Skip to main content
PLOS Genetics logoLink to PLOS Genetics
. 2020 Dec 21;16(12):e1009232. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1009232

CFAP53 regulates mammalian cilia-type motility patterns through differential localization and recruitment of axonemal dynein components

Takahiro Ide 1,*,#, Wang Kyaw Twan 1,2,#, Hao Lu 3,#, Yayoi Ikawa 1, Lin-Xenia Lim 3,¤b, Nicole Henninger 2, Hiromi Nishimura 1, Katsuyoshi Takaoka 2, Vijay Narasimhan 3,¤a, Xiumin Yan 4, Hidetaka Shiratori 2, Sudipto Roy 3,5,6,*, Hiroshi Hamada 1,2,*
Editor: Susan K Dutcher7
PMCID: PMC7817014  PMID: 33347437

Abstract

Motile cilia can beat with distinct patterns, but how motility variations are regulated remain obscure. Here, we have studied the role of the coiled-coil protein CFAP53 in the motility of different cilia-types in the mouse. While node (9+0) cilia of Cfap53 mutants were immotile, tracheal and ependymal (9+2) cilia retained motility, albeit with an altered beat pattern. In node cilia, CFAP53 mainly localized at the base (centriolar satellites), whereas it was also present along the entire axoneme in tracheal cilia. CFAP53 associated tightly with microtubules and interacted with axonemal dyneins and TTC25, a dynein docking complex component. TTC25 and outer dynein arms (ODAs) were lost from node cilia, but were largely maintained in tracheal cilia of Cfap53-/- mice. Thus, CFAP53 at the base of node cilia facilitates axonemal transport of TTC25 and dyneins, while axonemal CFAP53 in 9+2 cilia stabilizes dynein binding to microtubules. Our study establishes how differential localization and function of CFAP53 contributes to the unique motion patterns of two important mammalian cilia-types.

Author summary

Motile cilia in various kinds of tissues and cell-types drive fluid flow over epithelia or facilitate cellular locomotion. There are two types of motile cilia. Motile cilia with a 9+2 configuration of microtubules are found on tracheal epithelial cells and brain ependymal cells, and exhibit planar beating with effective and recovery strokes. On the other hand, 9+0 motile cilia are found in the embryonic node, show rotational movement and are involved in establishing left-right asymmetry of visceral organs. However, it is not well understood how these two types of motile cilia exhibit their characteristic motion patterns. We have uncovered distinct roles and subcellular localization of the CFAP53 protein in 9+0 versus the 9+2 motile cilia of the mouse. Our data provide novel insights into the molecular basis of motility differences that characterize these two types of mammalian motile cilia.

Introduction

Cilia are widely found in diverse animals, ranging from protozoans to man. Many of them are immotile, but some of them, such as those found in the mammalian trachea, brain ventricle, reproductive organs and male gametes are motile [1]. Motile cilia are also found within the left-right organizer (LRO) of embryos of many vertebrate species (for example, the ventral node in the mouse embryo), and are required for the initial step of left-right (L-R) patterning [2,3]. Loss of ciliary motility in humans results in congenital disorders such as primary ciliary dyskinesia (PCD), situs inversus and heterotaxy. PCD patients exhibit various symptoms including chronic respiratory disease, hydrocephalus, infertility as well as laterality defects [4].

Axonemal dyneins, motor proteins that directly generate the force for ciliary motility, form multisubunit ATPase complexes as outer and inner dynein arms (ODAs and IDAs, respectively) attached to the peripheral doublet microtubules of the cilium. Additional accessory structures, such as radial spokes and nexin links, are involved in the regulation of dynein activity. ODAs, which are absolutely essential for ciliary motility, are formed through several steps. First, dynein proteins synthesized in the cell are pre-assembled into multisubunit complexes in the cytoplasm by several dynein assembly factors (DNAAFs) [510]. Assembled complexes are then transported to the basal body, and into the axoneme by intraflagellar transport (IFT), and finally docked to microtubules through the docking complex (DC) composed of TTC25 [11], CCDC114 [12], CCDC151 [13] and ARMC4 [14]. Although many of the genes involved in these steps have been discovered by studying various model organisms and through the identification of causative mutations in human ciliary diseases, the full mechanism remains far from being completely understood.

