Sally H Cross1, Lisa Mckie1, Margaret Keighren1, Katrine West1, Caroline Thaung2,3, Tracey Davey4, Dinesh C Soares1, Luis Sanchez-Pulido1, Ian J Jackson1. 1. MRC Human Genetics Unit, MRC Institute of Genetics and Molecular Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom. 2. Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom. 3. University College London Institute of Ophthalmology, London, United Kingdom. 4. Electron Microscopy Research Services, Newcastle University, Newcastle, United Kingdom.
Abstract
Purpose: We previously found a dominant mutation, Rwhs, causing white spots on the retina accompanied by retinal folds. Here we identify the mutant gene to be Tmem98. In humans, mutations in the orthologous gene cause nanophthalmos. We modeled these mutations in mice and characterized the mutant eye phenotypes of these and Rwhs. Methods: The Rwhs mutation was identified to be a missense mutation in Tmem98 by genetic mapping and sequencing. The human TMEM98 nanophthalmos missense mutations were made in the mouse gene by CRISPR-Cas9. Eyes were examined by indirect ophthalmoscopy and the retinas imaged using a retinal camera. Electroretinography was used to study retinal function. Histology, immunohistochemistry, and electron microscopy techniques were used to study adult eyes. Results: An I135T mutation of Tmem98 causes the dominant Rwhs phenotype and is perinatally lethal when homozygous. Two dominant missense mutations of TMEM98, A193P and H196P, are associated with human nanophthalmos. In the mouse these mutations cause recessive retinal defects similar to the Rwhs phenotype, either alone or in combination with each other, but do not cause nanophthalmos. The retinal folds did not affect retinal function as assessed by electroretinography. Within the folds there was accumulation of disorganized outer segment material as demonstrated by immunohistochemistry and electron microscopy, and macrophages had infiltrated into these regions. Conclusions: Mutations in the mouse orthologue of the human nanophthalmos gene TMEM98 do not result in small eyes. Rather, there is localized disruption of the laminar structure of the photoreceptors.
Purpose: We previously found a dominant mutation, Rwhs, causing white spots on the retina accompanied by retinal folds. Here we identify the mutant gene to be Tmem98. In humans, mutations in the orthologous gene cause nanophthalmos. We modeled these mutations in mice and characterized the mutant eye phenotypes of these and Rwhs. Methods: The Rwhs mutation was identified to be a missense mutation in Tmem98 by genetic mapping and sequencing. The humanTMEM98 nanophthalmos missense mutations were made in the mouse gene by CRISPR-Cas9. Eyes were examined by indirect ophthalmoscopy and the retinas imaged using a retinal camera. Electroretinography was used to study retinal function. Histology, immunohistochemistry, and electron microscopy techniques were used to study adult eyes. Results: An I135T mutation of Tmem98 causes the dominant Rwhs phenotype and is perinatally lethal when homozygous. Two dominant missense mutations of TMEM98, A193P and H196P, are associated with human nanophthalmos. In the mouse these mutations cause recessive retinal defects similar to the Rwhs phenotype, either alone or in combination with each other, but do not cause nanophthalmos. The retinal folds did not affect retinal function as assessed by electroretinography. Within the folds there was accumulation of disorganized outer segment material as demonstrated by immunohistochemistry and electron microscopy, and macrophages had infiltrated into these regions. Conclusions: Mutations in the mouse orthologue of the human nanophthalmos gene TMEM98 do not result in small eyes. Rather, there is localized disruption of the laminar structure of the photoreceptors.
Authors: A I den Hollander; J B ten Brink; Y J de Kok; S van Soest; L I van den Born; M A van Driel; D J van de Pol; A M Payne; S S Bhattacharya; U Kellner; C B Hoyng; A Westerveld; H G Brunner; E M Bleeker-Wagemakers; A F Deutman; J R Heckenlively; F P Cremers; A A Bergen Journal: Nat Genet Date: 1999-10 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Andrea Milenkovic; Caroline Brandl; Vladimir M Milenkovic; Thomas Jendryke; Lalida Sirianant; Potchanart Wanitchakool; Stephanie Zimmermann; Charlotte M Reiff; Franziska Horling; Heinrich Schrewe; Rainer Schreiber; Karl Kunzelmann; Christian H Wetzel; Bernhard H F Weber Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2015-05-04 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: N L Hawes; B Chang; G S Hageman; S Nusinowitz; P M Nishina; B S Schneider; R S Smith; T H Roderick; M T Davisson; J R Heckenlively Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Serge A van de Pavert; Albena Kantardzhieva; Anna Malysheva; Jan Meuleman; Inge Versteeg; Christiaan Levelt; Jan Klooster; Sylvia Geiger; Mathias W Seeliger; Penny Rashbass; Andre Le Bivic; Jan Wijnholds Journal: J Cell Sci Date: 2004-08-15 Impact factor: 5.285
Authors: Rosemary Burgess; Ian D Millar; Bart P Leroy; Jill E Urquhart; Ian M Fearon; Elfrida De Baere; Peter D Brown; Anthony G Robson; Genevieve A Wright; Philippe Kestelyn; Graham E Holder; Andrew R Webster; Forbes D C Manson; Graeme C M Black Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: Ramani Soundararajan; Jungyeon Won; Timothy M Stearns; Jeremy R Charette; Wanda L Hicks; Gayle B Collin; Jürgen K Naggert; Mark P Krebs; Patsy M Nishina Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-10-30 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Codrut C Paun; Benjamin J Pijl; Anna M Siemiatkowska; Rob W J Collin; Frans P M Cremers; Carel B Hoyng; Anneke I den Hollander Journal: Mol Vis Date: 2012-10-04 Impact factor: 2.367
Authors: Owen M Siggs; Emmanuelle Souzeau; James Breen; Ayub Qassim; Tiger Zhou; Andrew Dubowsky; Jonathan B Ruddle; Jamie E Craig Journal: Mol Vis Date: 2019-09-21 Impact factor: 2.367
Authors: Sally H Cross; Lisa Mckie; Toby W Hurd; Sam Riley; Jimi Wills; Alun R Barnard; Fiona Young; Robert E MacLaren; Ian J Jackson Journal: PLoS Genet Date: 2020-04-01 Impact factor: 5.917