Knockdown of Crispld2 in zebrafish identifies a novel network for nonsyndromic cleft lip with or without cleft palate candidate genes

Abstract

Orofacial development is a multifaceted process involving tightly regulated genetic signaling networks, that when perturbed, lead to orofacial abnormalities including cleft lip and/or cleft palate. We and others have shown an association between the cysteine-rich secretory protein LCCL domain containing 2 (CRISPLD2) gene and nonsyndromic cleft lip with or without cleft palate (NSCLP). Further, we demonstrated that knockdown of Crispld2 in zebrafish alters neural crest cell migration patterns resulting in abnormal jaw and palate development. In this study, we performed RNA profiling in zebrafish embryos and identified 249 differentially expressed genes following knockdown of Crispld2. In silico pathway analysis identified a network of seven genes previously implicated in orofacial development for which differential expression was validated in three of the seven genes (CASP8, FOS, and MMP2). Single nucleotide variant (SNV) genotyping of these three genes revealed significant associations between NSCLP and FOS/rs1046117 (GRCh38 chr14:g.75746690 T > C, p = 0.0005) in our nonHispanic white (NHW) families and MMP2/rs243836 (GRCh38 chr16:g.55534236 G > A; p = 0.002) in our Hispanic families. Nominal association was found between NSCLP and CASP8/rs3769825 (GRCh38 chr2:g.202111380 C > A; p < 0.007). Overtransmission of MMP2 haplotypes were identified in the Hispanic families (p < 0.002). Significant gene–gene interactions were identified for FOS-MMP2 in the NHW families and for CASP8-FOS in the NHW simplex family subgroup (p < 0.004). Additional in silico analysis revealed a novel gene regulatory network including five of these newly identified and 23 previously reported NSCLP genes. Our results demonstrate that animal models of orofacial clefting can be powerful tools to identify novel candidate genes and gene regulatory networks underlying NSCLP.

Introduction

Normal craniofacial development results from the convergence and fusion of the facial and palatal processes and involves interactions between genes that regulate cell growth, proliferation, differentiation, epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition, and apoptosis [1–3]. The cranial processes are derived from neural crest cells that subsequently undergo migration and differentiation to form the maxillary, lateral nasal, and medial nasal processes, which fuse to form a continuous upper lip and palate [4–6]. Characterizing the normal biological functions of the genes that control the craniofacial complex, including their potential interactions, has led to important insights about the biologic mechanisms contributing to craniofacial anomalies, with the most frequent being nonsyndromic cleft lip and palate (NSCLP).

NSCLP is a common birth defect affecting one out of every 700 newborns and resulting in ~4000 new cases in the US and ~135,000 worldwide each year [7]. NSCLP requires surgical, dental, and speech interventions, which place significant financial and psychological burdens on these families. Therefore, identifying the genetic liability underlying this common birth defect is critical towards the development of prevention and better prediction strategies [1, 8]. The causes of NSCLP are multifactorial with both genetic and environmental factors contributing to the etiology [9–12]. Approximately 40 genes with moderate evidence for involvement in NSCLP have been identified by chromosomal, genome-wide association (GWAS), candidate gene, and animal model approaches [12–15].

Gene regulatory networks such as fibroblast growth factor (FGF) signaling, transforming growth factor beta (TGF-β) signaling, and wingless-type MMTV integration site (WNT) family genes, are known to be important in craniofacial development and genes within these networks have shown association with NSCLP. Two other gene networks have also recently been implicated in NSCLP, the first network composed by Pbx1, Wnt3, Wnt9b, Fgf8, and p63, which function to form the murine midface, and second network represented by the Irf6 krüppel-like factor (Klf) gene network that is expressed in the oral periderm of mice and zebrafish and regulates keratin expression [16, 17]. Variation in many of these network genes have previously been associated with orofacial clefting, thus supporting the use of a network-based approach to identify gene contributions to NSCLP [18–24].

