| Literature DB >> 27233670 |
Rebecca E McIntyre1, Jérôme Nicod2, Carla Daniela Robles-Espinoza3, John Maciejowski4, Na Cai2, Jennifer Hill5, Ruth Verstraten1, Vivek Iyer1, Alistair G Rust6, Gabriel Balmus7, Richard Mott8, Jonathan Flint2, David J Adams9.
Abstract
In mammals the regulation of genomic instability plays a key role in tumor suppression and also controls genome plasticity, which is important for recombination during the processes of immunity and meiosis. Most studies to identify regulators of genomic instability have been performed in cells in culture or in systems that report on gross rearrangements of the genome, yet subtle differences in the level of genomic instability can contribute to whole organism phenotypes such as tumor predisposition. Here we performed a genome-wide association study in a population of 1379 outbred Crl:CFW(SW)-US_P08 mice to dissect the genetic landscape of micronucleus formation, a biomarker of chromosomal breaks, whole chromosome loss, and extranuclear DNA. Variation in micronucleus levels is a complex trait with a genome-wide heritability of 53.1%. We identify seven loci influencing micronucleus formation (false discovery rate <5%), and define candidate genes at each locus. Intriguingly at several loci we find evidence for sexual dimorphism in micronucleus formation, with a locus on chromosome 11 being specific to males.Entities:
Keywords: Micronuclei; Outbred mice; genetic mapping; genome-wide association study (GWAS); genomic instability
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27233670 PMCID: PMC4978889 DOI: 10.1534/g3.116.030767
Source DB: PubMed Journal: G3 (Bethesda) ISSN: 2160-1836 Impact factor: 3.154
Figure 1Micronucleus levels are genetically controlled. (A) Graph shows the percentage of micronucleated (MN) normochromatic erythrocytes (NCE) in males from four different inbred strains of mice. Boxplot shows the median and the min-max (whiskers) of at least six measurements for each strain. Data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA (P < 0.0001) followed by Tukey’s post hoc test (P < 0.05 for all combinations except C57BL/6NTAC and CBA/2J). (B) Micronucleus levels are influenced by sex in mice. Shown is the difference in micronucleus levels in males (blue) and females (pink) for three strains of inbred laboratory mice. Data were analyzed using the Student’s two-tailed t-test, P < 0.00001. (C) Manhattan plots of genome-wide analyses for micronucleus levels performed in all mice (top) or in female (middle) or male (bottom) mice only using the subset of tagging SNPs (n = 359,559). Horizontal red lines represent –log10 P-values at which QTL reach FDR < 5%. (D) QTL detected in all mice, males and females. Loci with FDR < 5% are shaded in gray. These QTL positions were defined using the above-mentioned 359,559 tagging SNPs. Shown are the maximum -log P values among tagging SNPs at each QTL.
Genome-wide significant loci
| Chromosome | Top SNP Position | Top SNP logP | FDR | Size 95% CI (bp) | Start Position 95% CI | End Position 95% CI | Number of Genes in 95% CI | Gene Names | MAF | β | Variance Explained (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 29990674 | 5.21 | 0.017 | 661130 | 29606566 | 30267695 | 20 | 0.49 | 0.33 | 1.29 | |
| 5 | 148761610 | 4.66 | 0.045 | 747871 | 148093705 | 148841575 | 3 | 0.46 | 0.27 | 1.13 | |
| 8 | 33158129 | 13.05 | 0 | 1312071 | 32889539 | 34201609 | 13 | 0.38 | 0.59 | 4.46 | |
| 9 | 109076890 | 5.43 | 0.015 | 624542 | 108855860 | 109480401 | 20 | 0.20 | 0.46 | 1.77 | |
| 10 | 121477912 | 8.55 | 0 | 476002 | 121229924 | 121705925 | 6 | 0.50 | 0.46 | 2.98 | |
| 11 | 69570999 | 8.21 | 0 | 1055268 | 68747919 | 69803186 | 49 | 0.45 | 0.45 | 2.55 | |
| 17 | 34159865 | 9.25 | 0 | 1456751 | 34145616 | 35602366 | 86 | 0.38 | 0.74 | 3.16 |
Shown are the seven genome-wide significant loci for micronucleus levels and the genes within the 95% confidence intervals. The start and end positions of each QTL are provided, and the minor allele frequency (MAF), β, and effect size (variance explained) of the top scoring SNP. These QTL positions were defined using the entire collection of SNPs for higher mapping resolution. Note that the -logP value given in the table is the maximum among all imputed SNPs under the QTL, which is generally higher than that shown on Fig 1D.
