Regulation of Nodal signaling propagation by receptor interactions and positive feedback

  1. Hannes Preiß
  2. Anna C Kögler  Is a corresponding author
  3. David Mörsdorf
  4. Daniel Čapek
  5. Gary H Soh
  6. Katherine W Rogers
  7. Hernán Morales-Navarrete
  8. María Almuedo-Castillo
  9. Patrick Müller  Is a corresponding author
  1. Friedrich Miescher Laboratory of the Max Planck Society, Germany
  2. University of Konstanz, Germany
  3. University of Vienna, Austria
  4. Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, United States
  5. Centro Andaluz de Biología del Desarrollo, Spain

Abstract

During vertebrate embryogenesis, the germ layers are patterned by secreted Nodal signals. In the classical model, Nodals elicit signaling by binding to a complex comprising Type I/II Activin receptors (Acvr) and the co-receptor Tdgf1. However, it is currently unclear whether receptor binding can also affect the distribution of Nodals themselves through the embryo, and it is unknown which of the putative Acvr paralogs mediate Nodal signaling in zebrafish. Here, we characterize three Type I (Acvr1) and four Type II (Acvr2) homologs and show that - except for Acvr1c - all receptor-encoding transcripts are maternally deposited and present during zebrafish embryogenesis. We generated mutants and used them together with combinatorial morpholino knockdown and CRISPR F0 knockout (KO) approaches to assess compound loss-of-function phenotypes. We discovered that the Acvr2 homologs function partly redundantly and partially independently of Nodal to pattern the early zebrafish embryo, whereas the Type I receptors Acvr1b-a and Acvr1b-b redundantly act as major mediators of Nodal signaling. By combining quantitative analyses with expression manipulations, we found that feedback-regulated Type I receptors and co-receptors can directly influence the diffusion and distribution of Nodals, providing a mechanism for the spatial restriction of Nodal signaling during germ layer patterning.

Data availability

Figure 1 - Source Data, Figure 2 - Source Data, Figure 2 - Figure Supplement 1 - Source Data, Figure 2 - Figure Supplement 2 - Source Data, Figure 2 - Figure Supplement 3 - Source Data, Figure 3 - Source Data, Figure 3 - Figure Supplement 1 - Source Data, Figure 3 - Figure Supplement 2 - Source Data, Figure 3 - Figure Supplement 3 - Source Data, Figure 4 - Source Data, Figure 4 - Figure Supplement 1 - Source Data, Figure 5 - Source Data, Figure 6 - Source Data, Figure 6 - Figure Supplement 1 - Source Data and Figure 6 - Figure Supplement 2 - Source Data contain the numerical data used to generate the figures.

The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Hannes Preiß

    Systems Biology of Development, Friedrich Miescher Laboratory of the Max Planck Society, Tübingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6873-9440
  2. Anna C Kögler

    University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany
    For correspondence
    anna.koegler@uni-konstanz.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. David Mörsdorf

    Department of Neurosciences and Developmental Biology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8982-2155
  4. Daniel Čapek

    University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Gary H Soh

    Systems Biology of Development, Friedrich Miescher Laboratory of the Max Planck Society, Tübingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Katherine W Rogers

    Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Bethesda, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5700-2662
  7. Hernán Morales-Navarrete

    University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. María Almuedo-Castillo

    Centro Andaluz de Biología del Desarrollo, Seville, Spain
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Patrick Müller

    University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany
    For correspondence
    p.mueller@uni.kn
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0702-6209

Funding

International Max Planck Research School From Molecules to Organisms"" (Graduate Student Fellowship)

  • Hannes Preiß
  • David Mörsdorf
  • Patrick Müller

Max Planck Society (Max Planck Research Group)

  • Patrick Müller

European Research Council (Grant agreement No 637840 (QUANTPATTERN))

  • Patrick Müller

European Research Council (Grant agreement No 863952 (ACE-OF-SPACE))

  • Patrick Müller

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 procedures were executed in accordance with the guidelines of the State of Baden-Württemberg and approved by the Regierungspräsidium Tübingen and the Regierungspräsidium Freiburg.

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

  • 2,240
    views
  • 379
    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. Hannes Preiß
  2. Anna C Kögler
  3. David Mörsdorf
  4. Daniel Čapek
  5. Gary H Soh
  6. Katherine W Rogers
  7. Hernán Morales-Navarrete
  8. María Almuedo-Castillo
  9. Patrick Müller
(2022)
Regulation of Nodal signaling propagation by receptor interactions and positive feedback
eLife 11:e66397.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.66397

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.66397

Further reading

    1. Developmental Biology
    2. Stem Cells and Regenerative Medicine
    Olivia B Taylor, Nicholas DeGroff ... Andy J Fischer
    Research Article

    The purpose of these studies is to investigate how Sphingosine-1-phosphate (S1P) signaling regulates glial phenotype, dedifferentiation of Müller glia (MG), reprogramming into proliferating MG-derived progenitor cells (MGPCs), and neuronal differentiation of the progeny of MGPCs in the chick retina. We found that S1P-related genes are highly expressed by retinal neurons and glia, and levels of expression were dynamically regulated following retinal damage. Drug treatments that activate S1P receptor 1 (S1PR1) or increase levels of S1P suppressed the formation of MGPCs. Conversely, treatments that inhibit S1PR1 or decrease levels of S1P stimulated the formation of MGPCs. Inhibition of S1P receptors or S1P synthesis significantly enhanced the neuronal differentiation of the progeny of MGPCs. We report that S1P-related gene expression in MG is modulated by microglia and inhibition of S1P receptors or S1P synthesis partially rescues the loss of MGPC formation in damaged retinas missing microglia. Finally, we show that TGFβ/Smad3 signaling in the resting retina maintains S1PR1 expression in MG. We conclude that the S1P signaling is dynamically regulated in MG and MGPCs in the chick retina, and activation of S1P signaling depends, in part, on signals produced by reactive microglia.

    1. Developmental Biology
    Kayleigh Bozon, Hartmut Cuny ... Sally L Dunwoodie
    Research Article

    Congenital malformations can originate from numerous genetic or non-genetic factors but in most cases the causes are unknown. Genetic disruption of nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD) de novo synthesis causes multiple malformations, collectively termed Congenital NAD Deficiency Disorder (CNDD), highlighting the necessity of this pathway during embryogenesis. Previous work in mice shows that NAD deficiency perturbs embryonic development specifically when organs are forming. While the pathway is predominantly active in the liver postnatally, the site of activity prior to and during organogenesis is unknown. Here, we used a mouse model of human CNDD and assessed pathway functionality in embryonic livers and extraembryonic tissues via gene expression, enzyme activity and metabolic analyses. We found that the extra-embryonic visceral yolk sac endoderm exclusively synthesises NAD de novo during early organogenesis before the embryonic liver takes over this function. Under CNDD-inducing conditions, visceral yolk sacs had reduced NAD levels and altered NAD-related metabolic profiles, affecting embryo metabolism. Expression of requisite pathway genes is conserved in the equivalent yolk sac cell type in humans. Our findings show that visceral yolk sac-mediated NAD de novo synthesis activity is essential for mouse embryogenesis and its perturbation causes CNDD. As mouse and human yolk sacs are functionally homologous, our data improve the understanding of human congenital malformation causation.