The asymmetric expression of HSPA2 in blastomeres governs the first embryonic cell-fate decision
Curation statements for this article:-
Curated by eLife
eLife Assessment
This useful study by Gao et al identifies Hspa2 as a heterogeneous transcript in the early embryo and proposes a plausible mechanism showing interactions with Carm1. The authors propose that variability in HSPA2 levels among blastomeres at the 4-cell stage skews their relative contribution to the embryonic lineage. Given only 4 other heterogeneous transcripts/non-coding RNA have been proposed to act similarly at or before the 4-cell stage, this would be a key addition to our understanding of how the first cell fate decision is made. Whilst this is a solid study, in order to support its conclusions image analyses and quantifications would need to be better described, and the overexpression studies should be validated.
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (eLife)
Abstract
The first cell-fate decision is the process by which cells of an embryo take on distinct lineage identities for the first time, thus representing the beginning of developmental patterning. Here, we demonstrate that the molecular chaperone heat shock protein A2 (HSPA2), a member of the 70 kDa heat shock protein (HSP70) family, is asymmetrically expressed in the late 2-cell stage of mouse embryos. The knockdown of Hspa2 in one of the two-cell blastomeres prevented its progeny predominantly toward the inner cell mass (ICM) fate, thus indicating that the differential distribution of HSPA2 in the blastomeres of two-cell embryos can influence the selection of embryonic cell lineages. In contrast, the overexpression of Hspa2 in one of the two-cell blastomeres did not induce blastomeres to differentiate towards the ICM fate. Furthermore, we demonstrated that HSPA2 forms a complex with CARM1 and activates ICM-specific gene expression. Collectively, our results identify HSPA2 as a critical regulator of the first cell-fate decision which specifies the ICM via the execution of commitment and differentiation phases.
Article activity feed
-
eLife Assessment
This useful study by Gao et al identifies Hspa2 as a heterogeneous transcript in the early embryo and proposes a plausible mechanism showing interactions with Carm1. The authors propose that variability in HSPA2 levels among blastomeres at the 4-cell stage skews their relative contribution to the embryonic lineage. Given only 4 other heterogeneous transcripts/non-coding RNA have been proposed to act similarly at or before the 4-cell stage, this would be a key addition to our understanding of how the first cell fate decision is made. Whilst this is a solid study, in order to support its conclusions image analyses and quantifications would need to be better described, and the overexpression studies should be validated.
-
Reviewer #1 (Public review):
Summary:
The authors investigate the role of HSPA2 during mouse preimplantation development. Knocking down HSPA2 in zygotes, the authors describe lower chances of developing into blastocysts, which show a reduced number of inner cell mass cells. They find that HSPA2 mRNA and protein levels show some heterogeneity among blastomeres at the 4-cell stage and propose that HSPA2 could contribute to skewing their relative contribution to embryonic lineages. To test this, the authors try to reduce HSPA2 expression in one of the 2-cell stage blastomere and propose that it biases their contribution to towards extra-embryonic lineages. To explain this, the authors propose that HSPA2 would interact with CARM1, which controls chromatin accessibility around genes regulating differentiation into embryonic lineage.
Strengths:
Reviewer #1 (Public review):
Summary:
The authors investigate the role of HSPA2 during mouse preimplantation development. Knocking down HSPA2 in zygotes, the authors describe lower chances of developing into blastocysts, which show a reduced number of inner cell mass cells. They find that HSPA2 mRNA and protein levels show some heterogeneity among blastomeres at the 4-cell stage and propose that HSPA2 could contribute to skewing their relative contribution to embryonic lineages. To test this, the authors try to reduce HSPA2 expression in one of the 2-cell stage blastomere and propose that it biases their contribution to towards extra-embryonic lineages. To explain this, the authors propose that HSPA2 would interact with CARM1, which controls chromatin accessibility around genes regulating differentiation into embryonic lineage.
Strengths:
(1) The study offers simple and straightforward experiments with large sample sizes.
