E2F/Dp inactivation in fat body cells triggers systemic metabolic changes

  1. Maria Paula Zappia
  2. Ana Guarner
  3. Nadia Kellie-Smith
  4. Alice Rogers
  5. Robert Morris
  6. Brandon Nicolay
  7. Myriam Boukhali
  8. Wilhelm Haas
  9. Nicholas Dyson
  10. Maxim V Frolov  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Illinois at Chicago, United States
  2. Massachusetts General Hospital, United States
  3. Massachusetts General Hospital CancerCenter and Harvard Medical School, United States

Abstract

The E2F transcription factors play a critical role in controlling cell fate. In Drosophila, the inactivation of E2F in either muscle or fat body results in lethality, suggesting an essential function for E2F in these tissues. However, the cellular and organismal consequences of inactivating E2F in these tissues are not fully understood. Here, we show that the E2F loss exerts both tissue-intrinsic and systemic effects. The proteomic profiling of E2F-deficient muscle and fat body revealed that E2F regulates carbohydrate metabolism, a conclusion further supported by metabolomic profiling. Intriguingly, animals with E2F-deficient fat body had a lower level of circulating trehalose and reduced storage of fat. Strikingly, a sugar supplement was sufficient to restore both trehalose and fat levels, and subsequently, rescued animal lethality. Collectively, our data highlight the unexpected complexity of E2F mutant phenotype, which is a result of combining both tissue-specific and systemic changes that contribute to animal development.

Data availability

All mass spectrometer RAW files for quantitative proteomics analysis can be accessed through the MassIVE data repository (massive.ucsd.edu) under the accession number MSV000086854

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Maria Paula Zappia

    Biochemistry and Molecular Genetics, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Ana Guarner

    Cancer Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Charlestown, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Nadia Kellie-Smith

    Biochemistry and Molecular Genetics, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Alice Rogers

    Biochemistry and Molecular Genetics, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Robert Morris

    Cancer Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Charlestown, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Brandon Nicolay

    Cancer Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Charlestown, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Myriam Boukhali

    Cancer Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Charlestown, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Wilhelm Haas

    Massachusetts General Hospital CancerCenter and Harvard Medical School, Charlestown, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Nicholas Dyson

    Cancer Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Charlestown, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Maxim V Frolov

    Biochemistry and Molecular Genetics, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, United States
    For correspondence
    mfrolov@uic.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3953-3739

Funding

National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R35GM131707)

  • Maxim V Frolov

National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM117413)

  • Nicholas Dyson

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

Copyright

© 2021, Zappia 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

  • 1,712
    views
  • 212
    downloads
  • 5
    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. Maria Paula Zappia
  2. Ana Guarner
  3. Nadia Kellie-Smith
  4. Alice Rogers
  5. Robert Morris
  6. Brandon Nicolay
  7. Myriam Boukhali
  8. Wilhelm Haas
  9. Nicholas Dyson
  10. Maxim V Frolov
(2021)
E2F/Dp inactivation in fat body cells triggers systemic metabolic changes
eLife 10:e67753.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.67753

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.67753

Further reading

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Evolutionary Biology
    Susanne Tilk, Judith Frydman ... Dmitri A Petrov
    Research Article

    In asexual populations that don’t undergo recombination, such as cancer, deleterious mutations are expected to accrue readily due to genome-wide linkage between mutations. Despite this mutational load of often thousands of deleterious mutations, many tumors thrive. How tumors survive the damaging consequences of this mutational load is not well understood. Here, we investigate the functional consequences of mutational load in 10,295 human tumors by quantifying their phenotypic response through changes in gene expression. Using a generalized linear mixed model (GLMM), we find that high mutational load tumors up-regulate proteostasis machinery related to the mitigation and prevention of protein misfolding. We replicate these expression responses in cancer cell lines and show that the viability in high mutational load cancer cells is strongly dependent on complexes that degrade and refold proteins. This indicates that the upregulation of proteostasis machinery is causally important for high mutational burden tumors and uncovers new therapeutic vulnerabilities.

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Cell Biology
    Kourosh Hayatigolkhatmi, Chiara Soriani ... Simona Rodighiero
    Tools and Resources

    Understanding the cell cycle at the single-cell level is crucial for cellular biology and cancer research. While current methods using fluorescent markers have improved the study of adherent cells, non-adherent cells remain challenging. In this study, we addressed this gap by combining a specialized surface to enhance cell attachment, the FUCCI(CA)2 sensor, an automated image analysis pipeline, and a custom machine learning algorithm. This approach enabled precise measurement of cell cycle phase durations in non-adherent cells. This method was validated in acute myeloid leukemia cell lines NB4 and Kasumi-1, which have unique cell cycle characteristics, and we tested the impact of cell cycle-modulating drugs on NB4 cells. Our cell cycle analysis system, which is also compatible with adherent cells, is fully automated and freely available, providing detailed insights from hundreds of cells under various conditions. This report presents a valuable tool for advancing cancer research and drug development by enabling comprehensive, automated cell cycle analysis in both adherent and non-adherent cells.