The long noncoding RNA Charme supervises cardiomyocyte maturation by controlling cell differentiation programs in the developing heart

Abstract

Long noncoding RNAs (lncRNAs) are emerging as critical regulators of heart physiology and disease, although the studies unveiling their modes-of-action are still limited to few examples. We recently identified pCharme, a chromatin-associated lncRNA whose functional knockout in mice results in defective myogenesis and morphological remodelling of the cardiac muscle. Here, we combined Cap-Analysis of Gene Expression (CAGE), single-cell (sc)RNA sequencing and whole-mount in situ hybridization analyses to study pCharme cardiac expression. Since the early steps of cardiomyogenesis, we found the lncRNA being specifically restricted to cardiomyocytes, where it assists the formation of specific nuclear condensates containing MATR3, as well as important RNAs for cardiac development. In line with the functional significance of these activities, pCharme ablation in mice results in a delayed maturation of cardiomyocytes, which ultimately leads to morphological alterations of the ventricular myocardium. Since congenital anomalies in myocardium are clinically relevant in humans and predispose patients to major complications, the identification of novel genes controlling cardiac morphology becomes crucial. Our study offers unique insights into a novel lncRNA-mediated regulatory mechanism promoting cardiomyocyte maturation and bears relevance to Charme locus for future theranostic applications.

Data availability

Sequencing data presented in this study have been deposited in the NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/) under the accession codes: GSE200878 and GSE200877.All data analysed from previously published datasets have been cited in the manuscript

The following data sets were generated
The following previously published data sets were used
    1. Noguchi S
    2. Arakawa T
    3. Fukuda S
    4. Furuno M
    5. Hasegawa A
    6. Hori F
    7. Ishikawa-Kato S
    8. Kaida K
    9. Kaiho A
    10. Kanamori-Katayama M
    11. Kawashima T
    12. Kojima M
    13. Kubosaki A
    14. Manabe RI
    15. Murata M
    16. Nagao-Sato S
    17. Nakazato K
    18. Ninomiya N
    19. Nishiyori-Sueki H
    20. Noma S
    21. Saijyo E
    22. Saka A
    23. Sakai M
    24. Simon C
    25. Suzuki N
    26. Tagami M
    27. Watanabe S
    28. Yoshida S
    29. Arner P
    30. Axton RA
    31. Babina M
    32. Baillie JK
    33. Barnett TC
    34. Beckhouse AG
    35. Blumenthal A
    36. Bodega B
    37. Bonetti A
    38. Briggs J
    39. Brombacher F
    40. Carlisle AJ
    41. Clevers HC
    42. Davis CA
    43. Detmar M
    44. Dohi T
    45. Edge ASB
    46. Edinger M
    47. Ehrlund A
    48. Ekwall K
    49. Endoh M
    50. Enomoto H
    51. Eslami A
    52. Fagiolini M
    53. Fairbairn L
    54. Farach-Carson MC
    55. Faulkner GJ
    56. Ferrai C
    57. Fisher ME
    58. Forrester LM
    59. Fujita R
    60. Furusawa JI
    61. Geijtenbeek TB
    62. Gingeras T
    63. Goldowitz D
    64. Guhl S
    65. Guler R
    66. Gustincich S
    67. Ha TJ
    68. Hamaguchi M
    69. Hara M
    70. Hasegawa Y
    71. Herlyn M
    72. Heutink P
    73. Hitchens KJ
    74. Hume DA
    75. Ikawa T
    76. Ishizu Y
    77. Kai C
    78. Kawamoto H
    79. Kawamura YI
    80. Kempfle JS
    81. Kenna TJ
    82. Kere J
    83. Khachigian LM
    84. Kitamura T
    85. Klein S
    86. Klinken SP
    87. Knox AJ
    88. Kojima S
    89. Koseki H
    90. Koyasu S
    91. Lee W
    92. Lennartsson A
    93. Mackay-Sim A
    94. Mejhert N
    95. Mizuno Y
    96. Morikawa H
    97. Morimoto M
    98. Moro K
    99. Morris KJ
    100. Motohashi H
    101. Mummery CL
    102. Nakachi Y
    103. Nakahara F
    104. Nakamura T
    105. Nakamura Y
    106. Nozaki T
    107. Ogishima S
    108. Ohkura N
    109. Ohno H
    110. Ohshima M
    111. Okada-Hatakeyama M
    112. Okazaki Y
    113. Orlando V
    114. Ovchinnikov DA
    115. Passier R
    116. Patrikakis M
    117. Pombo A
    118. Pradhan-Bhatt S
    119. Qin XY
    120. Rehli M
    121. Rizzu P
    122. Roy S
    123. Sajantila A
    124. Sakaguchi S
    125. Sato H
    126. Satoh H
    127. Savvi S
    128. Saxena A
    129. Schmidl C
    130. Schneider C
    131. Schulze-Tanzil GG
    132. Schwegmann A
    133. Sheng G
    134. Shin JW
    135. Sugiyama D
    136. Sugiyama T
    137. Summers KM
    138. Takahashi N
    139. Takai J
    140. Tanaka H
    141. Tatsukawa H
    142. Tomoiu A
    143. Toyoda H
    144. van de Wetering M
    145. van den Berg LM
    146. Verardo R
    147. Vijayan D
    148. Wells CA
    149. Winteringham LN
    150. Wolvetang E
    151. Yamaguchi Y
    152. Yamamoto M
    153. Yanagi-Mizuochi C
    154. Yoneda M
    155. Yonekura Y
    156. Zhang PG
    157. Zucchelli S
    158. Abugessaisa I
    159. Arner E
    160. Harshbarger J
    161. Kondo A
    162. Lassmann T
    163. Lizio M
    164. Sahin S
    165. Sengstag T
    166. Severin J
    167. Shimoji H
    168. Suzuki M
    169. Suzuki H
    170. Kawai J
    171. Kondo N
    172. Itoh M
    173. Daub CO
    174. Kasukawa T
    175. Kawaji H
    176. Carninci P
    177. Forrest ARR
    178. Hayashizaki Y
    (2017) FANTOM5 CAGE profiles of human and mouse samples
    Zenbu Genome Browser.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Valeria Taliani

