| Literature DB >> 30482800 |
Jingyue Ellie Duan1, Kaleigh Flock1, Nathanial Jue2, Mingyuan Zhang1,3, Amanda Jones1, Sahar Al Seesi4,5, Ion Mandoiu5, Sambhu Pillai1, Maria Hoffman1, Rachel O'Neill6, Steven Zinn1, Kristen Govoni1, Sarah Reed1, Hesheng Jiang7, Zongliang Carl Jiang1,8, Xiuchun Cindy Tian9.
Abstract
Ohno's hypothesis predicts that the expression of the single X chromosome in males needs compensatory upregulation to balance its dosage with that of the diploid autosomes. Additionally, X chromosome inactivation ensures that quadruple expression of the two X chromosomes is avoided in females. These mechanisms have been actively studied in mice and humans but lag behind in domestic species. Using RNA sequencing data, we analyzed the X chromosome upregulation in sheep fetal tissues from day 135 of gestation under control, over or restricted maternal diets (100%, 140% and 60% of National Research Council Total Digestible Nutrients), and in conceptuses, juvenile, and adult somatic tissues. By computing the mean expression ratio of all X-linked genes to all autosomal genes (X:A), we found that all samples displayed some levels of X chromosome upregulation. The degrees of X upregulation were not significant (P-value = 0.74) between ovine females and males in the same somatic tissues. Brain, however, displayed complete X upregulation. Interestingly, the male and female reproduction-related tissues exhibited divergent X dosage upregulation. Moreover, expression upregulation of the X chromosome in fetal tissues was not affected by maternal diets. Maternal nutrition, however, did change expression levels of several X-linked genes, such as sex determination genes SOX3 and NR0B1 In summary, our results showed that X chromosome upregulation occurred in nearly all sheep somatic tissues analyzed, thus support Ohno's hypothesis in a new species. However, the levels of upregulation differed by different subgroups of genes such as those that are house-keeping and "dosage-sensitive".Entities:
Keywords: Maternal nutrition; Ohno’s hypothesis; Ovine; X chromosome upregulation
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30482800 PMCID: PMC6325915 DOI: 10.1534/g3.118.200815
Source DB: PubMed Journal: G3 (Bethesda) ISSN: 2160-1836 Impact factor: 3.154
Figure 1Boxplots of log2-transformed relative expression of the X chromosome (RXE) and each autosome pair (RGE) in major tissues (A) and brain (B) of juvenile and adult sheep. Red dots: mean RXEs for all replicates within a tissue type. Black dots: mean RGEs for each autosome pair. Numbers by black dots: autosomes whose RGEs fell outside of the expression quartiles for the tissue. Red dotted line: the border for complete (above line) and incomplete (below line) dosage compensation. The X:A ratio was calculated as the Relative X expression, RXE = log2 (X) − log2 (A), the difference between the log2-transformed mean TPM values of X and A. An RXE value of 0 means the expression of X and autosome is equal, suggesting X dosage compensation. Positive and negative RXE values indicate complete and incomplete dosage compensation, respectively. An RXE of -1, however, represents the lack of X dosage compensation. RGE of each autosome pair over all other chromosomes was used to evaluate the deviation of X expression to autosomes.
Figure 2Boxplots of log2-transformed relative expression of the X chromosome (RXE) and each autosome pair (RGE) in female- and male-specific tissues. Red dots: RXEs for all replicates within a tissue type. Black dots: RGEs for each autosome pair. Numbers by black dots: autosomes whose RGEs fell outside of the expression quartiles for the tissue. Red dotted line: the border for complete (above line) and incomplete (below line) dosage compensation. The X:A ratio was calculated as the Relative X expression, RXE = log2 (X) − log2 (A), the difference between the log2-transformed mean TPM values of X and A. An RXE value of 0 means the expression of X and autosome is equal, suggesting X dosage compensation. Positive and negative RXE values indicate complete and incomplete dosage compensation, respectively. An RXE of -1, however, represents the lack of X dosage compensation. RGE of each autosome pair over all other chromosomes was used to evaluate the deviation of X expression to autosomes.
Figure 3Boxplots of log2-transformed expression of the X chromosome (RXE) and each autosome pair by fetal tissues from mothers under different nutritional treatments: Control (A), Overfed (B) and Restricted (C). Red dots: RXEs for all replicates within a treatment group. Black dots: RGEs for each autosome pair. Numbers by black dots: autosomes whose RGEs fell outside of the expression quartiles for the tissue. Red dotted line: the border for complete (above line) and incomplete (below line) dosage compensation. The X:A ratio was calculated as the Relative X expression, RXE = log2 (X) − log2 (A), the difference between the log2-transformed mean TPM values of X and A. An RXE value of 0 means the expression of X and autosome is equal, suggesting X dosage compensation. Positive and negative RXE values indicate complete and incomplete dosage compensation, respectively. An RXE of -1, however, represents the lack of X dosage compensation. RGE of each autosome pair over all other chromosomes was used to evaluate the deviation of X expression to autosomes.
Figure 4Boxplot of RXE values in the categories of “All genes”, “Expressed genes”, “Genes subject to XCI (removal of genes in PAR)” and “Dosage sensitive genes”. Red dotted line: the border for complete (above line) and incomplete (below line) dosage compensation.
Mean numbers of expressed (TPM ≥ 1) X-linked genes in tissues of day 135 fetuses from control (n = 7), overfed (n = 4) and restricted (n = 4) mothers
| Treatments | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | Overfed | Restricted | P-value | |
| Brain | 536.1 ± 15.4 | 531.8 ± 8.7 | 530.3 ± 9.2 | 0.73 |
| Kidney | 517.3 ± 9.9 | 514.5 ± 9.1 | 518.8 ± 2.2 | 0.77 |
| Lung | 506.0 ± 4.0 | 503.3 ± 7.4 | 502.0 ± 4.2 | 0.44 |
Differentially expressed X-linked genes by tissues of ovine fetuses from mothers under control, overfed and restricted nutrition treatments
| Comparison | Tissue | Gene | Expression in controls (TPM) | Expression in treated (TPM) | Log2 FC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Con | Brain | 99.80 | 0.18 | -∞ | |
| Brain | 33.62 | 0.46 | -∞ | ||
| Brain | 1.23 | 0.15 | -∞ | ||
| Kidney | 1.71 | 0.27 | -∞ | ||
| Kidney | 1.46 | 0.86 | −3.23 | ||
| Lung | 0.26 | 6.36 | 4.71 | ||
| Con | Brain | 0.08 | 1.04 | 5.21 | |
| Brain | 1.04 | 0.00 | -∞ | ||
| Brain | 33.62 | 1.27 | −5.20 | ||
| Lung | 1.57 | 0.10 | −5.43 |
Log2 FC: calculated by using bootstrapping; FC: fold change.
∞: infinity;
PAGE4: PAGE family member 4; S100G: S100 calcium binding protein G; SOX3: SRY-box 3; KCNE5: potassium voltage-gated channel subfamily E regulatory subunit 5; CLDN2: claudin 2; DUSP21: dual specificity phosphatase 21; LOC105610402: 60S ribosomal protein L17; SLC6A14: solute carrier family 6 member 14.