(A) scRNA-seq data from Figure 5A were binned according to four major classifications: Epi basal, Epi suprabasal, HF WNThi and HF WNTlo. Scatter plots of mRNAs in these cells were then analyzed according to their expression changes (cKO/Ctrl) assessed by scRNA-seq Z score and to their coding sequence m6A density in wild-type (WT) skin epithelium assessed by the miCLIP SN-uTPM per nt value. Dots on the left of the dashed line in each plot indicate RNAs which from scRNA-seq have a Z score (cKO/Ctrl)<−1.96 (Supplementary file 3). Among those, blue dots denote mRNAs with m6A coding sequence SN-uTPM per nt among the top 20% (Supplementary file 4). (B) Major pathways and their associated RNAs that were downregulated upon METTL3 loss. Shown are the data for the basal epidermal progenitors, which at E17 contained both epidermal and hair placode cells. mRNAs highlighted in blue correspond to blue dots in (A), and were among the most significantly downregulated upon METTL3 loss but heavily m6A-modified in wild-type. Note that many of these pathways also corresponded to those whose heavily m6A-modified mRNAs were also efficiently translated. (C) Violin plots illustrating the relative expression levels of Lef1 mRNA in the Mettl3 cKO versus control basal epidermal progenitors and WNThi progenitors. Z score assessment of expressional difference between cKO and control [Z (cKO/Ctrl)] and false discovery rate (FDR) is calculated by MAST. The down-regulation was verified with qPCR on total RNA samples extracted from YFP+ skin epithelial cells FACS isolated from E16.5 embryos with Tbp mRNA as internal control (error bars: standard deviation, for each condition n = 3 biological replicates, **p<0.01 by unpaired two-tailed Student’s t-test). (D) Confocal images of E16.5 whole-mount back skin immunolabeled for HES1 and YFP (scale bars: 20 µm). HES1 expression was quantified in the stratified layers of skin epithelium (middle line corresponds to the mean; for each condition, the data are from two biological replicates; ****p<0.0001 by unpaired two-tailed Student’s t-test). (E) Pulse-chase assay examining the rate of epidermal cell flux from basal to suprabasal layers. Control and cKO animals were pulsed at E18.5 with EdU and the signal was then chased until P1. Before tissue collection, the P1 pups were treated with a short (1 hr) BrdU pulse. P1 back skin sagittal sections were subjected to immunofluorescence to examine the EdU and BrdU labeling in the basal versus suprabasal layers of the epidermis (scale bars: 25 µm). White solid lines denote skin surface and dashed lines denote dermal-epidermal border. Cell flux rates were quantified based on the ratio of EdU+ cells in the suprabasal layer to BrdU+ basal cells (for each condition n = 4 biological replicates ×10 images per replicate, *p<0.05 by unpaired two-tailed Student’s t-test). (F) Radial histograms depicting the division orientation of epidermal basal cells during anaphase/telophase at E17.5 and P0, assessed by IF staining of Survivin, integrin β4 (CD104) and PCAD as described in Williams et al., 2011. For each condition, three biological replicates were analyzed and n indicates the total number of anaphase/telophase cells examined from the embryos. (G) Ultrastructure of epidermis in control and Mettl3 cKO P0 back skin. Ba, basal layer, colored in green; Sp, spinous layer, colored in greenish yellow; Gr, granular layer, colored in yellow; SC, stratum corneum, colored in orange. Note the increased numbers of cells in the spinous layer of cKO, and the presence of nuclei in many cells of the granular layer. The boundary between dermis (Der) and the basal layer is shown in the middle panel. KF, keratin filaments; HD, hemidesmosomes. The border between cell #1 (basal) and cell #2 (suprabasal) is shown in the lower panel. Intercellular membranes are sealed in the control. Note small gaps (arrow) are present at the intercellular border, more frequently in cKO than in control. Scale bars: 10 µm (upper panel), 600 nm (middle and lower panel).
Figure 6—source data 1. Lef1 qPCR in (C).
Figure 6—source data 2. Quantification of HES1 immunofluorescence signals in (D).
Figure 6—source data 3. Quantification of EdU+ and BrdU+ cells in (E).
Figure 6—source data 4. Quantification of cell division angles in (F).