    Department of Biology and Biotechnologies, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6449-735X
  2. Giulia Buonaiuto

    Department of Biology and Biotechnologies, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4099-2433
  3. Fabio Desideri

    Center for Life Nano- and Neuro-Science, Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia (IIT), Rome, Italy
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Adriano Setti

    Department of Biology and Biotechnologies, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Tiziana Santini

    Department of Biology and Biotechnologies, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Silvia Galfrè

    Center for Life Nano- and Neuro-Science, Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia (IIT), Rome, Italy
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Leonardo Schirone

    Department of Medical Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, Sapienza University of Rome, Latina, Italy
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Davide Mariani

    Center for Human Technologies, Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia (IIT), Genova, Italy
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0903-5632
  9. Giacomo Frati

    Department of Medical Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, Sapienza University of Rome, Latina, Italy
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Valentina Valenti

    Department of Medical Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, Sapienza University of Rome, Latina, Italy
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Sebastiano Sciarretta

    Department of Medical Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, Sapienza University of Rome, Latina, Italy
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Emerald Perlas

    Epigenetics and Neurobiology Unit, EMBL-Rome, Monterotondo, Italy
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Carmine Nicoletti

    DAHFMO-Unit of Histology and Medical Embryology, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5896-2040
  14. Antonio Musarò

    DAHFMO-Unit of Histology and Medical Embryology, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Monica Ballarino

    Department of Biology and Biotechnologies, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
    For correspondence
    monica.ballarino@uniroma1.it
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8595-7105

Funding

Sapienza Università di Roma (RM11916B7A39DCE5)

  • Monica Ballarino

Sapienza Università di Roma (RM12117A5DE7A45B)

  • Monica Ballarino

Regione Lazio (2020-T0002E0001)

  • Monica Ballarino

Ministero dell'Istruzione, dell'Università e della Ricerca (CN3221842F1B2436 CN3_Spoke 3)

  • Monica Ballarino

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 mice used in this work were C57BL6/J mice and all procedures involving laboratory animals were performed according to the institutional and national guidelines and legislations of Italy and according to the guidelines of Good Laboratory Practice (GLP). All experiments were approved by the Institutional Animal Use and Care Committee and carried out in accordance with the law (Protocol number 82945.56). MB has successfully completed the Module1 as co-coordinated by the Administration of Animal Facilities in the premises of EMBL. The EMBL course meets the requirements of European legislation on basic training of researchers.

