2022 (version 3)

Copyright

This is an open-access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication.

Metrics

  • 1,469
    Page views
  • 319
    Downloads
  • 2
    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)

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. Hannes Preiß
  2. Anna C Kögler
  3. David Mörsdorf
  4. Daniel Čapek
  5. Gary H Soh
  6. Katherine W Rogers
  7. Hernán Morales-Navarrete
  8. María Almuedo-Castillo
  9. Patrick Müller
(2022)
Regulation of Nodal signaling propagation by receptor interactions and positive feedback
eLife 11:e66397.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.66397

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.66397

Further reading

    1. Developmental Biology
    Marta Grzonka, Hisham Bazzi
    Research Article

    SAS‑6 (SASS6) is essential for centriole formation in human cells and other organisms but its function in mouse is unclear. Here, we report that Sass6‑mutant mouse embryos lack centrioles, activate the mitotic surveillance cell death pathway and arrest at mid‑gestation. In contrast, SAS‑6 is not required for centriole formation in mouse embryonic stem cells (mESCs), but is essential to maintain centriole architecture. Of note, centrioles appeared after just one day of culture of Sass6‑mutant blastocysts, from which mESCs are derived. Conversely, the number of cells with centrosomes is drastically decreased upon the exit from a mESC pluripotent state. At the mechanistic level, the activity of the master kinase in centriole formation, PLK4, associated with increased centriolar and centrosomal protein levels, endow mESCs with the robustness in using SAS‑6‑independent centriole-duplication pathways. Collectively, our data suggest a differential requirement for mouse SAS‑6 in centriole formation or integrity depending on PLK4 and centrosome composition.

    1. Developmental Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Wen Wang, Xiao Zhang ... Zi-Bing Jin
    Research Article Updated

    Chimeric RNAs have been found in both cancerous and healthy human cells. They have regulatory effects on human stem/progenitor cell differentiation, stemness maintenance, and central nervous system development. However, whether they are present in human retinal cells and their physiological functions in the retinal development remain unknown. Based on the human embryonic stem cell-derived retinal organoids (ROs) spanning from days 0 to 120, we present the expression atlas of chimeric RNAs throughout the developing ROs. We confirmed the existence of some common chimeric RNAs and also discovered many novel chimeric RNAs during retinal development. We focused on CTNNBIP1-CLSTN1 (CTCL) whose downregulation caused precocious neuronal differentiation and a marked reduction of neural progenitors in human cerebral organoids. CTCL is universally present in human retinas, ROs, and retinal cell lines, and its loss-of-function biases the progenitor cells toward retinal pigment epithelial cell fate at the expense of retinal cells. Together, this work provides a landscape of chimeric RNAs and reveals evidence for their critical role in human retinal development.