| Literature DB >> 32678143 |
Benedikt von der Heyde1,2, Anastasia Emmanouilidou1,2, Eugenia Mazzaferro1,2, Silvia Vicenzi1,2, Ida Höijer1,2, Tiffany Klingström2,3, Sitaf Jumaa1,2, Olga Dethlefsen4,5, Harold Snieder6, Eco de Geus7, Adam Ameur1,2,8, Erik Ingelsson2,9,10,11, Amin Allalou2,12, Hannah L Brooke13, Marcel den Hoed14,15.
Abstract
A meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies (GWAS) identified eight loci that are associated with heart rate variability (HRV), but candidate genes in these loci remain uncharacterized. We developed an image- and CRISPR/Cas9-based pipeline to systematically characterize candidate genes for HRV in live zebrafish embryos. Nine zebrafish orthologues of six human candidate genes were targeted simultaneously in eggs from fish that transgenically express GFP on smooth muscle cells (Tg[acta2:GFP]), to visualize the beating heart. An automated analysis of repeated 30 s recordings of beating atria in 381 live, intact zebrafish embryos at 2 and 5 days post-fertilization highlighted genes that influence HRV (hcn4 and si:dkey-65j6.2 [KIAA1755]); heart rate (rgs6 and hcn4); and the risk of sinoatrial pauses and arrests (hcn4). Exposure to 10 or 25 µM ivabradine-an open channel blocker of HCNs-for 24 h resulted in a dose-dependent higher HRV and lower heart rate at 5 days post-fertilization. Hence, our screen confirmed the role of established genes for heart rate and rhythm (RGS6 and HCN4); showed that ivabradine reduces heart rate and increases HRV in zebrafish embryos, as it does in humans; and highlighted a novel gene that plays a role in HRV (KIAA1755).Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32678143 PMCID: PMC7367351 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-68567-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Overview of the experimental pipeline showing the image-based acquisition and post-processing of images and samples. dpf days post-fertilization.
Selected candidate genes and their zebrafish orthologues in GWAS-identified heart rate variability-associated loci.
| rsID* | Chr | Human gene | ENSG stable ID | Zebrafish orthologue | ENSDARG stable ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
rs4262 rs180238 | 7 | ENSG00000127920 | ENSDARG00000035798 | ||
rs7980799 rs1351682 rs1384598 | 12 | ENSG00000110976 | ENSDARG00000045750 | ||
rs4899412 rs2052015 rs2529471 rs36423 | 14 | ENSG00000182732 | ENSDARG00000015627 | ||
| rs2680344 | 15 | ENSG00000138622 | ENSDARG00000061685 | ||
| ENSDARG00000074419 | |||||
| rs1812835 | 15 | ENSG00000067141 | ENSDARG00000102855 | ||
| ENSDARG00000075100 | |||||
| rs6123471 | 20 | ENSG00000149633 | ENSDARG00000073684 | ||
| ENSDARG00000103586 |
*rsID refers to the lead SNP(s) of the GWAS-identified loci[3].
Figure 2Visualization of cardiac rhythmic or other abnormalities, highlighted by arrows. Sinoatrial pauses were defined as the atrium ceasing to contract for > 3 × the median inter beat interval of the embryo. A sinoatrial arrest was defined as an event where the atrium stopped contracting for > 2 s. Abnormal cardiac morphology was defined as the atrium appearing as a tube-like structure, and impaired cardiac contractility was defined as the atrium vibrating rather than contracting.
Effect of mutations in hcn4 on sinoatrial pauses in data from the CRISPR/Cas9 F1 and sa11188 experiments combined.