Even more intriguing is the fact that cilia in different tissues exhibit different patterns of motion. This is best exemplified, for instance, by differences in the beating patterns of cilia within the ventral node versus those that decorate the lumen of the trachea. Monocilia on pit cells of the node beat with a rotary pattern and produce a laminar flow of extraembryonic fluid within the node cavity, while multiple cilia on multiciliated cells (MCCs) of the trachea exhibit a planar back-and-forth beating pattern to clear more viscous mucus from the airways [15]. How these cilia acquire the ability to beat in such distinct patterns has so far been examined only to a limited degree. Node cilia lack the central pair of singlet microtubules and associated radial spoke complex (hence classified as 9+0 cilia), features that are a hall mark of prototypical 9+2 motile cilia, and this ultrastructural modification has been postulated to be the basis for their characteristic rotary beating. This view emanates from genetic evidence from PCD patients as well as zebrafish and mice with mutations in genes that encode proteins of the central pair apparatus (CPA) [1618]. In all of these situations, while motile cilia-dependent functions in many tissues and organs were compromised, however, laterality was not affected. Moreover, destabilization of the CPA in otherwise 9+2 cilia, such as the tracheal cilia of the respiratory tract, can cause them to now adopt a rotary beat pattern [17]. Yet another emerging view explaining the causal basis of motility differences between the different kinds of cilia is founded on unique composition of axonemal dyneins in the different cilia-types. Thus, a comprehensive study of axonemal dynein gene expression in the zebrafish has revealed that different motile ciliated tissues express different combinations of axonemal dynein genes [19]. An additional layer of complexity is apparent from the observation that a specific dynein protein can be differentially required for motility in different cilia-types: for instance, mutation of DNAH11 in mice and humans strongly affected nodal cilia motility, but other kinds of motile cilia were far less severely affected [2022]. All of these data suggest that while different kinds of motility are essential for motile cilia to perform specific kinds of functions, the molecular mechanisms underlying this important aspect of ciliary biology requires further investigation.

We and others have previously identified the coiled-coil containing protein CFAP53 (aka CCDC11) as an important regulator of ciliary motility [2225]. Loss-of-function studies in the zebrafish and human situs inversus/heterotaxy patients have shown that while CFAP53 is essential for cilia motility within the LRO, cilia in other tissues are only mildly affected, similar to the loss of DNAH11 but the converse of mutations affecting the CPA. Using over-expression, we also demonstrated that CFAP53 localized at the base of 9+0 cilia within Kupffer’s vesicle (KV, the zebrafish LRO), whereas in 9+2 cilia of the pronephric (kidney) ducts it was present at the base and also along the axoneme [23]. We also documented the pan-axonemal localization of endogenous CFAP53 in multiple cilia of human respiratory MCCs. Furthermore, consistent with motility defects, we also showed that the numbers of ODAs were strongly reduced in zebrafish KV cilia. Despite these intriguing findings implicating a differential requirement of CFAP53 in regulating motility of 9+0 versus 9+2 cilia, the mechanism of this function has remained unexplored.

Here, we have used genetic, cell biological and biochemical analyses to investigate the molecular details of CFAP53 activity in regulating motility in different cilia-types of the mouse. Our study establishes that in addition to the absence or presence of the CPA, differential localization of CFAP53 to 9+0 and 9+2 cilia and its differential effects on the transport and axonemal docking of ODA dyneins is an important contributory factor in the regulation of motility patterns that characterize these cilia-types.

Results

Mouse Cfap53 is specifically expressed in cells with motile cilia

We first examined the expression pattern of the Cfap53 gene in the mouse using a transgenic strain harboring Cfap53lacZ bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC), in which lacZ has been knocked into the Cfap53 gene. In embryonic day (E) 8.0 embryos, Cfap53 was specifically expressed in the node, in particular within the pit cells that are located at the center of the node and have rotating monocilia on their apical surface (Fig 1A and 1B). In the adult mouse, we found lacZ expression in epithelial cells of the trachea, brain ventricles, the oviducts and in the testes (Fig 1C–1L), all of which are known to differentiate motile cilia. Thus, Cfap53 expression in the embryonic and adult mouse is strictly confined to cells with motile cilia.

Fig 1. Cfap53 is specifically expressed in cells with motile cilia.

