Identification of compounds that rescue otic and myelination defects in the zebrafish adgrg6 (gpr126) mutant

Abstract

Adgrg6 (Gpr126) is an adhesion class G protein-coupled receptor with a conserved role in myelination of the peripheral nervous system. In the zebrafish, mutation of adgrg6 also results in defects in the inner ear: otic tissue fails to down-regulate versican-gene expression and morphogenesis is disrupted. We have designed a whole-animal screen that tests for rescue of both up- and down-regulated gene expression in mutant embryos, together with analysis of weak and strong alleles. From a screen of 3120 structurally diverse compounds, we have identified 68 that reduce versican-b expression in the adgrg6 mutant ear, 41 of which also restore myelin basic protein gene expression in Schwann cells of mutant embryos. Nineteen compounds unable to rescue a strong adgrg6 allele provide candidates for molecules that may interact directly with the Adgrg6 receptor. Our pipeline provides a powerful approach for identifying compounds that modulate GPCR activity, with potential impact for future drug design.

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files. Source data files have been provided for Table 1 and Figure1-figure supplement 1, Figure 3, Figure 7 and Figure 7-figure supplements. Links to interactive files are given in the manuscript and in a supplemental file.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Elvira Diamantopoulou

    Bateson Centre and Department of Biomedical Science, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9336-7965
  2. Sarah Baxendale

    Bateson Centre and Department of Biomedical Science, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-6760-9457
  3. Antonio de la Vega de León

    Information School, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  4. Anzar Asad

    Bateson Centre and Department of Biomedical Science, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  5. Celia J Holdsworth

    Bateson Centre and Department of Biomedical Science, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  6. Leila Abbas

    Bateson Centre and Department of Biomedical Science, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  7. Valerie J Gillet

    Information School, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  8. Giselle R Wiggin

    Sosei Heptares, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  9. Tanya T Whitfield

    Bateson Centre and Department of Biomedical Science, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    t.whitfield@sheffield.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    Tanya T Whitfield, Reviewing editor, eLife.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1575-1504

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (Project grant BB/J003050/1)

  • Sarah Baxendale
  • Tanya T Whitfield

University of Sheffield (PhD studentship 314420)

  • Tanya T Whitfield

Medical Research Council (G0802527)

  • Sarah Baxendale
  • Celia J Holdsworth
  • Leila Abbas
  • Tanya T Whitfield

European Union's Seventh Framework Programme (Grant agreement no. 612347)

  • Valerie J Gillet

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/R50581X/1)

  • Sarah Baxendale
  • Anzar Asad
  • Giselle R Wiggin
  • Tanya T Whitfield

Wellcome (VIP award 084551)

  • Leila Abbas
  • Tanya T Whitfield

Medical Research Council (G0700091)

  • Sarah Baxendale
  • Celia J Holdsworth
  • Leila Abbas
  • Tanya T Whitfield

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (Project grant BB/M01021X/1)

  • Sarah Baxendale
  • Tanya T Whitfield

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (ALERT14 equipment award BB/M012522/1)

  • Sarah Baxendale
  • Tanya T Whitfield

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. David A Lyons, University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All animal work was performed under licence from the UK Home Office (P66302E4E), and approved by the University of Sheffield Ethical Review Committee (ASPA Ethical Review Process).

Version history

  1. Received: January 4, 2019
  2. Accepted: June 8, 2019
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: June 10, 2019 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: June 28, 2019 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2019, Diamantopoulou 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

  • 2,679
    views
  • 334
    downloads
  • 19
    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. Elvira Diamantopoulou
  2. Sarah Baxendale
  3. Antonio de la Vega de León
  4. Anzar Asad
  5. Celia J Holdsworth
  6. Leila Abbas
  7. Valerie J Gillet
  8. Giselle R Wiggin
  9. Tanya T Whitfield
(2019)
Identification of compounds that rescue otic and myelination defects in the zebrafish adgrg6 (gpr126) mutant
eLife 8:e44889.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.44889

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.44889

Further reading

    1. Developmental Biology
    Amandine Jarysta, Abigail LD Tadenev ... Basile Tarchini
    Research Article

    Inhibitory G alpha (GNAI or Gαi) proteins are critical for the polarized morphogenesis of sensory hair cells and for hearing. The extent and nature of their actual contributions remains unclear, however, as previous studies did not investigate all GNAI proteins and included non-physiological approaches. Pertussis toxin can downregulate functionally redundant GNAI1, GNAI2, GNAI3, and GNAO proteins, but may also induce unrelated defects. Here, we directly and systematically determine the role(s) of each individual GNAI protein in mouse auditory hair cells. GNAI2 and GNAI3 are similarly polarized at the hair cell apex with their binding partner G protein signaling modulator 2 (GPSM2), whereas GNAI1 and GNAO are not detected. In Gnai3 mutants, GNAI2 progressively fails to fully occupy the sub-cellular compartments where GNAI3 is missing. In contrast, GNAI3 can fully compensate for the loss of GNAI2 and is essential for hair bundle morphogenesis and auditory function. Simultaneous inactivation of Gnai2 and Gnai3 recapitulates for the first time two distinct types of defects only observed so far with pertussis toxin: (1) a delay or failure of the basal body to migrate off-center in prospective hair cells, and (2) a reversal in the orientation of some hair cell types. We conclude that GNAI proteins are critical for hair cells to break planar symmetry and to orient properly before GNAI2/3 regulate hair bundle morphogenesis with GPSM2.

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Developmental Biology
    Gang Xue, Xiaoyi Zhang ... Zhiyuan Li
    Research Article

    Organisms utilize gene regulatory networks (GRN) to make fate decisions, but the regulatory mechanisms of transcription factors (TF) in GRNs are exceedingly intricate. A longstanding question in this field is how these tangled interactions synergistically contribute to decision-making procedures. To comprehensively understand the role of regulatory logic in cell fate decisions, we constructed a logic-incorporated GRN model and examined its behavior under two distinct driving forces (noise-driven and signal-driven). Under the noise-driven mode, we distilled the relationship among fate bias, regulatory logic, and noise profile. Under the signal-driven mode, we bridged regulatory logic and progression-accuracy trade-off, and uncovered distinctive trajectories of reprogramming influenced by logic motifs. In differentiation, we characterized a special logic-dependent priming stage by the solution landscape. Finally, we applied our findings to decipher three biological instances: hematopoiesis, embryogenesis, and trans-differentiation. Orthogonal to the classical analysis of expression profile, we harnessed noise patterns to construct the GRN corresponding to fate transition. Our work presents a generalizable framework for top-down fate-decision studies and a practical approach to the taxonomy of cell fate decisions.