Figure 2Genome-wide significant loci for micronucleus formation on chromosomes 2, 5, 8, and 9. The −log10 P-values of imputed single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with micronucleus levels are shown on the Y axis. The X axis gives chromosome and position in megabases (Mb). Genes within the regions are shown in the bottom panels (for clarity, as indicated on the figure, some gene names have been omitted). Linkage disequilibrium of each SNP with top SNP, shown in large purple diamond, is indicated by its color. The plots were drawn using LocusZoom (Pruim ).
Figure 3Genome-wide significant loci for micronucleus formation on chromosomes 10, 11 and 17. The −log10 P-values of imputed SNPs associated with micronucleus levels are shown on the left Y axis. The horizontal axis gives chromosome and position in megabases (Mb). Genes within the regions are shown in the bottom panels (for clarity, as indicated on the figure, some gene names have been omitted). Linkage disequilibrium of each SNP with top SNP, shown in large purple diamond, is indicated by its color. The plots were drawn using LocusZoom (Pruim ).
Pathogenicity analysis of variants at loci associated with elevated micronucleus levels
| Mouse genomic location | Nearest gene | Consequence | Log | GERP Score | Grantham classification | Grantham score | SIFT class | Lowest SIFT score | EnsEMBL VEP class | EnsEMBL aa change | AA Change | Nuc Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| chr8:33576360-33576360 | A > T | 12.48026273 | −1.05 | Radical | 110 | Tolerated | 0.4 | Downstream gene variant; missense variant | R/S | |||
| chr8:33268792-33268792 | G > A | 12.45662832 | −3.07 | Radical | 145 | Tolerated | 0.3 | Missense variant | S/L | |||
| chr8:33557389-33557389 | A > C | 12.43606688 | 3.19 | Radical | 110 | Tolerated | 0.44 | NMD transcript variant; downstream gene variant; missense variant | S/R | |||
| chr8:33557366-33557366 | G > T | 12.4319775 | 3.14 | Radical | 205 | Tolerated | 0.13 | NMD transcript variant; downstream gene variant; missense variant | C/F | |||
| chr8:33546343-33546343 | C > G | 12.42405548 | 3.56 | Nonconservative | 60 | Deleterious; tolerated | 0.02 | NMD transcript variant; missense variant | A/G | |||
| chr17:34804124-34804124 | A > G | 8.239597012 | 0 | Nonconservative | 64 | Deleterious | 0.01 | Downstream gene variant; missense variant; upstream gene variant | V/A | |||
| chr17:34711526-34711526 | G > A | 8.198665514 | 4.53 | Radical | 125 | Deleterious; tolerated | 0.05 | Missense variant | G/R | |||
| chr17:34711722-34711722 | G > A | 8.188940007 | −9.05 | Conservative | 29 | Deleterious | 0.02 | Missense variant | R/H | |||
| chr17:34713138-34713138 | T > A | 8.185003889 | −2.37 | Radical | 113 | Tolerated | 0.21 | Missense variant | L/Q | |||
| chr17:35161042-35161042 | T > G | 8.088956801 | 4.11 | Conservative | 15 | Deleterious | 0.02 | Downstream gene variant; missense variant; upstream gene variant | M/L | |||
| chr11:69236603-69236603 | C > G | 7.758017279 | −9.38 | Radical | 125 | Tolerated | 0.46 | Missense variant; upstream gene variant | G/R | |||
| chr10:121667433-121667433 | T > C | 7.543972828 | 0.726 | Radical | 155 | Tolerated | 0.85 | Missense variant | F/S | |||
| chr11:69047870-69047870 | T > C | 7.224042226 | 2.01 | Radical | 155 | Tolerated | 0.74 | Missense variant; upstream gene variant | F/S | |||
| chr11:69134001-69134001 | G > A | 6.687629704 | 3.92 | Conservative | 56 | Deleterious | 0.01 | NMD transcript variant; missense variant; upstream gene variant | G/S | |||
