| Literature DB >> 34042332 |
Cuicui Liu1,2, Dan Wu1,2, Meijuan Xia1,2, Minmin Li1,2, Zhiqiang Sun1,2, Biao Shen1,2, Yiying Liu1,2, Erlie Jiang1,2, Hongtao Wang1,2, Pei Su1,2, Lihong Shi1,2, Zhijian Xiao1,2, Xiaofan Zhu1,2, Wen Zhou3, Qianfei Wang4, Xin Gao1,2, Tao Cheng1,2, Jiaxi Zhou1,2.
Abstract
Megakaryocytes (MKs) and their progeny platelets function in a variety of biological processes including coagulation, hemostasis, inflammation, angiogenesis, and innate immunity. However, the divergent developmental and cellular landscape of adult MKs remains mysterious. Here, by deriving the single-cell transcriptomic profiling of MKs from human adult bone marrow (BM), cellular heterogeneity within MKs is unveiled and an MK subpopulation with high enrichment of immune-associated genes is identified. By performing the dynamic single-cell transcriptomic landscape of human megakaryopoiesis in vitro, it is found that the immune signatures of MKs can be traced back to the progenitor stage. Furthermore, two surface markers, CD148 and CD48, are identified for mature MKs with immune characteristics. At the functional level, these CD148+ CD48+ MKs can respond rapidly to immune stimuli both in vitro and in vivo, exhibit high-level expression of immune receptors and mediators, and may function as immune-surveillance cells. The findings uncover the cellular heterogeneity and a novel immune subset of human adult MKs and should greatly facilitate the understanding of the divergent functions of MKs under physiological and pathological conditions.Entities:
Keywords: CD48; cellular heterogeneity; human megakaryopoiesis; immune-surveillance; single-cell RNA-Seq
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34042332 PMCID: PMC8336508 DOI: 10.1002/advs.202100921
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Adv Sci (Weinh) ISSN: 2198-3844 Impact factor: 16.806
Figure 1Single‐cell profiling of human MKs from native bone marrow. A) Schematic diagram of single‐cell RNA‐seq of human MKs from native bone marrow (BM). B) Representative morphologies of MKs with different sizes analyzed by MGG staining (scale bar, 20 µm). C) Cell clusters of 860 human MK single cells visualized by UMAP. Colors indicate different MK clusters. Each dot represents one cell. D) UMAP visualization of the expression of known marker genes for MK clusters. E) Heatmap showing top ten highly differentially expressed genes in each cluster with gene ontology (GO) analysis. Highlighted GO terms were selected by adjusted P value (<0.05). F) Dot plot showing the expression of feature genes in five distinct MK clusters.
Figure 2Identification of a subpopulation of “immune‐MKs.” A) Gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) of immune gene sets enriched in hBM‐MK5 versus hBM‐MK1‐4. B) UMAP visualization of the expression of feature genes for hBM‐MK5. C) Dot plot showing the expression of various immune genes in five distinct MK clusters. D) Box plot displaying the expression level of genes related to antimicrobials and various immune receptors in each MK subset. Colors indicate different MK clusters described in Figure 1C. E) Dot plot showing the expression of representative genes of antimicrobials in human MK subsets. F) Dot plot showing the expression of multiple immune receptors in human MK subsets.
Figure 3Identification of “immune MKs” in human megakaryopoiesis in vitro. A) Schematic diagram of single‐cell RNA‐seq cells collected from in vitro model of megakaryopoiesis from human BM (hiBM). B) Cell clusters of 15,780 single cells derived at all time points from hiBM model visualized by UMAP. Colors represent distinct cell types annotated by the expression of feature genes. Each dot represents one cell. C) The MK, MKP, and MEPa clusters identified in (B) were taken out for reclustering and visualized by UMAP. Subclusters were marked with different colors. D) Heatmap showing top ten differentially expressed genes in each subpopulation of mature MKs. Highlighted GO terms were selected by adjusted P value (<0.05). Colors indicate different MK clusters described in (C). E) Box plot displaying the expression level of genes related to antimicrobials and immune receptors in each MK subset. Colors indicate different MK clusters described in (C). F) Dot plot showing the expression of feature genes in each MKP and MEP subpopulation. G) Box plot showing the level of signature genes of immune MKs (hiBM‐MK3) in each MEP and MKP subsets. Colors indicate different MKP and MEP clusters described in (C).