| Age | Model | Study | nunaffected | naffected | OR | LCI | UCI | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2dpf | Additive | CRISPR/Cas9 F1 | 258 | 39 | 2.749 | 1.461 | 5.171 | 1.7 × 10–3 |
| sa11188 | 394 | 12 | 1.697 | 0.695 | 4.148 | 2.5 × 10–1 | ||
| Combined | 678 | 51 | 2.245 | 1.358 | 3.710 | 1.6 × 10–3 | ||
| 2 vs. 0 | CRISPR/Cas9 F1 | 127 | 23 | 3.667 | 0.633 | 21.249 | 1.5 × 10–1 | |
| sa11188 | 193 | 7 | 2.529 | 0.468 | 13.657 | 2.8 × 10–1 | ||
| Combined | 414 | 30 | 2.916 | 0.851 | 9.993 | 8.9 × 10–2 | ||
| 5dpf | Additive | CRISPR/Cas9 F1 | 312 | 9 | 2.460 | 0.680 | 8.899 | 1.7 × 10–1 |
| sa11188 | 308 | 34 | 2.252 | 1.303 | 3.893 | 3.7 × 10–3 | ||
| Combined | 620 | 43 | 2.762 | 1.320 | 5.782 | 7.0 × 10–3 | ||
| 2 vs. 0 | CRISPR/Cas9 F1 | 231 | 4 | – | – | – | – | |
| sa11188 | 151 | 16 | 7.885 | 1.719 | 36.163 | 7.9 × 10–3 | ||
| Combined | 382 | 20 | 9.015 | 3.348 | 24.277 | 1.4 × 10–5 | ||
| Any | Additive | Combined | 631 | 90 | 2.121 | 1.456 | 3.090 | 8.9 × 10–5 |
| 2 vs. 0 | Combined | 391 | 47 | 3.687 | 1.651 | 8.232 | 1.5 × 10–3 |
Associations between the presence of sinoatrial pauses during the 30 s recording and the number of mutated alleles in hcn4 weighted by the predicted effect of those mutations on protein function (additive); or in embryos with nonsense mutations in both hcn4 alleles vs. embryos free from CRISPR/Cas9-induced or sa11188 mutations in hcn4 (2 vs. 0) at 2 days post-fertilization (dpf), 5dpf, or at either time point (any). In the CRISPR/Cas9 experiment, associations were examined using logistic regression, adjusting for time of day, batch and for the weighted number of mutated alleles in the other genes as fixed factors; in the sa11188 experiment and combined analysis, associations were examined using mixed models (xtmelogit in Stata), with embryos nested in batches and experiments and adjusting for time of day as a fixed factor. At 2dpf, 26 and 94 unaffected larvae were dropped from the additive and ‘2 vs. 0’ analyses in the CRISPR/Cas9 F1 larvae due to multicollinearity. These observations were included in the combined analysis.
Figure 3Effect of CRISPR/Cas9-induced mutations in candidate genes on (change in) heart rate variability (top) and heart rate (bottom) at 2 days post-fertilization (dpf, n = 234) and 5dpf (n = 285). Full dots and solid whiskers show the effect size and 95% confidence interval (CI) for each additional mutated allele, weighted by the mutation’s predicted effect on protein function. Open dots and dotted whiskers indicate the effect and 95% CI for nonsense mutations in both alleles vs. no CRISPR/Cas9-induced mutations. Effects were adjusted for the weighted number of mutated alleles in the other targeted genes, as well as for time of day (fixed factors), with embryos nested in batches (random factor). quo and si:dkey-65j6.2 are orthologues of the human KIAA1755.
Figure 4Association of heart rate variability and heart rate at 2- and 5-days post-fertilization (dpf) and effect of nonsense mutations in both hcn4 alleles. Top: the association of heart rate variability and heart rate at 2 and 5dpf, with embryos carrying nonsense mutations in both hcn4 alleles shown as pink diamonds. Bottom: the mean ± standard deviation of heart rate variability and heart rate at 2dpf and 5dpf for embryos with nonsense mutations in both hcn4 alleles (n = 5) vs. embryos without CRISPR/Cas9-induced mutations in hcn4 (n = 147).
Figure 5The effect of mutations in hcn4 and treatment with ivabradine on (change in) heart rate variability and heart rate. Effects were examined by comparing embryos with nonsense mutations in both hcn4 alleles and embryos free from CRISPR/Cas9 or sa11188 mutations; as well as using an additive model, weighing the number of mutated alleles by their predicted effect on protein function based on Ensembl’s Variant Effect Predictor (VEP). Effects were adjusted for time of day and the weighted number of mutated alleles in other targeted genes as fixed factors, and with embryos nested in batches and experiment (for the combined analysis, random factor). Dots and whiskers represent effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals.
Figure 6qRT-PCR results for the expression of transcripts with high (> 75%) sequence similarity to the main zebrafish hcn4 transcript, with and without CRISPR/Cas9 targeting of hcn4, hcn4l, or hcn4 & hcn4l. Each sample consists of five pooled, 5-day-old embryos, which at the single cell stage had been injected with: (1) hcn4 and hcn4l gRNAs, or Cas9 mRNA (controls, in blue, n = 26); or with Cas9 mRNA together with (2) hcn4 gRNA (red, n = 10); (3) hcn4l gRNA (green, n = 12); or (4) hcn4 and hcn4l gRNA (orange, n = 21). In all samples, technological triplicates of quantification cycles (Cq) were averaged, and normalized using expression in un-injected controls as calibrator, and expression of mob4 as a reference gene, using the Pfaffl method. For hcn4 and hcn4l, expression was quantified at the CRISPR/Cas9 targeted site and at the last exon. Differences between the three experimental conditions and controls were examined in a multiple linear regression analysis, adjusting for batch (n = 2). CABZ01086574.1 is likely an orthologue of the human HCN2. Significant differences with controls are highlighted by * (p < 0.05) or # (P < 1 × 10–4). Boxes show mean ± 1 SD. Genes are ordered by sequence similarity to the main hcn4 transcript.