Abstract

During early vertebrate development, signals from a special region of the embryo, the organizer, can re-direct the fate of non-neural ectoderm cells to form a complete, patterned nervous system. This is called neural induction and has generally been imagined as a single signalling event, causing a switch of fate. Here we undertake a comprehensive analysis, in very fine time-course, of the events following exposure of competent ectoderm of the chick to the organizer (the tip of the primitive streak, Hensen's node). Using transcriptomics and epigenomics we generate a Gene Regulatory Network comprising 175 transcriptional regulators and 5,614 predicted interactions between them, with fine temporal dynamics from initial exposure to the signals to expression of mature neural plate markers. Using in situ hybridization, single-cell RNA-sequencing and reporter assays we show that the gene regulatory hierarchy of responses to a grafted organizer closely resembles the events of normal neural plate development. The study is accompanied by an extensive resource, including information about conservation of the predicted enhancers in other vertebrates.

Data availability

Full scRNAseq software and pipelines deposited in https://github.com/alexthiery/10x_neural_tubeFull software/scripts/pipelines for GRN construction deposited inhttps://github.com/grace-hc-lu/NI_networkFull sequencing datasets in ArrayExpress under E-MTAB-10409, E-MTAB-10420, E-MTAB-10424, E-MTAB-10426, and E-MTAB-10408.Expression patterns submitted to GEISHA (http://geisha.arizona.edu/geisha/)Code for DREiVe: https://github.com/grace-hc-lu/DREiVe

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Katherine E Trevers

    Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Hui-Chun Lu

    Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Youwen Yang

    Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Alexandre P Thiery

    Centre for Craniofacial and Regenerative Biology, King's College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Anna C Strobl

    Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Claire Anderson

    Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Božena Pálinkášová

    Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Nidia MM de Oliveira

    Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Irene M de Almeida

    Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Mohsin AF Khan

    Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Natalia Moncaut

    Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Nicholas M Luscombe

    The Francis Crick Institute, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Leslie Dale

    Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Andrea Streit

    Centre for Craniofacial and Regenerative Biology, King's College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7664-7917
  15. Claudio D Stern

    Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    c.stern@ucl.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9907-889X

Funding

National Institute of Mental Health (R01 MH60156)

  • Claudio D Stern

Wellcome Trust (FC010110)

  • Nicholas M Luscombe

Medical Research Council (G0400559)

  • Claudio D Stern

Wellcome Trust (063988)

  • Claudio D Stern

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/R003432/1)

  • Claudio D Stern

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/K007742/1)

  • Claudio D Stern

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/K006207/1)

  • Andrea Streit

Francis Crick Institute

  • Nicholas M Luscombe

Cancer Research UK (FC010110)

  • Nicholas M Luscombe

Medical Research Council (FC010110)

  • Nicholas M Luscombe

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

Copyright

© 2023, Trevers 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

  • 2,283
    views
  • 444
    downloads
  • 9
    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. Katherine E Trevers
  2. Hui-Chun Lu
  3. Youwen Yang
  4. Alexandre P Thiery
  5. Anna C Strobl
  6. Claire Anderson
  7. Božena Pálinkášová
  8. Nidia MM de Oliveira
  9. Irene M de Almeida
  10. Mohsin AF Khan
  11. Natalia Moncaut
  12. Nicholas M Luscombe
  13. Leslie Dale
  14. Andrea Streit
  15. Claudio D Stern
(2023)
A gene regulatory network for neural induction
eLife 12:e73189.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.73189

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.73189

Further reading

    1. Developmental Biology
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Debashish U Menon, Prabuddha Chakraborty ... Terry Magnuson
    Research Article

    We present evidence implicating the BAF (BRG1/BRM Associated Factor) chromatin remodeler in meiotic sex chromosome inactivation (MSCI). By immunofluorescence (IF), the putative BAF DNA binding subunit, ARID1A (AT-rich Interaction Domain 1 a), appeared enriched on the male sex chromosomes during diplonema of meiosis I. Germ cells showing a Cre-induced loss of ARID1A arrested in pachynema and failed to repress sex-linked genes, indicating a defective MSCI. Mutant sex chromosomes displayed an abnormal presence of elongating RNA polymerase II coupled with an overall increase in chromatin accessibility detectable by ATAC-seq. We identified a role for ARID1A in promoting the preferential enrichment of the histone variant, H3.3, on the sex chromosomes, a known hallmark of MSCI. Without ARID1A, the sex chromosomes appeared depleted of H3.3 at levels resembling autosomes. Higher resolution analyses by CUT&RUN revealed shifts in sex-linked H3.3 associations from discrete intergenic sites and broader gene-body domains to promoters in response to the loss of ARID1A. Several sex-linked sites displayed ectopic H3.3 occupancy that did not co-localize with DMC1 (DNA meiotic recombinase 1). This observation suggests a requirement for ARID1A in DMC1 localization to the asynapsed sex chromatids. We conclude that ARID1A-directed H3.3 localization influences meiotic sex chromosome gene regulation and DNA repair.

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Developmental Biology
    Sofía Suárez Freire, Sebastián Perez-Pandolfo ... Mariana Melani
    Research Article

    Eukaryotic cells depend on exocytosis to direct intracellularly synthesized material toward the extracellular space or the plasma membrane, so exocytosis constitutes a basic function for cellular homeostasis and communication between cells. The secretory pathway includes biogenesis of secretory granules (SGs), their maturation and fusion with the plasma membrane (exocytosis), resulting in release of SG content to the extracellular space. The larval salivary gland of Drosophila melanogaster is an excellent model for studying exocytosis. This gland synthesizes mucins that are packaged in SGs that sprout from the trans-Golgi network and then undergo a maturation process that involves homotypic fusion, condensation, and acidification. Finally, mature SGs are directed to the apical domain of the plasma membrane with which they fuse, releasing their content into the gland lumen. The exocyst is a hetero-octameric complex that participates in tethering of vesicles to the plasma membrane during constitutive exocytosis. By precise temperature-dependent gradual activation of the Gal4-UAS expression system, we have induced different levels of silencing of exocyst complex subunits, and identified three temporarily distinctive steps of the regulated exocytic pathway where the exocyst is critically required: SG biogenesis, SG maturation, and SG exocytosis. Our results shed light on previously unidentified functions of the exocyst along the exocytic pathway. We propose that the exocyst acts as a general tethering factor in various steps of this cellular process.