Figure 4CD148 and CD48 mark the “immune MKs.” A) UMAP plot showing PTPRJ (CD148) expression in mature MKs both in vivo and in vitro. B) Typical morphologies of three types of MK populations detected by immunofluorescent staining of CD41a, CD42b, CD148, and Hoechst33342 on the BM smears of healthy donors (scale bar, 20 µm). C) Screening of potential surface markers that were common to immune MKs from both native BM and in vitro cultures. D) Candidate surface markers of immune MKs ranked by the specificity ratio (positive expression rate of candidate genes in MK populations vs progenitors) both in vivo and in vitro. E) UMAP plot showing CD48 expression in immune MKs both in vivo and in vitro. F) The morphology of CD148+CD48+ MKs in the BM smears of healthy donors (scale bar, 20 µm). G) The percentage of CD148+CD48+ MKs gated in CD41a+CD42b+ cells in human BM measured with flow cytometry.
Figure 5CD148+CD48+ “immune MKs” can respond to immune stimuli. A) The percentage of CD148+CD48+ subset gated in CD41a+CD42b+ MKs with stimulation of different concentrations of LPS. Data are pooled from four independent experiments (n = 4) and presented as mean ± SD. P‐values are calculated using a two‐tailed unpaired Student's t test, NS, not significant, * P < 0.05. B) The percentage of CD148+CD48+ subset gated in CD41a+CD42b+ with stimulation of different concentrations of IFNγ. Data are pooled from four independent experiments (n = 4) and presented as mean ± SD. P‐values are calculated using a two‐tailed unpaired Student's t test, NS, not significant, * P < 0.05 and ** P < 0.01. C) The dynamic percentage of CD148+CD48+ immune subset gated in CD41+CD42d+ MKs in the BM of E. coli‐challenged mice within 72 h of infection. Data are pooled from 3 to 4 independent experiments with n = 4–8 mice per time point and presented as mean ± SD. P‐values are calculated using a two‐tailed unpaired Student's t test, NS, not significant, *** P < 0.001. D) Schematic diagram of single‐cell RNA‐Seq of mouse MKs from the BM with or without E. coli infection. E) Cell clusters of 851 mouse MK single cells from two groups visualized by UMAP. Colors indicate different MK clusters. Each dot represents one cell. F) Violin plot showing the expression of Cd48 in mBM‐MK5 versus mBM‐MK1‐4. G) The distribution of each MK subpopulation in control and infection groups visualized by UMAP. Colors indicate different MK clusters. Each dot represents one cell. H) Dot plot showing the expression of various immune genes in mBM‐MK5 in each group.
Figure 6The functional link between CD148+CD48+ MKs and immune surveillance. A) The expression of representative immunoreceptors in CD48+ and CD48− MKs measured with single‐cell qPCR. B) The expression of the immunoreceptor C5AR1 (CD88) in CD48+ and CD48− MKs measured by in situ immunofluorescence staining (scale bar, 20 µm). C) The expression of representative immune mediators in CD48+ and CD48− MKs measured with single‐cell qPCR. D) The expression of the immune mediator LCN2 in CD48+ and CD48− MKs measured by in situ immunofluorescence staining (scale bar, 20 µm). E) The spatial relationship of CD48+ or CD48− MKs and blood vessels (VE) in the BM of control or infected mice were detected by in situ immunofluorescence staining (scale bar, 20 µm). The CD48+ MKs were highlighted by white arrows and the blood vessels were stained by Endomucin in yellow. F) The shortest distance was calculated for CD48+ or CD48− MKs to blood vessels in the BM of control (n = 290) or infected mice (n = 375). G) Networks of potential cell–cell interactions between immune MKs (iMK) and hematopoietic immune cells inferred from gene expression of known receptor–ligand pairs. NEU, neutrophil; MON, monocyte; Mø, macrophage; NK, natural killer cell; B, B cell; T, T cell. H) The interactions of CD48+ or CD48− MKs with S100A8hi neutrophils in the BM of control or infected mice were detected by in situ immunofluorescence staining (scale bar, 20 µm). The CD48+ MKs were highlighted by white arrows, and the blood vessels were stained by Endomucin in yellow. I) The percentage of sorted CD48+ or CD48− MKs with Ly6G+ neutrophil adhesion after 2 h coculture at 37 °C. Data are pooled from three independent experiments (n = 3) and presented as mean ± SD. P‐values are calculated using a two‐tailed unpaired Student's t test, * P < 0.05. J) The schematic illustration of cellular heterogeneity of MKs and immune functions of CD48+ MK subpopulation. The MKs from native bone marrow consist of heterogeneous subpopulations. Among them, the immune MK subpopulation, which specifically expressed CD48, can respond to the inflammatory stimuli and increase substantially after infections. These CD48+ immune MKs, with high‐level expression of multiple receptors and mediators, might benefit from their short distance to the blood vessel after infections and function as potential immune sensors and modulators, which may contribute to neutrophil migration and mobilization.