A cellular and molecular analysis of SoxB-driven neurogenesis in a cnidarian

  1. Eleni Chrysostomou
  2. Hakima Flici
  3. Sebastian G Gornik
  4. Miguel Salinas-Saavedra
  5. James M Gahan
  6. Emma T McMahon
  7. Kerry Thompson
  8. Shirley Hanley
  9. Michelle Kincoyne
  10. Christine E Schnitzler
  11. Paul Gonzalez
  12. Andreas D Baxevanis
  13. Uri Frank  Is a corresponding author
  1. National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
  2. University of Florida, United States
  3. National Human Genome Research Institute, United States

Abstract

Neurogenesis is the generation of neurons from stem cells, a process that is regulated by SoxB transcription factors (TFs) in many animals. Although the roles of these TFs are well understood in bilaterians, how their neural function evolved is unclear. Here, we use Hydractinia symbiolongicarpus, a member of the early-branching phylum Cnidaria, to provide insight into this question. Using a combination of mRNA in situ hybridization, transgenesis, gene knockdown, transcriptomics, and in-vivo imaging, we provide a comprehensive molecular and cellular analysis of neurogenesis during embryogenesis, homeostasis, and regeneration in this animal. We show that SoxB genes act sequentially at least in some cases. Stem cells expressing Piwi1 and Soxb1, which have a broad developmental potential, become neural progenitors that express Soxb2 before differentiating into mature neural cells. Knockdown of SoxB genes resulted in complex defects in embryonic neurogenesis. Hydractinia neural cells differentiate while migrating from the aboral to the oral end of the animal, but it is unclear whether migration per se or exposure to different microenvironments is the main driver of their fate determination. Our data constitute a rich resource for studies aiming at addressing this question, which is at the heart of understanding the origin and development of animal nervous systems.

Data availability

The accession number for the RNA-seq datasets generated in this study is Sequence Read Archive (SRA): BioProjects PRJNA549873 (bulk RNA-seq) and PRJNA777228 (single cell RNA-seq). Accession numbers for each sample are listed in Table S2. The Hydractinia symbiolongicarpus genome is available through the NIH National Human Genome Research Institute (https://research.nhgri.nih.gov/hydractinia/). Corresponding data is archived in the NCBI Sequence Read Archive (SRA) under BioProject PRJNA807936.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Eleni Chrysostomou

    Centre for Chromosome Biology, National University of Ireland, Galway, Galway, Ireland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Hakima Flici

    Centre for Chromosome Biology, National University of Ireland, Galway, Galway, Ireland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Sebastian G Gornik

    Centre for Chromosome Biology, National University of Ireland, Galway, Galway, Ireland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8026-1336
  4. Miguel Salinas-Saavedra

    Centre for Chromosome Biology, National University of Ireland, Galway, Galway, Ireland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1598-9881
  5. James M Gahan

    Centre for Chromosome Biology, National University of Ireland, Galway, Galway, Ireland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Emma T McMahon

    Centre for Chromosome Biology, National University of Ireland, Galway, Galway, Ireland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3933-8853
  7. Kerry Thompson

    Centre for Microscopy and Imaging, Discipline of Anatomy, School of Medicine, National University of Ireland, Galway, Galway, Ireland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2721-8977
  8. Shirley Hanley

    National Centre for Biomedical Engineering Science, National University of Ireland, Galway, Galway, Ireland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Michelle Kincoyne

    Carbohydrate Signalling Group, National University of Ireland, Galway, Galway, Ireland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Christine E Schnitzler

    Whitney Laboratory for Marine Bioscience, University of Florida, St. Augustine, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5001-6524
  11. Paul Gonzalez

    Computational and Statistical Genomics Branch, National Human Genome Research Institute, Bethesda, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Andreas D Baxevanis

    Computational and Statistical Genomics Branch, National Human Genome Research Institute, Bethesda, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5370-0014
  13. Uri Frank

    Centre for Chromosome Biology, National University of Ireland, Galway, Galway, Ireland
    For correspondence
    uri.frank@nuigalway.ie
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2094-6381