We and others have shown an association between cysteine-rich secretory protein Limulus factor C-related region domain containing 2 (CRISPLD2) and NSCLP in ethnically diverse populations [25–28]. CRISPLD2, also known as late gestation lung 1 (Lgl1) in mice, is a member of the Cysteine-rich secretory proteins, Antigen 5 and Pathogenesis-related 1 (CAP) superfamily [25, 28, 29]. In mice, Crispld2/Lgl1 plays a critical role in fibroblast and epithelial cell migration and epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition and Crispld2/Lgl1 null mice are embryonic lethals, demonstrating that it is necessary for embryonic development [30]. In previous studies, we showed that CRISPLD2 is expressed in the developing murine craniofacies and zebrafish embryo heads, and that knockdown of Crispld2 in zebrafish alters neural crest cell migration and increases apoptosis resulting in jaw and palatal anomalies [28, 31, 32]. While these observations support a role for CRISPLD2 in craniofacial development, there is little information about interacting genes and gene networks that would further elucidate its role in NSCLP. In this study, we applied RNA-seq and in silico network approaches to identify genes that were (1) differentially expressed between wild type and Crispld2 morphant zebrafish and (2) previously known to play a role in craniofacial development. We also tested the association of single nucleotide variants (SNVs) in the identified genes with NSCLP in our nonHispanic white (NHW) and Hispanic multiplex and simplex families. We then applied in silico network approaches to our RNA-seq derived network and previously implicated NSCLP genes to identify a novel candidate NSCLP gene network.

Materials and methods

RNA-seq analysis

Zebrafish (Danio rerio) were raised and housed following standard techniques [33] and fertilized eggs were obtained through in-tank breeding. One-cell stage embryos were injected with 0.2 ng of crispld2 antisense morpholino (MO) targeting the ATG start site (TTGATGATTTCAGGCCC GGACTCTA), as previously described [31]. RT-PCR validation studies also utilized mismatch MO (TTcATcATTTgAGcCCCcGACTCTA). Fifty MO-injected, mismatch MO-injected, and uninjected embryos were collected at the 15-somite stage (16 h post fertilization, hpf) and the yolk was removed. The anterior third of each embryo was isolated, pooled into injected and uninjected samples, and total RNA was isolated. For RNA-seq analysis, four micrograms of total RNA from MO-injected and uninjected samples were used for comparative RNA-seq analysis using Cuffdiff (LC Sciences, Houston, TX, USA). The abundance, or fragments per kilobase of exon per million (FPKM) reads, and the dispersion were estimated using the negative binomial model, and differences between uninjected and MO-injected embryos were tested using a Student’s t-test. Transcripts were sorted by the q-value (False Discovery Rate adjusted p-value) with a cutoff of 0.05. RNA-seq data have been deposited in the ArrayExpress database at EMBL-EBI (www.ebi.ac.uk/arrayexpress) under accession number E-MTAB-6705.

In silico pathway analyses

Differentially expressed genes identified in RNA-seq analysis were subjected to pathway primary analysis using Ingenuity (Qiagen, San Francisco, CA, USA) [34]. Pubmatrix (NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA) was used to determine the craniofacial relevance and previous species-specific publications of the gene network using MESH words: “oral”, “cleft”, “lip”, “palate”, “facial”, “tooth”, “zebrafish”, “mouse”, “CLP”, and “RNA-seq” [35].

Validation

The seven newly identified differentially expressed pathway genes, bag3, casp8, fgfr1, fos, hoxb1b, kif1b, and mmp2, were subjected to RT-PCR validation using beta actin (actb1) as an endogenous control gene [32]. Gene expression assays were obtained from either Life Technologies (Foster City, CA, USA) or Qiagen (Valencia, CA, USA) and total RNA was run on a ViiA7 Automatic Sequence Detection System (Foster City, CA, USA). All samples were run in triplicate following manufacturer’s protocol. The comparative cycle threshold (C_T) and the 2^-ddCt method were used to assess change in mRNA levels between the target genes and the endogenous control gene [36]. Student’s t-test was used to compare the mRNA expression levels between wild type, morpholino-injected, and mismatch morpholino-injected embryos; p < 0.05 was considered significant.

