William G Pembroke1, Christopher L Hartl1, Daniel H Geschwind2,3,4. 1. Program in Neurogenetics, Department of Neurology, David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 2. Program in Neurogenetics, Department of Neurology, David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA. dhg@mednet.ucla.edu. 3. Center for Autism Research and Treatment, Semel Institute, David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA. dhg@mednet.ucla.edu. 4. Department of Human Genetics, David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA. dhg@mednet.ucla.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mouse models have allowed for the direct interrogation of genetic effects on molecular, physiological, and behavioral brain phenotypes. However, it is unknown to what extent neurological or psychiatric traits may be human- or primate-specific and therefore which components can be faithfully recapitulated in mouse models. RESULTS: We compare conservation of co-expression in 116 independent data sets derived from human, mouse, and non-human primate representing more than 15,000 total samples. We observe greater changes occurring on the human lineage than mouse, and substantial regional variation that highlights cerebral cortex as the most diverged region. Glia, notably microglia, astrocytes, and oligodendrocytes are the most divergent cell type, three times more on average than neurons. We show that cis-regulatory sequence divergence explains a significant fraction of co-expression divergence. Moreover, protein coding sequence constraint parallels co-expression conservation, such that genes with loss of function intolerance are enriched in neuronal, rather than glial modules. We identify dozens of human neuropsychiatric and neurodegenerative disease risk genes, such as COMT, PSEN-1, LRRK2, SHANK3, and SNCA, with highly divergent co-expression between mouse and human and show that 3D human brain organoids recapitulate in vivo co-expression modules representing several human cell types. CONCLUSIONS: We identify robust co-expression modules reflecting whole-brain and regional patterns of gene expression. Compared with those that represent basic metabolic processes, cell-type-specific modules, most prominently glial modules, are the most divergent between species. These data and analyses serve as a foundational resource to guide human disease modeling and its interpretation.
BACKGROUND: Mouse models have allowed for the direct interrogation of genetic effects on molecular, physiological, and behavioral brain phenotypes. However, it is unknown to what extent neurological or psychiatric traits may be human- or primate-specific and therefore which components can be faithfully recapitulated in mouse models. RESULTS: We compare conservation of co-expression in 116 independent data sets derived from human, mouse, and non-human primate representing more than 15,000 total samples. We observe greater changes occurring on the human lineage than mouse, and substantial regional variation that highlights cerebral cortex as the most diverged region. Glia, notably microglia, astrocytes, and oligodendrocytes are the most divergent cell type, three times more on average than neurons. We show that cis-regulatory sequence divergence explains a significant fraction of co-expression divergence. Moreover, protein coding sequence constraint parallels co-expression conservation, such that genes with loss of function intolerance are enriched in neuronal, rather than glial modules. We identify dozens of human neuropsychiatric and neurodegenerative disease risk genes, such as COMT, PSEN-1, LRRK2, SHANK3, and SNCA, with highly divergent co-expression between mouse and human and show that 3D human brain organoids recapitulate in vivo co-expression modules representing several human cell types. CONCLUSIONS: We identify robust co-expression modules reflecting whole-brain and regional patterns of gene expression. Compared with those that represent basic metabolic processes, cell-type-specific modules, most prominently glial modules, are the most divergent between species. These data and analyses serve as a foundational resource to guide human disease modeling and its interpretation.
Authors: Cleber A Trujillo; Richard Gao; Priscilla D Negraes; Jing Gu; Justin Buchanan; Sebastian Preissl; Allen Wang; Wei Wu; Gabriel G Haddad; Isaac A Chaim; Alain Domissy; Matthieu Vandenberghe; Anna Devor; Gene W Yeo; Bradley Voytek; Alysson R Muotri Journal: Cell Stem Cell Date: 2019-08-29 Impact factor: 24.633
Authors: F Kyle Satterstrom; Jack A Kosmicki; Jiebiao Wang; Michael S Breen; Silvia De Rubeis; Joon-Yong An; Minshi Peng; Ryan Collins; Jakob Grove; Lambertus Klei; Christine Stevens; Jennifer Reichert; Maureen S Mulhern; Mykyta Artomov; Sherif Gerges; Brooke Sheppard; Xinyi Xu; Aparna Bhaduri; Utku Norman; Harrison Brand; Grace Schwartz; Rachel Nguyen; Elizabeth E Guerrero; Caroline Dias; Catalina Betancur; Edwin H Cook; Louise Gallagher; Michael Gill; James S Sutcliffe; Audrey Thurm; Michael E Zwick; Anders D Børglum; Matthew W State; A Ercument Cicek; Michael E Talkowski; David J Cutler; Bernie Devlin; Stephan J Sanders; Kathryn Roeder; Mark J Daly; Joseph D Buxbaum Journal: Cell Date: 2020-01-23 Impact factor: 41.582
Authors: Adam Siepel; Gill Bejerano; Jakob S Pedersen; Angie S Hinrichs; Minmei Hou; Kate Rosenbloom; Hiram Clawson; John Spieth; Ladeana W Hillier; Stephen Richards; George M Weinstock; Richard K Wilson; Richard A Gibbs; W James Kent; Webb Miller; David Haussler Journal: Genome Res Date: 2005-07-15 Impact factor: 9.043
Authors: André M M Sousa; Ying Zhu; Mary Ann Raghanti; Robert R Kitchen; Marco Onorati; Andrew T N Tebbenkamp; Bernardo Stutz; Kyle A Meyer; Mingfeng Li; Yuka Imamura Kawasawa; Fuchen Liu; Raquel Garcia Perez; Marta Mele; Tiago Carvalho; Mario Skarica; Forrest O Gulden; Mihovil Pletikos; Akemi Shibata; Alexa R Stephenson; Melissa K Edler; John J Ely; John D Elsworth; Tamas L Horvath; Patrick R Hof; Thomas M Hyde; Joel E Kleinman; Daniel R Weinberger; Mark Reimers; Richard P Lifton; Shrikant M Mane; James P Noonan; Matthew W State; Ed S Lein; James A Knowles; Tomas Marques-Bonet; Chet C Sherwood; Mark B Gerstein; Nenad Sestan Journal: Science Date: 2017-11-24 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: J Gray Camp; Farhath Badsha; Marta Florio; Sabina Kanton; Tobias Gerber; Michaela Wilsch-Bräuninger; Eric Lewitus; Alex Sykes; Wulf Hevers; Madeline Lancaster; Juergen A Knoblich; Robert Lachmann; Svante Pääbo; Wieland B Huttner; Barbara Treutlein Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2015-12-07 Impact factor: 11.205