| chr11:69107564-69107564 | C > T | 6.656511366 | 2.92 | Nonconservative | 64 | Deleterious | 0.01 | Downstream gene variant; missense variant | A/V | |||
| chr9:109061596-109061596 | A > T | 5.330403284 | −0.969 | Radical | 113 | NMD transcript variant; downstream gene variant; missense variant; synonymous variant; upstream gene variant | L/Q | |||||
| chr9:109073661-109073661 | T > A | 5.271500634 | 0.625 | Radical | 152 | Deleterious | 0.03 | NMD transcript variant; downstream gene variant; missense variant; splice region variant; upstream gene variant | D/V | |||
| chr9:109432436-109432436 | A > G | 5.023943697 | 0 | Radical | 155 | Tolerated | 0.56 | Missense variant | F/S | |||
| chr2:30174134-30174134 | C > T | 4.890540776 | 4.1 | Radical | 125 | Tolerated | 0.34 | Downstream gene variant; missense variant | G/R | |||
| chr2:30174134-30174134 | C > T | 4.890540776 | 4.1 | Radical | 125 | Tolerated | 0.34 | Downstream gene variant; missense variant | G/R | |||
| chr2:29702527-29702527 | G > T | 4.806085521 | 1.45 | Conservative | 24 | Deleterious; tolerated | 0.02 | NMD transcript variant; missense variant | Q/H | |||
| chr2:29702527-29702527 | G > T | 4.806085521 | 1.45 | Conservative | 24 | Deleterious; tolerated | 0.02 | NMD transcript variant; missense variant | Q/H | |||
| chr2:29788325-29788325 | G > T | 4.571110541 | 0 | Radical | 102 | Tolerated | 0.32 | NMD transcript variant; missense variant; upstream gene variant | R/L | |||
| chr9:109060491-109060491 | T > G | 3.712727076 | 0.625 | Conservative | 15 | Deleterious; tolerated | 0.03 | NMD transcript variant; downstream gene variant; missense variant; upstream gene variant | M/L | |||
| chr5:148288927-148288927 | C > A | 3.699186538 | 0 | Radical | 110 | NMD transcript variant; missense variant; synonymous variant | S/R | |||||
| chr5:148288935-148288935 | T > C | 3.692862836 | 0 | Radical | 145 | NMD transcript variant; missense variant; synonymous variant | L/S | |||||
| chr9:109058117-109058117 | G > C | 3.215586866 | −1.25 | Radical | 125 | Tolerated | 0.18 | Downstream gene variant; missense variant | R/G |
Shown are the top five scoring variants at each of the seven genome-wide significant loci ranked by –log10 P-value. See Materials and Methods for a description of the approach used for variant annotation.
Figure 4Candidate genes from genome-wide significant loci. (A) Frequency of propidium iodide positive, micronucleated (MN) normochromatic erythrocytes (NCE) in wild-type (+/+), heterozygote (tm1/+), and homozygote (tm/tm) Trex1 knockout male mice. Each circle, square, or triangle indicates an individual mouse. Mutant mice had significantly elevated MN-NCE when compared to wild-type control mice (Student’s two-tailed t-test; P < 0.0001), but heterozygous and homozygous mice showed comparable levels of MN-NCE. (B and C) Micronucleus formation in human TREX1 null and wild-type control cells. Chromatin was labeled with H2B-mCherry. The data shown are the result of three independent experiments where >100 mitoses were counted. Cell lines 2.2 and 2.5 are TREX1 null RPE-1 cells. For a full description of the lines used in these experiments see Maciejowski . Wild type (WT) refers to an isogenic control. (D) Schematic to show alignment of mouse and human AURKB proteins. A candidate single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in Aurkb (rs29417126) falls into a highly conserved residue of AURKB that is known to be mitotically phosphorylated.