Fig 1

Cfap53lacZ mouse embryos and adult tissues were stained with the β-galactosidase substrate X-gal. The images include lateral (A) and ventral (B) views of E8.0 embryos; a sagittal section of the brain at 3 weeks of age (C), with higher magnification views of the boxed regions being presented in (D) and (E); the trachea at 8 weeks of age (F), with an image for a non-transgenic (Tg-) also being shown; sagittal section of the trachea at 8 weeks of age (G), with a higher magnification view shown in (H); the fallopian tube at 6 weeks of age (I); a sagittal section of the fallopian tube (J); and ducts of the testis at 10 weeks of age (K), with a higher magnification view shown in (L). Scale bars, 2 mm (K), 500 μm (C, G, J, L), 50 μm (D, E), 20 μm (H).

Differential requirement of CFAP53 for motility of 9+0 and 9+2 cilia

To uncover the function of CFAP53 in mouse development and physiology, we generated two types of mutants that lack either exon 2 or exons 2–8 of the Cfap53 gene (Fig 2A). Deletion of exon 2 alone is predicted to produce a severely truncated protein. Since Cfap53Δex2/Δex2 and Cfap53Δex2-8/Δex2-8 mice exhibited indistinguishable phenotypes, the mutant allele lacking exon 2 is referred to as Cfap53-/- hereafter. Cfap53-/- mice were smaller at birth and showed laterality defects (Fig 2B and 2C). Half of Cfap53-/- mice (7/14) exhibited situs inversus, while 15% (2/14) showed heterotaxy. In addition, all of the Cfap53-/- mice examined (14/14) developed hydrocephalus around 3~4 weeks after birth and died by 6 weeks of postnatal life (Fig 2B and 2D).

Fig 2. Laterality defects, hydrocephalus, and ciliary motion defects in Cfap53 mutant mice.

Fig 2

(A) Genetic structure of the WT mouse Cfap53 locus and the generation of two types of knockout alleles lacking either exon 2 or exons 2 to 8. (B) Smaller body size and development of hydrocephalus in Cfap53–/–mice at 4 weeks of age. (C) Laterality defects of Cfap53–/–mice. (D) Survival curve for Cfap53–/–mice (n = 14), with all animals dying by 6 weeks of age. (E) In situ hybridization analysis of Nodal expression in Cfap53+/–and Cfap53–/–mice at E8.0. Nodal expression was missing in the LPM of Cfap53–/–embryos. Arrowheads indicate the node. (F) Immotility of node cilia in Cfap53–/–embryos at E8.0. Red signals for the Cfap53+/–embryo indicate motion trajectory in the corresponding movie. The red signal for the Cfap53–/–embryo reflects the trajectory of a bubble. Dashed lines indicate the outline of the node. (G) Wave forms of tracheal and brain ventricle cilia determined from corresponding videos, S3 and S4 Videos. (H) Beat frequency for tracheal cilia of Cfap53–/–and control mice (dots and triangles indicate Cfap53+/+ and Cfap53-/- mice, respectively) determined at 25°C. Data are presented as mean ± SD (n = 18 independent experiments); two tailed Student’s t-test (*p = 0.0041). See also S3 Video.

Laterality defects observed at newborn stages prompted us to examine several markers of L-R development at E8.0. Whereas Nodal is expressed bilaterally at the node and asymmetrically on the left lateral plate mesoderm (LPM) of wild-type (WT) embryos; in Cfap53-/- embryos, however, Nodal expression at the node was maintained but that in the LPM was absent (3/3 embryos) (Fig 2E). Since these defects are likely to arise from impairment in the differentiation or motility of the node cilia, we examined these cilia as well as other kinds of motile cilia in the mutant mice. Node cilia are the only motile cilia found in WT embryos at E8.0, and they were completely immotile in Cfap53-/- embryos (Fig 2F and S1 and S2 Videos). The length of node cilia in Cfap53-/- embryos was slightly shorter than that in WT embryos (S1 Fig). Cilia within the trachea and those within the brain ventricles differentiated normally in the absence of CFAP53 and maintained the normal ciliary length (S1 Fig), but in contrast to the nodal cilia, retained motility, albeit with abnormal beating pattern. In particular, the beating angle of the tracheal cilia was smaller, making the effective stroke inefficient (Fig 2G and S3 and S4 Videos). In addition, the beating frequency of the mutant tracheal cilia was significantly reduced (Fig 2H). Cilia within the brain ventricles of the mutants also showed similar defects in their beating pattern, with the proximal portion of the ependymal cilia appearing rigid and with a reduced beating angle and inefficient stroke (Fig 2G), which is consistent with the observation that Cfap53-/- mice develop hydrocephalus (Fig 2B). Cfap53-/- males were infertile. Their sperm were morphologically abnormal lacking the tails (S2 Fig) and completely immotile (S5 and S6 Videos).