(2) Unlike most studies in the field, this research often relies on both mRNA and protein levels to analyse gene expression and differentiation.
Weaknesses:
(1) Image and statistical analyses are not well described.
(2) The functionality of the overexpression construct is not validated.
(3) Tracking of KD cells in embryos injected at the 2-cell stage with GFP is unclear.
(4) A key rationale of the study relies on measuring small differences in the levels of mRNA and proteins using semi-quantitative methods to compare blastomeres. As such, it is not possible to know whether those subtle differences are biologically meaningful. For example, the lowest HSPA2 level of the embryo with the highest level is much higher than the top cell from the embryo with the lowest level. What does this level mean then? Does this mean that some blastomeres grafted from strong embryos would systematically outcompete all other blastomeres from weaker embryos? That would be very surprising. I think the authors should be more careful and consider the lack of quantitative power of their approach before reaching firm conclusions. Although to be fair, the authors only follow a long trend of studies with the same intrinsic flaw of this approach.
(5) Some of the analyses on immunostaining do not take into account that this technique only allows for semi-quantitative measurements and comparisons.
a) Some of the microscopy images are shown with an incorrect look-up table.
b) Some of the schematics are incorrect and misleading. -
Reviewer #2 (Public review):
Summary:
In this study, Gao et al. use RNA-seq to identify Hspa2 as one of the earliest transcripts heterogeneously distributed between blastomeres. Functional studies are performed using siRNA knockdown showing Hspa2 may bias cells toward the ICM lineage via interaction with the known methyltransferase CARM1.
Strengths:
This study tackles an important question regarding the origins of the first cell fate decision in the preimplantation embryo. It provides novelty in its identification of Hspa2 as a heterogeneous transcript in the early embryo and proposes a plausible mechanism showing interactions with Carm1. Multiple approaches are used to validate their functional studies (FISH, WB, development rates, proteomics). Given only 4 other transcripts/RNA have been identified at or before the 4-cell stage …
Reviewer #2 (Public review):
Summary:
In this study, Gao et al. use RNA-seq to identify Hspa2 as one of the earliest transcripts heterogeneously distributed between blastomeres. Functional studies are performed using siRNA knockdown showing Hspa2 may bias cells toward the ICM lineage via interaction with the known methyltransferase CARM1.
Strengths:
This study tackles an important question regarding the origins of the first cell fate decision in the preimplantation embryo. It provides novelty in its identification of Hspa2 as a heterogeneous transcript in the early embryo and proposes a plausible mechanism showing interactions with Carm1. Multiple approaches are used to validate their functional studies (FISH, WB, development rates, proteomics). Given only 4 other transcripts/RNA have been identified at or before the 4-cell stage (LincGET, CARM1, PRDM14, HMGA1), this would be an important addition to our understanding of how TE vs ICM fate is established.
Weaknesses:
The RNA-seq results leading the authors to focus on Hspa2 are not included in the manuscript. This dataset would serve as an important resource but is neither included nor discussed. Nor is it mentioned whether Hspa2 was identified in prior RNA-seq embryos studies (for example Deng Science 2014).
In addition, the functional studies are centered on Hspa2 knockdown at the zygote (1-cell) stage, which would largely target maternal transcript. Given the proposed mechanism relies on Hspa2 heterogeneity post-ZGA (late 2-cell stage), the knockdown studies don't necessarily test this and thus don't provide direct support to the authors' conclusions. The relevance of the study would be improved if the authors could show that zygotic knockdown leads to symmetric Hspa2 levels at the late 2-cell and/or 4-cell stage. It may be possible that zygotic knockdown leads to lower global Hspa2 levels, but that asymmetry is still generated at the 4-cell stage.
Furthermore, the authors show that Hspa2 knockdown at the 1-cell stage lowers total Carm1 levels at the 4-cell stage. However, it is unclear how total abundance within the embryo alters lineage specification within blastomeres. The authors go on to propose a plausible mechanism involving Hspa2 and Carm1 interaction, but do not discuss how expression levels may be involved.
-
-
-
