1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
  2. Genetics and Genomics
Download icon

Functional dynamic genetic effects on gene regulation are specific to particular cell types and environmental conditions

  1. Anthony S Findley
  2. Alan Monziani
  3. Allison L Richards
  4. Katherine Rhodes
  5. Michelle C Ward
  6. Cynthia A Kalita
  7. Adnan Alazizi
  8. Ali Pazokitoroudi
  9. Sriram Sankararaman
  10. Xiaoquan Wen
  11. David E Lanfear
  12. Roger Pique-Regi  Is a corresponding author
  13. Yoav Gilad  Is a corresponding author
  14. Francesca Luca  Is a corresponding author
  1. Wayne State University, United States
  2. University of Chicago, United States
  3. UCLA, United States
  4. University of Michigan, United States
  5. Henry Ford Hospital, United States
Research Article
  • Cited 0
  • Views 895
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2021;10:e67077 doi: 10.7554/eLife.67077

Abstract

Genetic effects on gene expression and splicing can be modulated by cellular and environmental factors; yet interactions between genotypes, cell type and treatment have not been comprehensively studied together. We used an induced pluripotent stem cell system to study multiple cell types derived from the same individuals and exposed them to a large panel of treatments. Cellular responses involved different genes and pathways for gene expression and splicing, and were highly variable across contexts. For thousands of genes, we identified variable allelic expression across contexts and characterized different types of gene-environment interactions, many of which are associated with complex traits. Promoter functional and evolutionary features distinguished genes with elevated allelic imbalance mean and variance. On average half of the genes with dynamic regulatory interactions were missed by large eQTL mapping studies, indicating the importance of exploring multiple treatments to reveal previously unrecognized regulatory loci that may be important for disease.

Data availability

Sequencing files have been uploaded to the Sequence Read Archive (SRA) under Bioproject PRJNA694697

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Anthony S Findley

    Center for Molecular Medicine and Genetics, Wayne State University, Detroit, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9922-3076
  2. Alan Monziani

    Center for Molecular Medicine and Genetics, Wayne State University, Detroit, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Allison L Richards

    Center for Molecular Medicine and Genetics, Wayne State University, Detroit, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Katherine Rhodes

    Department of Human Genetics, University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Michelle C Ward

    Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1485-320X
  6. Cynthia A Kalita

    Center for Molecular Medicine and Genetics, Wayne State University, Detroit, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Adnan Alazizi

    Center for Molecular Medicine and Genetics, Wayne State University, Detroit, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Ali Pazokitoroudi

    Department of Computer Science,, UCLA, Los Angeles, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Sriram Sankararaman

    Department of Computer Science,, UCLA, Los Angeles, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Xiaoquan Wen

    University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. David E Lanfear

    Center for Individualized and Genomic Medicine Research, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Roger Pique-Regi

    Center for Molecular Medicine and Genetics, Wayne State University, Detroit, United States
    For correspondence
    rpique@wayne.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1262-2275
  13. Yoav Gilad

    Department of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    For correspondence
    gilad@uchicago.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8284-8926
  14. Francesca Luca

    Center for Molecular Medicine and Genetics, Wayne State University, Detroit, United States
    For correspondence
    fluca@wayne.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8252-9052

Funding

National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM109215)

  • Roger Pique-Regi
  • Francesca Luca

National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R35GM131726)

  • Yoav Gilad

National Institute of General Medical Sciences (F30GM131580)

  • Anthony S Findley

National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R35GM125055)

  • Sriram Sankararaman

National Science Foundation (III-1705121)

  • Ali Pazokitoroudi
  • Sriram Sankararaman

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Stephen CJ Parker, University of Michigan, United States

Publication history

  1. Received: February 1, 2021
  2. Accepted: May 13, 2021
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: May 14, 2021 (version 1)

Copyright

© 2021, Findley 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

  • 895
    Page views
  • 146
    Downloads
  • 0
    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. Cell Biology
    2. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    Christopher Duncan-Lewis et al.
    Research Article Updated

    RNA abundance is generally sensitive to perturbations in decay and synthesis rates, but crosstalk between RNA polymerase II transcription and cytoplasmic mRNA degradation often leads to compensatory changes in gene expression. Here, we reveal that widespread mRNA decay during early apoptosis represses RNAPII transcription, indicative of positive (rather than compensatory) feedback. This repression requires active cytoplasmic mRNA degradation, which leads to impaired recruitment of components of the transcription preinitiation complex to promoter DNA. Importin α/β-mediated nuclear import is critical for this feedback signaling, suggesting that proteins translocating between the cytoplasm and nucleus connect mRNA decay to transcription. We also show that an analogous pathway activated by viral nucleases similarly depends on nuclear protein import. Collectively, these data demonstrate that accelerated mRNA decay leads to the repression of mRNA transcription, thereby amplifying the shutdown of gene expression. This highlights a conserved gene regulatory mechanism by which cells respond to threats.

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    Amy R Strom et al.
    Research Article

    Chromatin, which consists of DNA and associated proteins, contains genetic information and is a mechanical component of the nucleus. Heterochromatic histone methylation controls nucleus and chromosome stiffness, but the contribution of heterochromatin protein HP1α (CBX5) is unknown. We used a novel HP1α auxin-inducible degron human cell line to rapidly degrade HP1α. Degradation did not alter transcription, local chromatin compaction, or histone methylation, but did decrease chromatin stiffness. Single-nucleus micromanipulation reveals that HP1α is essential to chromatin-based mechanics and maintains nuclear morphology, separate from histone methylation. Further experiments with dimerization-deficient HP1αI165E indicate that chromatin crosslinking via HP1α dimerization is critical, while polymer simulations demonstrate the importance of chromatin-chromatin crosslinkers in mechanics. In mitotic chromosomes, HP1α similarly bolsters stiffness while aiding in mitotic alignment and faithful segregation. HP1α is therefore a critical chromatin-crosslinking protein that provides mechanical strength to chromosomes and the nucleus throughout the cell cycle and supports cellular functions.