Localization of CFAP53 in node and tracheal cilia

We investigated the intracellular localization of CFAP53 in mouse tissues with an anti-CFAP53 antibody. In E8.0 embryos, CFAP53 protein was specifically detected at the node of Cfap53+/+ embryos (Fig 3A–3C), but was absent from the node of Cfap53-/- embryos (Fig 3D–3F). It was highly enriched at the base of the node cilia, most likely at the centriolar satellites [26], although much weaker signal could be detected along the axoneme (Fig 3G). Consistent with this observation, CFAP53 has been reported to be a novel centriolar satellites protein [25]. In fact, CFAP53-positive region at the base of node cilia merged with the centriolar satellites marked by PCM1 (Fig 3G–3I) and surrounded the basal body positive for γ-Tubulin (Fig 3J–3L).

Fig 3. Differential localization of CFAP53 in tracheal and node cilia.

Fig 3

(A–L) Immunofluorescence staining of the node of WT (A-C, G-L) or Cfap53–/–(D-F) embryos at E8.0 with antibodies to CFAP53 (A, D, G, J), to acetylated (acet.) Tubulin (B and E), to PCM1 (H) and to γ-Tubulin (K). Scale bars, 10 μm (A-F). Higher magnification images are shown in insets. Scale bars, 5 μm (A-F). Note that CFAP53 is mainly localized at the base of nodal cilia (centriolar satellites positive for PCM1), and weakly in the axoneme. Scale bar, 2 μm (G-L). (M-R) Immunofluorescence analysis of an isolated tracheal MCC from a WT (M-O) or Cfap53–/–(P-R) mouse. CFAP53 is detected at the base of cilia (the centriolar satellites) and in the axoneme. Scale bar, 5 μm.

In adult Cfap53+/+ mice, CFAP53 protein was detected in MCCs of the trachea (Fig 3M–3O), but was absent from MCCs of Cfap53-/- mice (Fig 3P–3R). CFAP53 was localized not only at the base of the tracheal cilia but also in the axonemes (Fig 3M–3O). Overall, CFAP53 localized mainly at the base (centriolar satellites) of node cilia, whereas it was also present prominently in the axonemes of tracheal cilia.

We also investigated intracellular localization of CFAP53 protein by establishing a transgenic strain harboring a Cfap53Venus BAC, encoding functional CFAP53::Venus fusion protein (S3 Fig). Like the endogenous CFAP53 protein, the CFAP53::Venus fusion protein was expressed at the node, and was enriched at the base of node cilia although much weaker Venus signal was detected in the axoneme (S4 Fig). In the tracheal cilia of the transgenic mice, the fusion protein was detected at the base of MCC cilia and in their axonemes (S4 Fig). Unlike the endogenous CFAP53 protein, however, the fusion protein was absent in the distal end of the axonemes of tracheal cilia of Cfap53Venus BAC, Cfap53-/- mice (S4 Fig), suggesting that the CFAP53::Venus protein may fail to be transported efficiently to the distal region of tracheal cilia.

ODAs are lost from node cilia but mostly retained in tracheal cilia of Cfap53-/- mice

Given that node cilia lose motility in the absence of CFAP53, we next examined the presence or absence of DNAH5, a major axonemal dynein heavy chain protein, by immunostaining. In WT node cilia, DNAH5 is localized throughout the axoneme (Fig 4A–4C). In Cfap53 mutant node cilia, however, DNAH5 was not detected in the axoneme (Fig 4D–4F). In tracheal cilia, on the other hand, DNAH5 was detected throughout the axoneme, in both control (Fig 4G–4I) and in Cfap53-/- mice (Fig 4J–4L). Since DNAH5 is essential for ciliary motility [27,28], the absence or presence of DNAH5 in the two types of cilia correlated with effects of the loss of CFAP53 on their ability to move.