Copyright

© 2023, Taliani 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

  • 1,913
    views
  • 251
    downloads
  • 6
    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. Valeria Taliani
  2. Giulia Buonaiuto
  3. Fabio Desideri
  4. Adriano Setti
  5. Tiziana Santini
  6. Silvia Galfrè
  7. Leonardo Schirone
  8. Davide Mariani
  9. Giacomo Frati
  10. Valentina Valenti
  11. Sebastiano Sciarretta
  12. Emerald Perlas
  13. Carmine Nicoletti
  14. Antonio Musarò
  15. Monica Ballarino
(2023)
The long noncoding RNA Charme supervises cardiomyocyte maturation by controlling cell differentiation programs in the developing heart
eLife 12:e81360.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.81360

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.81360

Further reading

    1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Hasiba Asma, Ellen Tieke ... Marc S Halfon
    Tools and Resources

    Annotation of newly sequenced genomes frequently includes genes, but rarely covers important non-coding genomic features such as the cis-regulatory modules—e.g., enhancers and silencers—that regulate gene expression. Here, we begin to remedy this situation by developing a workflow for rapid initial annotation of insect regulatory sequences, and provide a searchable database resource with enhancer predictions for 33 genomes. Using our previously developed SCRMshaw computational enhancer prediction method, we predict over 2.8 million regulatory sequences along with the tissues where they are expected to be active, in a set of insect species ranging over 360 million years of evolution. Extensive analysis and validation of the data provides several lines of evidence suggesting that we achieve a high true-positive rate for enhancer prediction. One, we show that our predictions target specific loci, rather than random genomic locations. Two, we predict enhancers in orthologous loci across a diverged set of species to a significantly higher degree than random expectation would allow. Three, we demonstrate that our predictions are highly enriched for regions of accessible chromatin. Four, we achieve a validation rate in excess of 70% using in vivo reporter gene assays. As we continue to annotate both new tissues and new species, our regulatory annotation resource will provide a rich source of data for the research community and will have utility for both small-scale (single gene, single species) and large-scale (many genes, many species) studies of gene regulation. In particular, the ability to search for functionally related regulatory elements in orthologous loci should greatly facilitate studies of enhancer evolution even among distantly related species.

    1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    Zulong Chen, Xin Wang ... Jessica K Tyler
    Research Article

    In response to DNA double-strand damage, ongoing transcription is inhibited to facilitate accurate DNA repair while transcriptional recovery occurs after DNA repair is complete. However, the mechanisms at play and the identity of the transcripts being regulated in this manner are unclear. In contrast to the situation following UV damage, we found that transcriptional recovery after ionizing radiation (IR) occurs in a manner independent of the HIRA histone chaperone. Sequencing of the nascent transcripts identified a programmed transcriptional response, where certain transcripts and pathways are rapidly downregulated after IR, while other transcripts and pathways are upregulated. Specifically, most of the loss of nascent transcripts occurring after IR is due to inhibition of transcriptional initiation of the highly transcribed histone genes and the rDNA. To identify factors responsible for transcriptional inhibition after IR in an unbiased manner, we performed a whole genome gRNA library CRISPR/Cas9 screen. Many of the top hits on our screen were factors required for protein neddylation. However, at short times after inhibition of neddylation, transcriptional inhibition still occurred after IR, even though neddylation was effectively inhibited. Persistent inhibition of neddylation blocked transcriptional inhibition after IR, and it also leads to cell cycle arrest. Indeed, we uncovered that many inhibitors and conditions that lead to cell cycle arrest in G1 or G2 phase also prevent transcriptional inhibition after IR. As such, it appears that transcriptional inhibition after IR occurs preferentially at highly expressed genes in cycling cells.