Genotyping and association analysis

As previously described, probands and their families were ascertained at Boston Children’s Hospital, Texas Children’s Hospital, Houston, the Texas Cleft-Craniofacial Clinic at the University of Texas McGovern Medical School, and the Cleft Clinic of Shriners Hospital, Houston [23, 28, 37, 38]. Briefly, all individuals were evaluated for the presence/absence of NSCLP and to exclude syndromic forms of clefting. The dataset was composed of 241 multiplex families (152 NHW and 89 Hispanic) and 589 simplex parent-child trios (367 NHW and 222 Hispanic) with ethnicity based on self-report (Supplemental Table 1). After obtaining informed consent, saliva and/or blood samples were collected and DNA was extracted using either Oragene Purifier for saliva (DNA Genotek, Inc., Ontario, Canada) or Roche DNA Isolation Kit for Mammalian Blood (Roche, Switzerland) following the manufacturers’ protocols.

Nine SNVs in/nearby the validated RNA-seq genes were selected based on: (1) HapMap reported minor allele frequencies greater than 0.2 in the CEPH population, (2) Haploview linkage disequilibrium (LD) plots, and (3) location within the gene, with preference given for SNVs in potential regulatory regions (Table 1) [28]. SNVs were genotyped using TaqMan Genotyping Assays (Life Technologies, Foster City, CA, USA) following manufacturer’s protocol. Allele calls were detected on a ViiA7 Automatic Sequence Detection System (Life Technologies, Foster City, CA, USA). Genotyping data from SNVs with call rate of 90% or higher were entered into Progeny Laboratory (South Bend, IN, USA) and assessed for Mendelian errors using PedCheck [39].

Table 1.

SNV alleles and frequency by ethnicity

Gene	Variant	Location	Human genome reference sequencea	MAFb
				NHW	Hispanic
CASP8	rs6747918	5′ UTR	GRCh38 chr2:g.20297575 G > A	0.475	0.639
	rs3769825	intron 1	GRCh38 chr2:g.202111380 C > A	0.445	0.598
	rs6754084	intron 2	GRCh38 chr2:g.202124997 C > T	0.251	0.438
	rs1035140	3′ UTR	GRCh38 chr2:g.202152491 T > A	0.452	0.539
FOS	rs1046117	exon 2	GRCh38 chr14:g.75746690 T > C	0.252	0.315
MMP2	rs243864	5′ UTR	GRCh38 chr16:g.55512322 T > G	0.246	0.238
	rs243849	missense	GRCh38 chr16:g.55523705 T > C	0.159	0.171
	rs243836	intron 10	GRCh38 chr16:g.55534236 G > A	0.488	0.399
	rs7201	3′ UTR	GRCh38 chr16:g.55539614 A > C	0.448	0.442

MAF  minor allele frequency, NHW nonHispanic white

^aMinor allele in 1000 Genomes CEPH population listed last

^bFrequency in Hispanic population of nonHispanic white minor allele

Genotype data were stratified by ethnicity and presence/absence of family history of NSCLP in each population. Single-SNV analysis was performed using Family Based Association Test (FBAT), with the “-e” option to correct for complex pedigree structures [40, 41] and Association in the Presence of Linkage (APL) test [42]. Haplotype analysis was performed using the “HBAT” function in FBAT. Gene–gene interaction analysis was performed using APL [42]. Genotyping data for CRISPLD2 SNVs previously associated with NSCLP was used in the gene–gene analysis [28]. To correct for multiple testing, a p-value, corrected for the number of SNVs, of 0.0056 (0.05/9 SNVs) was considered significant and a p-value, corrected for the number of genes, of 0.017 (0.05/3 genes) was considered nominal. For the gene–gene interaction analysis, a p-value of 0.0042 (0.05/3!/((3–2)!2!)) was considered significant.

Gene network In silico analyses

Pathway analysis using Ingenuity (Qiagen, San Francisco) was applied to the validated RNA-seq genes as well as 41 previously confirmed, likely, or intensely studied NSCLP genes (Supplemental Table 2) [12, 13].

Results

RNA-seq, in silico analysis and validation

RNA-seq analysis identified 249 unique differentially expressed genes between wild type and Crispld2 knockdown zebrafish (Supplemental Table 3). In silico pathway analysis of these genes identified five gene networks, including one 52- and three 2-gene pathways (Supplemental Fig. 1A-D). Using PubMatrix, the 52-gene pathway was collapsed and yielded a smaller 7-gene network containing BAG3, CASP8, FGFR1, FOS, KIF1B, MMP2, and HOXA1/hox1b1 (Fig. 1a) [35]. All seven genes are plausible candidates for involvement in craniofacial development because of their expression patterns, role in animal craniofacial development, and human syndromes and/or human association studies (Supplemental Table 4).

