| Literature DB >> 25653314 |
Pierre-François Roux1, Simon Boitard2, Yuna Blum3, Brian Parks3, Alexandra Montagner4, Etienne Mouisel5, Anis Djari6, Diane Esquerré7, Colette Désert1, Morgane Boutin1, Sophie Leroux8, Frédéric Lecerf9, Elisabeth Le Bihan-Duval10, Christophe Klopp6, Bertrand Servin8, Frédérique Pitel8, Michel Jean Duclos10, Hervé Guillou4, Aldons J Lusis11, Olivier Demeure1, Sandrine Lagarrigue12.
Abstract
Very few causal genes have been identified by quantitative trait loci (QTL) mapping because of the large size of QTL, and most of them were identified thanks to functional links already known with the targeted phenotype. Here, we propose to combine selection signature detection, coding SNP annotation, and cis-expression QTL analyses to identify potential causal genes underlying QTL identified in divergent line designs. As a model, we chose experimental chicken lines divergently selected for only one trait, the abdominal fat weight, in which several QTL were previously mapped. Using new haplotype-based statistics exploiting the very high SNP density generated through whole-genome resequencing, we found 129 significant selective sweeps. Most of the QTL colocalized with at least one sweep, which markedly narrowed candidate region size. Some of those sweeps contained only one gene, therefore making them strong positional causal candidates with no presupposed function. We then focused on two of these QTL/sweeps. The absence of nonsynonymous SNPs in their coding regions strongly suggests the existence of causal mutations acting in cis on their expression, confirmed by cis-eQTL identification using either allele-specific expression or genetic mapping analyses. Additional expression analyses of those two genes in the chicken and mice contrasted for adiposity reinforces their link with this phenotype. This study shows for the first time the interest of combining selective sweeps mapping, coding SNP annotation and cis-eQTL analyses for identifying causative genes for a complex trait, in the context of divergent lines selected for this specific trait. Moreover, it highlights two genes, JAG2 and PARK2, as new potential negative and positive key regulators of adiposity in chicken and mice.Entities:
Keywords: JAG2; PARK2; QTL; adiposity; cis-eQTLs; divergent lines; selective sweeps
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25653314 PMCID: PMC4390568 DOI: 10.1534/g3.115.016865
Source DB: PubMed Journal: G3 (Bethesda) ISSN: 2160-1836 Impact factor: 3.154
Figure 1Overview of the strategy used in this study. QTL: quantitative trait locus; cis-eQTL: QTL for gene expression and acting in cis; ASE: allele-specific expression; VeP: Variant Effect Predictor tool from the Ensembl API; NGS-SNP: variant annotation tool developed by Grant ; GWAS: genome-wide association study; HMDP: Hybrid Mouse Diversity Panel.
Genome-wide description of selective sweeps identified using hapFLK
| 200.99 | 36 | 127.28 | 1.74 | 789.46 | 2.22 | 1348.37 | 18 | 10,096 | 1.69 | 0 | 8 | 61 | |
| 154.87 | 25 | 89.55 | 0.08 | 505.77 | 1.45 | 787.00 | 5 | 5238 | 1.64 | 0 | 13 | 41 | |
| 113.66 | 17 | 93.20 | 0.22 | 535.04 | 1.23 | 943.65 | 9 | 5336 | 1.47 | 0 | 6 | 25 | |
| 94.23 | 21 | 124.44 | 0.75 | 754.56 | 2.91 | 1324.00 | 16 | 7583 | 2.71 | 0 | 32 | 57 | |
| 62.24 | 1 | 1.29 | 1.29 | 1.29 | 0.002 | 16.00 | 16 | 16 | 1.00 | 1 | 1 | 1 | |
| 37.40 | 5 | 41.12 | 17.31 | 74.93 | 0.55 | 409.00 | 201 | 961 | 2.00 | 0 | 5 | 10 | |
| 38.38 | 3 | 272.65 | 206.99 | 393.85 | 2.13 | 2724.70 | 2530 | 3019 | 2.67 | 2 | 4 | 8 | |
| 30.67 | 1 | 103.19 | 103.19 | 103.19 | 0.34 | 570.00 | 570 | 570 | 2.00 | 2 | 2 | 2 | |
| 22.56 | 6 | 11.04 | 0.10 | 46.48 | 0.29 | 142.00 | 7 | 555 | 2.17 | 1 | 6 | 13 | |
| 21.93 | 5 | 303.97 | 10.10 | 1018.14 | 6.93 | 1623.60 | 86 | 4532 | 3.00 | 0 | 5 | 15 | |
| 20.54 | 1 | 15.86 | 15.86 | 15.86 | 0.08 | 94.00 | 94 | 94 | 0.00 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 18.91 | 1 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 2.00 | 2 | 2 | 1.00 | 1 | 1 | 1 | |
| 15.82 | 4 | 112.17 | 22.41 | 166.90 | 2.84 | 762.75 | 186 | 1620 | 5.00 | 4 | 6 | 20 | |
| 11.18 | 1 | 107.06 | 107.06 | 107.06 | 0.96 | 650.00 | 650 | 650 | 1.00 | 1 | 1 | 1 | |
| 13.99 | 1 | 151.00 | 151.00 | 151.00 | 1.08 | 1895.00 | 1895 | 1895 | 6.00 | 6 | 6 | 6 | |
| 6.40 | 1 | 6.81 | 6.81 | 6.81 | 0.11 | 114.00 | 114 | 114 | 1.00 | 1 | 1 | 1 | |
| 1050.9 | 129 | — | — | — | 1.36 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 262 | |
| — | — | 97.54 | — | — | — | 837.88 | — | — | 2.11 | — | — | — | |
Characterization of selective sweeps colocalizing with QTL for abdominal fat
| 22.00 | 22.50 | 0.50 | 6 | ||||||||
| 24.03 | 24.16 | 0.13 | 2 | ||||||||
| 18.61 | 32.15 | 13.54 | 171 | $ | 24.30 | 24.64 | 0.34 | 3 | |||
| 26.05 | 26.10 | 0.04 | 0 | ||||||||
| 30.52 | 30.59 | 0.07 | 2 | ||||||||
| 40.28 | 40.30 | 0.02 | 0 | ||||||||
| 39.74 | 48.52 | 8.78 | 107 | $ | 44.03 | 44.04 | 0.01 | ||||
| 46.57 | 46.60 | 0.03 | |||||||||
| 54.52 | 62.03 | 7.51 | 142 | ** | 54.65 | 54.65 | 0.00 | ||||
| 4.21 | 17.63 | 13.42 | 229 | $ | 5.31 | 5.52 | 0.21 | 2 | |||
| — | — | — | — | — | |||||||
Chromosome-wide significance: **1%; *5%; $10% (suggestive QTL).