Fig 4. Localization of DNAH5 in ciliated cells of the trachea and node.

Fig 4

(A-F) Immunofluorescence staining with antibodies to DNAH5 (green) and to acetylated (acet.) Tubulin (magenta) of the node at E8.0 and adult trachea (G-L) from Cfap53–/–and control mice. (D-F, J-L) DNAH5 was absent from node cilia but maintained in tracheal cilia of Cfap53–/–mice. Scale bars, 20 μm. Insets show higher magnification views. Scale bars, 2 μm.

We also examined the localization of two other important ODA dynein heavy chains, DNAH11 and DNAH9. Since antibodies suitable for immunostaining of DNAH11 in mouse embryos are not available, we generated the Dnah11Venus allele, which encodes a functional DNAH11::Venus fusion protein (S5 Fig), and examined its localization. DNAH11 localized along the entire axoneme of node cilia (Fig 5A–5C) as previously described [11,29], while it localized only to the proximal portion of trachea cilia (Fig 5G–5I), as reported earlier from studies with human respiratory MCCs [11]. However, DNAH11 was absent from node cilia of Cfap53-/- embryos (Fig 5D–5F). By contrast, proximal localization of DNAH11 in tracheal cilia was maintained in Cfap53-/- mice (Fig 5J–5L).

Fig 5. Localization of DNAH11 in ciliated cells of the trachea and node.

Fig 5

(A-F) Immunofluorescence staining with antibodies to GFP (green) and to acetylated (acet.) Tubulin (magenta) for the node at E8.0 and adult trachea (G-O) of Cfap53–/–; Dnah11Venus and control mice. (D-F, J-L) DNAH11::Venus was absent from node cilia but was maintained in tracheal cilia of Cfap53–/–mice. In (C) and (F), the arrowhead indicates a node cilium. Scale bars, 10 μm (A-F) or 5 μm (G-O). Insets represent higher magnification views.

In humans, DNAH9 is localized to the distal region of tracheal cilia, and in PCD patients with DNAH9 mutations, the motility of the tracheal cilia is affected. Many of these patients also exhibit situs defects implying a requirement for the DNAH9 protein in human nodal cilia motility [30]. In tracheal cilia of Cfap53-/- mice, distal localization of DNAH9 was maintained, although its level was reduced compared with that apparent in control mice (S6 Fig). Unexpectedly, we failed to detect DNAH9 protein in node cilia, either with a DNAH9-specific antibody (S6 Fig) or by live imaging of a DNAH9::Venus fusion protein encoded by a Dnah9Venus transgene (S7 Fig). To confirm the absence of DNAH9 at the node of the mouse embryo, we generated a mutant mouse deficient in this protein (Dnah9 KO mouse; Fig 6A). Dnah9 KO mouse showed normal laterality (9/9 newborn mice; Fig 6B–6D), unlike in humans where DNAH9 mutations result in laterality defects [30]. When Dnah9 KO mice were dissected, L-R asymmetries of the lung, the heart apex, great arteries, azygous vein, stomach, liver and spleen were found to be normal (Fig 6D). Around one month after birth, four of the six Dnah9 KO mice examined showed hydrocephalus (Fig 6E). Tracheal and ependymal cilia from Dnah9 KO mice were motile, but exhibited abnormal beat pattern with reduced beating angle and insufficient effective stroke (Fig 6F, S7S10 Videos). The beat frequency of mutant tracheal cilia was reduced (Fig 6G). Sperm from a Dnah9 KO male was morphologically normal and retained normal motility (S11 and S12 Videos), which is consistent with the previous report that DNAH9 is not expressed in mouse sperm [31].

Fig 6. Phenotype of Dnah9 mutant mouse.