Fig. 1.

RNA-seq network analysis. a Network of seven craniofacial-relevant genes generated by Ingenuity and Pubmatrix. These genes showed differential expression following Crispld2 morpholino knockdown in zebrafish compared to uninjected controls. b RNA-seq differential expression results for seven craniofacial-relevant genes (*p < 0.05). c Differential expression of casp8, fos, and mmp2 (*p < 0.05) was validated by RT-PCR. d Ingenuity-derived network of three validated RNA-seq genes. Dotted lines represent gene–gene interactions identified in this study

RT-PCR analysis of MO-injected and mismatch MO-injected zebrafish embryos confirmed the expression of bag3, casp8, fgfr1, fos, hoxb1b, kif1b, and mmp2 in both wild type and Crispld2 morphant zebrafish. In the RNA-seq results, all genes, with the exception of kif1b, showed increased expression in the crispld2 morpholino-injected embryos compared to uninjected controls (UIC) (Fig. 1b). However, RT-PCR validated the differential expression patterns from the RNA-seq data for only three genes: casp8, fos, and mmp2 (Fig. 1c; Supplemental Table 5). Each of these genes showed differential expression compared to both UIC and mismatch MO-controls. While the RNA-seq results showed upregulation of bag3 and hoxb1b (HOXA1 in humans) in the morphant, RT-PCR results showed no difference in bag3 expression between morphant and UIC embryos and downregulation of hoxb1b in the morphant embryos. Additionally, fgfr1 and kif1b expression in MO-injected embryos were not different from mismatch MO-injected embryos. Therefore, only validated genes were further subjected to in silico network analysis, resulting in a three-gene network (Fig. 1d).

Association analysis in NSCLP families

Nine intra- and intergenic SNVs for CASP8, FOS, and MMP2 were tested for association with NSLCP in 241 multiplex and 589 simplex families (Table 1). Genotypes had a >90% allele call rate and all SNVs were in Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium (data not shown). Genotyping data is available in supplemental table 6.

As shown in Table 2, the strongest association was found between FOS/rs1046117:T > C and NSCLP in the NHW simplex families (p = 0.0007), and when all NHW families were analyzed together (p = 0.0005; Table 2). There was only suggestive association with FOS in the Hispanic multiplex subset (p = 0.02). In the Hispanic families, MMP2/rs243836:G > A) was associated with NSCLP in only the multiplex group (p = 0.002); while no association was found for MMP2 in the NHW families (Table 2; Supplemental Table 7). There was suggestive evidence for association between NSCLP and several SNVs in CASP8 in both the NHW and Hispanic families (0.017 ≥ p ≥ 0.0056; Table 2).

Table 2.

Association results

Population	Gene	SNP	All			Multiplex			Simplex
			APLa	FBAT	FBAT-e	APL	FBAT	FBAT-e	APL	FBAT	FBAT-e
NonHispanic white	CASP8	rs3769825	—	0.027	0.036	—	—	—	—	0.007	0.010
		rs6754084	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	0.028	0.041
	FOS	rs1046117	0.0005	0.011	0.009	—	—	—	0.0007	0.0016	0.0007
Hispanic	CASP8	rs6754084	—	—	—	—	0.033	—	—	—	—
		rs1035140	0.034	—	—	—	—	—	0.014	—	—
	FOS	rs1049117	—	—	—	0.021	0.024	0.030	—	—	—
	MMP2	rs243836	—	0.021	0.019	0.007	0.003	0.002	—	—	—

^ap-values < 0.05 shown; p-values < 0.0056 bolded to indicate significance; p-values < 0.017 italicized to indicate suggestive/marginal significance

Haplotype analysis identified both significant and suggestive associations to the same genes identified in the single-SNV analysis (Table 3). MMP2 haplotypes were associated in the Hispanic multiplex subset (p < 0.0056) and one haplotype was nominal in the NHW families (p = 0.01). In each case, the haplotype contained the associated allele from the single-SNV analyses. Haplotype analysis was not performed on FOS because only one SNV was genotyped.

