Transcriptional adaptation: Another reason why your disease model fails you

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (489) ◽  
pp. eaax1731
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Ronzitti

Up-regulation of paralogous transcripts is a potential mechanism of genetic compensation.

Phenomics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Rossi ◽  
Zacharias Kontarakis

AbstractUnderstanding the way genes work amongst individuals and across generations to shape form and function is a common theme for many genetic studies. The recent advances in genetics, genome engineering and DNA sequencing reinforced the notion that genes are not the only players that determine a phenotype. Due to physiological or pathological fluctuations in gene expression, even genetically identical cells can behave and manifest different phenotypes under the same conditions. Here, we discuss mechanisms that can influence or even disrupt the axis between genotype and phenotype; the role of modifier genes, the general concept of genetic redundancy, genetic compensation, the recently described transcriptional adaptation, environmental stressors, and phenotypic plasticity. We furthermore highlight the usage of induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs), the generation of isogenic lines through genome engineering, and sequencing technologies can help extract new genetic and epigenetic mechanisms from what is hitherto considered ‘noise’.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hajime Okada ◽  
Yumiko Saga

Organisms are inherently equipped with buffering systems against genetic perturbations. Upregulation of homologous genes responding to gene loss, termed genetic compensation, is one such buffering mechanism. Recently, a well-conserved compensatory mechanism was proposed: transcriptional adaptation of homologs under the nonsense-mediated mRNA decay pathways. However, this model cannot explain the onset of all compensatory events. We report a novel genetic compensation mechanism operating over the Mesp gene locus. Mesp1 and Mesp2 are homologs located adjacently in the genome. Mesp2 loss is partially rescued by Mesp1 upregulation in the presomitic mesoderm (PSM). Using a cultured PSM induction system, we reproduced the compensatory response in vitro and found that the Mesp2-enhancer is required to promote Mesp1. We revealed that the Mesp2-enhancer directly interacts with the Mesp1 promoter, thereby upregulating Mesp1 expression upon the loss of Mesp2. Of note, this interaction is established by genomic arrangement upon PSM development independently of Mesp2 disruption. We propose that the repurposing of this established enhancer-promoter communication is the mechanism underlying this compensatory response for the upregulation of the adjacent homolog.


PLoS Genetics ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. e1010000
Author(s):  
Hajime Okada ◽  
Yumiko Saga

Organisms are inherently equipped with buffering systems against genetic perturbations. Genetic compensation, the compensatory response by upregulating another gene or genes, is one such buffering mechanism. Recently, a well-conserved compensatory mechanism was proposed: transcriptional adaptation of homologs under the nonsense-mediated mRNA decay pathways. However, this model cannot explain the onset of all compensatory events. We report a novel genetic compensation mechanism operating over the Mesp gene locus. Mesp1 and Mesp2 are paralogs located adjacently in the genome. Mesp2 loss is partially rescued by Mesp1 upregulation in the presomitic mesoderm (PSM). Using a cultured PSM induction system, we reproduced the compensatory response in vitro and found that the Mesp2-enhancer is required to promote Mesp1. We revealed that the Mesp2-enhancer directly interacts with the Mesp1 promoter, thereby upregulating Mesp1 expression upon the loss of Mesp2. Of note, this interaction is established by genomic arrangement upon PSM development independently of Mesp2 disruption. We propose that the repurposing of this established enhancer-promoter communication is the mechanism underlying this compensatory response for the upregulation of the adjacent gene.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohamed A. El-Brolosy ◽  
Andrea Rossi ◽  
Zacharias Kontarakis ◽  
Carsten Kuenne ◽  
Stefan Günther ◽  
...  

Genetic compensation by transcriptional modulation of related gene(s) (also known as transcriptional adaptation) has been reported in numerous systems1–3; however, whether and how such a response can be activated in the absence of protein feedback loops is unknown. Here, we develop and analyze several models of transcriptional adaptation in zebrafish and mouse that we show are not caused by loss of protein function. We find that the increase in transcript levels is due to enhanced transcription, and observe a correlation between the levels of mutant mRNA decay and transcriptional upregulation of related genes. To assess the role of mutant mRNA degradation in triggering transcriptional adaptation, we use genetic and pharmacological approaches and find that mRNA degradation is indeed required for this process. Notably, uncapped RNAs, themselves subjected to rapid degradation, can also induce transcriptional adaptation. Next, we generate alleles that fail to transcribe the mutated gene and find that they do not show transcriptional adaptation, and exhibit more severe phenotypes than those observed in alleles displaying mutant mRNA decay. Transcriptome analysis of these different alleles reveals the upregulation of hundreds of genes with enrichment for those showing sequence similarity with the mutated gene’s mRNA, suggesting a model whereby mRNA degradation products induce the response via sequence similarity. These results expand the role of the mRNA surveillance machinery in buffering against mutations by triggering the transcriptional upregulation of related genes. Besides implications for our understanding of disease-causing mutations, our findings will help design mutant alleles with minimal transcriptional adaptation-derived compensation.


Author(s):  
Melanie K. T. Takarangi ◽  
Deryn Strange

When people are told that their negative memories are worse than other people’s, do they later remember those events differently? We asked participants to recall a recent negative memory then, 24 h later, we gave some participants feedback about the emotional impact of their event – stating it was more or less negative compared to other people’s experiences. One week later, participants recalled the event again. We predicted that if feedback affected how participants remembered their negative experiences, their ratings of the memory’s characteristics should change over time. That is, when participants are told that their negative event is extremely negative, their memories should be more vivid, recollected strongly, and remembered from a personal perspective, compared to participants in the other conditions. Our results provide support for this hypothesis. We suggest that external feedback might be a potential mechanism in the relationship between negative memories and psychological well-being.


2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosemary Bland ◽  
Corina Chivu ◽  
Kieran Jefferson ◽  
Donald MacDonald ◽  
Gulnaz Iqbal ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document