Number of genes contained in each sweep or gene name for sweep containing only one gene.
Figure 2HapFLK statistics profile inside each AF QTL region. The associated name of each QTL region is given at the top of each graph. Statistics are written as the -log10 of the p-value of the HapFLK test; for each sweep, the number of genes it contained is indicated in an orange box. Some QTL (AF3.I and AF3.II) colocalized with several selective sweeps, whereas others (AF5, AF7, and BMWT1) colocalized with a single selective sweep. The number of genes included in a sweep ranges from 0 to 6.
Figure 3Expression characterizations of JAG2 in chicken. (A) Expression pattern of JAG2 in various tissues quantified using RT-qPCR. Results are given as expression fold change relative to the liver, which exhibited the lowest level of expression. (B) Comparison of JAG2 mRNA level in the fat line (FL, n = 12) and the lean line (LL, n = 12) in the liver and the white adipose tissue (WAT). Results are expressed as the expression ratio relatively to the LL ± SEM.
Figure 4Expression of JAG2 in mice HMDP. (A) Correlation between JAG2 expression in white adipose tissue (WAT) and body fat mass (%) in HMDP of 86 mice fed a chow diet. (B) Body fat mass in % of body weight (top) and WAT expression (bottom) in HMDP panel of 86 mice fed chow diet (in grey) and high-fat/high-sucrose diet (in black). For each graph, values are centered on the mean of the whole values. (C) Haplotype cluster frequencies for both chicken lines for the PARK2 selective sweep. The difference in color along the Y-axis gives the frequencies of each haplotype cluster. The difference in color along the X-axis has no meaning. The almost fixed haplotype is colored red in the lean line. (D) Genetic association (top) for body fat mass gain between the second and the fourth week of high-fat diet in the HMDP and (bottom) for JAG2 expression in WAT. Gene positions as given in Ensembl 77 for GRCm38 mouse genome assembly .
Figure 5Expression of MLLT4 in chicken. (A) Expression pattern of MLLT4 in various tissues of chicken quantified using RT-qPCR. Results are given as expression fold change relative to the pancreas, which exhibited the lowest level of expression. (B) Comparison of MLLT4 mRNA level in the fat line (FL, n = 12) and the lean line (LL, n = 12) in the liver and the white adipose tissue (WAT). Results are expressed as the expression ratio relative to the LL ± SEM.
Figure 6Expression characterizations of PARK2. (A) Expression pattern in various tissues of chickens quantified using RT-qPCR. Results are given as expression fold change relative to the tight muscle, which exhibited the lowest level of expression. (B) Comparison of PARK2 mRNA level in the fat line (FL, n = 12) and the lean line (LL, n = 12) in the liver and the white adipose tissue (WAT). Results are expressed as the expression ratio relative to the LL ± SEM.*p < 5% and $p < 10% based on unpaired two-tailed Student t-test. (C) cDNA allelic ratio for two marker SNPs located on PARK2 for F1 birds obtained by crossing chicken FL and LL. SNP1 is located on chromosome 3 at 46,581,638 bp and SNP2 is on chromosome 3 at 46,581,695 bp. A total of five birds heterozygous on gDNA at those positions were considered for pyro-sequencing-based cDNA imbalance analyses. Each color and shape is associated with one individual. Down arrows indicate the average allelic ratio for each SNP. The top line stands for the expected allelic ratio in the case of a perfect cDNA allelic balance. The line included in the circle stands for the average value of the imbalance for a given SNP for five individuals. Significance of the allelic imbalance was assessed using a Mann-Whitney unpaired two-tailed nonparametric test to compare the observed allelic ratio with the expected one equal to 1 (i.e., in the case of a perfect balance). **p < 0.01. (D) Comparison of perigonadal fat mass (g) and PARK2 mRNA level in the liver and the white adipose tissue (WAT) of B6.V-Lepob/J mice (Ob, n = 8), KO for the gene encoding leptin, and their genetic background C57BL6/J (BL6, n = 8). For mRNA levels, results are expressed as the expression ratio relatively to the C57BL6/J ± SEM. *p < 0.05 and ***p < 0.001 based on unpaired two-tailed Student t-test. (E) Haplotype cluster frequencies for both chicken lines for the PARK2 selective sweep. The difference in color along the Y-axis gives the frequencies of each haplotype cluster. The difference in color along the X-axis has no meaning. The fixed haplotype is red here in the FL.