Table 3.

Haplotypes

Gene	SNPs	Alleles	Subgroup	p-value*
MMP2	rs243864, rs243836	G–A	NHW total	0.01
	rs243864, rs243836	T–A	Hisp M; Hisp total	0.001; 0.014
	rs243864, rs7201	T–A	Hisp M	0.013
	rs243849, rs243836	C–G	Hisp M	0.004
	rs243836, rs7201	A–A	Hisp M	0.001
	rs243864, rs243836, rs7201	T–A–A	Hisp M	0.001

NHW nonHispanic White, Hisp Hispanic, M multiplex

^*p ≤ 0.017 shown, p ≤ 0.0056 bolded and significant

Gene–gene interaction analysis was performed between the three RNA-seq-confirmed genes; CRISPLD2 was included in this analysis using previously genotyped and reported SNVs [28]. In the NHW multiplex families, there was evidence for an interaction between the FOS/rs1046117:T > C and two CASP8 SNVs (p = 0.002) and suggestive evidence for an interaction between FOS/rs1046117:T > C and MMP2/rs7201:A > C; p = 0.004) (Table 4; Fig. 1d).

Table 4.

Gene–gene interactions

Gene 1	SNP 1	Gene 2	SNP2	NHW			Hispanic
				ALL	M	S	ALL	M	S
CASP8	rs6747918	FOS	rs1046117	—	—	0.002	—	—	—
	rs6754084		rs1046117	0.008	—	0.005	—	—	—
FOS	rs1046117	MMP2	rs7201	0.004	—	—	—	—	—
	rs1046117		rs243849	0.008	—	0.007	—	—	—

p ≤ 0.008 shown; p ≤ 0.004 bolded and significant

NHW nonHispanic white, M multiplex, S simplex

In silico craniofacial development gene network

In silico network analysis including the five validated RNA-seq genes and strong candidate NSCLP genes (from published GWAS, linkage, and animal model studies) resulted in a 26-gene network potentially involved in craniofacial development (Fig. 2). In this 26-gene network, eleven known craniofacial genes were directly connected to our three validated RNA-seq genes; of note, FOS and CASP8 were each linked to five or more previously identified NSCLP genes, while MMP2 was linked to one (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2.

Craniofacial Gene Network. Ingenuity-derived network including previously identified NSCLP genes that have been confirmed, very likely, and intensively studied (shown in white) and RNA-seq genes from this study (shown in gray) identifies a 26-gene network that connect to our three genes of interest, either directly (solid line) or indirectly through another gene (dotted lines)

Discussion

In this study, we utilized RNA-seq findings from our Crispld2 morphant zebrafish to identify new candidate genes for NSCLP. We identified a three-gene network active in craniofacial development that when perturbed may contribute to NSCLP. This was accomplished by identifying differentially expressed genes in craniofacial development in our crispld2 morphant zebrafish [31, 32] and then testing for association in our multiethnic multiplex and simplex NSCLP families (Fig. 3). This unique network has not previously been reported to contribute to NSCLP, although some of the individual genes have been implicated in craniofacial development or NSCLP (Supplemental Table 4). This approach provides a new network of genes to be interrogated.

Fig. 3.

Paradigm used to identify novel NSCLP genes

FOS was connected to both CASP8 and MMP2 in the RNA-seq derived gene network and showed the strongest association with NSCLP in the NHW families (Table 2). FOS is an oncogene that promotes epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition, a critical process during craniofacial development [43]. Neural crest cells undergo EMT before migrating into the craniofacies and form the precursors to the processes that will develop into critical facial structures including the lip and palate [44, 45]. Based on these observations, FOS should be considered a plausible candidate gene for NSCLP. FOS is located on chromosome 14q24.3, spans 3456 basepairs, and is located in a single linkage disequilibrium block; therefore, only one synonymous SNV (rs1046117:T > C) was genotyped. While additional studies of the role of FOS in NSCLP are needed, our findings implicate it as a potential candidate gene for NSCLP.