Funding

Wellcome Trust (210722/Z/18/Z)

  • Uri Frank

Science Foundation Ireland (11/PI/1020)

  • Uri Frank

National Science Foundation (1923259)

  • Uri Frank

National Science Foundation (1923259)

  • Christine E Schnitzler

National Human Genome Research Institute (ZIA HG000140)

  • Andy D Baxevanis

Science Foundation Ireland (13/SIRG/2125)

  • Sebastian G Gornik

Human Frontiers Science Program (LT000756/2020-L)

  • Miguel Salinas-Saavedra

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

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

  • 1,982
    views
  • 377
    downloads
  • 25
    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. Eleni Chrysostomou
  2. Hakima Flici
  3. Sebastian G Gornik
  4. Miguel Salinas-Saavedra
  5. James M Gahan
  6. Emma T McMahon
  7. Kerry Thompson
  8. Shirley Hanley
  9. Michelle Kincoyne
  10. Christine E Schnitzler
  11. Paul Gonzalez
  12. Andreas D Baxevanis
  13. Uri Frank
(2022)
A cellular and molecular analysis of SoxB-driven neurogenesis in a cnidarian
eLife 11:e78793.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.78793

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.78793

Further reading

    1. Developmental Biology
    Thomas A Bos, Elizaveta Polyakova ... Monique RM Jongbloed
    Research Article

    Human autonomic neuronal cell models are emerging as tools for modelling diseases such as cardiac arrhythmias. In this systematic review, we compared thirty-three articles applying fourteen different protocols to generate sympathetic neurons and three different procedures to produce parasympathetic neurons. All methods involved the differentiation of human pluripotent stem cells, and none employed permanent or reversible cell immortalization. Almost all protocols were reproduced in multiple pluripotent stem cell lines, and over half show evidence of neural firing capacity. Common limitations in the field are a lack of three-dimensional models and models including multiple cell types. Sympathetic neuron differentiation protocols largely mirrored embryonic development, with the notable absence of migration, axon extension, and target-specificity cues. Parasympathetic neuron differentiation protocols may be improved by including several embryonic cues promoting cell survival, cell maturation, or ion channel expression. Moreover, additional markers to define parasympathetic neurons in vitro may support the validity of these protocols. Nonetheless, four sympathetic neuron differentiation protocols and one parasympathetic neuron differentiation protocol reported more than two thirds of cells expressing autonomic neuron markers. Altogether, these protocols promise to open new research avenues of human autonomic neuron development and disease modelling.

    1. Developmental Biology
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Svanhild Nornes, Susann Bruche ... Sarah De Val
    Research Article Updated

    The establishment and growth of the arterial endothelium require the coordinated expression of numerous genes. However, regulation of this process is not yet fully understood. Here, we combined in silico analysis with transgenic mice and zebrafish models to characterize arterial-specific enhancers associated with eight key arterial identity genes (Acvrl1/Alk1, Cxcr4, Cxcl12, Efnb2, Gja4/Cx37, Gja5/Cx40, Nrp1, and Unc5b). Next, to elucidate the regulatory pathways upstream of arterial gene transcription, we investigated the transcription factors binding each arterial enhancer compared to a similar assessment of non-arterial endothelial enhancers. These results found that binding of SOXF and ETS factors was a common occurrence at both arterial and pan-endothelial enhancers, suggesting neither are sufficient to direct arterial specificity. Conversely, FOX motifs independent of ETS motifs were over-represented at arterial enhancers. Further, MEF2 and RBPJ binding was enriched but not ubiquitous at arterial enhancers, potentially linked to specific patterns of behaviour within the arterial endothelium. Lastly, there was no shared or arterial-specific signature for WNT-associated TCF/LEF, TGFβ/BMP-associated SMAD1/5 and SMAD2/3, shear stress-associated KLF4, or venous-enriched NR2F2. This cohort of well-characterized and in vivo-verified enhancers can now provide a platform for future studies into the interaction of different transcriptional and signaling pathways with arterial gene expression.