MMP2 showed connections to three of the network genes (Fig. 1d) and showed the strongest association with NSCLP in the Hispanic families (Table 2). MMP2 belongs to the matrix metalloproteinase (MMP) gene family, which collectively are responsible for extracellular matrix (ECM) remodeling and subsequent fusion of the palatal shelves have previously been implicated in orofacial clefting [46, 47]. Several MMPs and their tissue inhibitors (TIMPs) are expressed in the medial edge epithelium during palatogenesis and MMP2 expression was found in a sample of palatal soft tissue adjacent to a cleft site that was excised during a child’s palatal repair [48]. Moreover, Tgfß3 null mice, which have cleft palate, show decreased MMP2 and MMP13 expression at the palatal midline, further supporting the role of this gene network in palatal fusion [46, 47]. Further, genetic studies in humans have reported an association between NSCLP and variants in MMP3, MMP25, TIMP2, and TIMP3, with functional promoter activity changes shown for SNVs in MMP3 and TIMP2 [49–54]. Our findings provide additional support for the role of MMPs in orofacial clefting.

Although only nominal associations were found for CASP8/rs3769825:C > A) in NHW simplex families and CASP8/rs6754084:C > T) in Hispanic simplex families, our results support previous findings suggesting a role for these genes in NSCLP. For example, CASP8 plays a role in apoptosis, which is critical to maintaining tissue homeostasis during embryonic development [55] and has been shown to contribute to cancer pathogenesis [56]. Recent studies have suggested a link between NSCLP genes and oral, gastric, and colorectal cancers [57–61]. Interestingly, the CASP8/rs3769825:C > A) “C” allele has been reported as a potentially protective allele for cancer risk in an Asian population [62]. Future research should focus on the potential interplay between NSCLP and cancer genes with emphasis on genes involved in the apoptotic pathway.

Our gene–gene interaction analyses revealed significant or nominal gene–gene interactions between MMP2, CASP8, and FOS, confirming the expression network analysis and thereby suggesting a biological interaction between these genes (Fig. 1d). MMP2 and FOS have previously been shown to interact in studies that demonstrate that the inhibition of MMP2 suppresses the induction of c-FOS and both of these genes are activated in metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma [13, 63]. FOS, which has been shown to play a role in cellular functions including apoptosis, is a target for CASP8 [64]. While neither of these connections are specific to craniofacial development; however, our gene–gene interaction analyses suggest that they might also have a role together for normal development of the lip and palate (Fig. 1d). Remarkably, when utilizing 41 known or suspected NSCLP genes, network analysis found direct connections between the three validated RNA-seq genes and 11 previously identified NSCLP genes, whereas indirect connections were also found with an additional twenty-two NSCLP genes (Fig. 2). It is particularly interesting that FOS, a novel finding in this study, has already been biologically connected to seven additional NSCLP genes as shown in Fig. 2. The biological implications of the RNA-seq identified gene connections and other craniofacially relevant genes opens new avenues of investigation.

Intriguingly, although the RNA-seq data was generated using zebrafish crispld2 morphant embryos, we did not detect any evidence of interactions between variations in CRISPLD2 and other genes identified in the network analysis. There are a number of possible explanations for this observation. The most likely is that the in silico analyses are based on curated data from published studies, and most of the studies on CRISPLD2 have focused on cancer and lung and not on craniofacial development [34, 35]. Alternatively, it is possible that the potential interactions involve rare variants in one or more genes, or that the effect size may be too small to be identified in our dataset. Interactions involving more than two genes or the presence of extrinsic unidentified factors that are critical for proper development are also possible. Functional studies will clarify if biological interactions between these genes indeed exist.

The power of this study lies in our multi-pronged approach (Fig. 3), taking discoveries in humans to an animal model and then back to humans to identify novel and biologically plausible NSCLP candidate gene networks. Functional studies of the identified gene network in animal models may reveal whether the individual genes interact during craniofacial development and will potentially improve our understanding of the role of CRISPLD2 in craniofacial development. Finally, these results support the integration of gene network analysis as an unbiased approach to discover the genetic etiology of NSCLP and other complex birth defects.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1038/s41431-018-0192-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.