Fig 6

(A) The exon-intron structure of mouse Dnah9 gene and generation of knockout allele lacking exon 30. Note that the motor domains of DNAH9 are encoded by exons 29–32 and exons 34–35. (B) Eight pups generated by CRISPR-mediated mutagenesis were genotyped by PCR. (C) External appearance of the same eight pups whose genotype is shown in (B). Arrowheads denote the position of the stomach. Note that all the Dnah9-/- (KO) mice have the stomach at the normal position. (D) Laterality of visceral organs in WT and Dnah9-/- mice. The arrowheads indicate the position of the heart apex. (E) Dnah9–/–mice developed hydrocephalus (arrowhead). (F) Wave forms of tracheal and brain ventricle cilia of Dnah9+/+ and Dnah9–/–mice. See also S7S10 Videos. (G) Beat frequency for tracheal cilia of Dnah9–/–and control mice. Data are presented as mean ± SD (n = 14 independent experiments); two tailed Student’s t-test (*p<0.05). See also S7 and S8 Videos.

We next studied the ultrastructure of node and tracheal cilia of WT and Cfap53 mutants using transmission electron microscopy (TEM). The axonemes of node cilia in WT embryos have a 9+0 configuration with ODAs attached to the nine peripheral microtubule doublets (Fig 7A and 7B). However, in node cilia from Cfap53-/- embryos, ODAs were missing from most of the sections examined (Fig 7C and 7D and 7J). Tracheal cilia from WT mice show 9+2 configuration with the CPA and ODAs attached to the peripheral microtubule doublets (Fig 7E and 7F). In tracheal cilia of Cfap53-/- mice, most ODAs were retained (Fig 7G, 7I and 7K), consistent with our observations that these cilia of the mutants are able to move, albeit with an altered motility pattern (Fig 2G). When tracheal cilia were examined along the proximal-distal direction, there was no significant preference in the loss of ODAs (S8 Fig). Thus, the partial loss of ODAs from tracheal cilia (with most axonemes having five to eight ODAs) allowed them to maintain their motility, but impaired their motion pattern.

Fig 7. ODAs are completely lost in node cilia but largely maintained in tracheal cilia of Cfap53–/–mice.

Fig 7

(A–D) TEM of node cilia of Cfap53+/+ (A) and Cfap53–/–(C) embryos at E8.0. Higher magnification views of corresponding doublet microtubules indicated by the arrowheads are shown in (B) and (D), respectively, together with schematic diagrams of the microtubule pairs and ODAs (blue protrusions). Scale bars, 100 nm. (E–I) TEM of tracheal cilia of adult Cfap53+/+ (E) and Cfap53–/–(G) mice. Higher magnification views of corresponding doublet microtubules indicated by the arrowheads are shown in (F), (H), and (I) together with schematic diagrams of the microtubule pairs and ODAs. Scale bars, 100 nm. (J and K) Distribution of the number of ODAs per axoneme for node (J) and tracheal (K) cilia of Cfap53–/–and Cfap53+/+ mice determined from TEM images. (L) Nine peripheral doublet microtubules were numbered from DMT1-DMT9, on the base of their relative position to the central pair: DMT1 is the doublet microtubule located at the position perpendicular to the central pair microtubules. The frequency of ODA loss at each DMT of Cfap53–/–tracheal cilia is shown by a circular plot. Note that DMTs with the line indicated by asterisk (#3 and #8) are preferentially lost (ρ = 0.04263 by Rayleigh’s test). (M) Distribution of the number of ODAs per axoneme for tracheal cilia of Cfap53; Rsph4a double mutant mice determined from TEM images.

Interestingly, ODAs at the position 3 and 8 were preferentially lost in tracheal cilia of Cfap53-/- mice (Fig 7L). It may be that ODAs are weakly attached to microtubules in the absence of CFAP53, and ODAs at position 3 and 8 are preferentially detached from microtubules because planar beating likely takes place along the ODA 3–8 axis. To test this, we examined the tracheal cilia of Cfap53-/-, Rsph4a-/- double mutant (DKO) mice, since tracheal cilia exhibit rotational movement instead of planar beating in the absence of RSPH4a [17]. ODAs in tracheal cilia of Cfap53-/-; Rsph4a-/- DKO mouse were more severely lost than those of Cfap53-/- mouse (Fig 7M).

CFAP53 associates with axonemal microtubules of tracheal cilia and interacts with dynein proteins and the docking complex (DC)

Given that CFAP53 is an axoneme-associated protein in tracheal cilia, we investigated its localization within these cilia more precisely. First, we examined whether CFAP53 interacts with microtubules. Isolated tracheal cilia were treated with high salt (0.6 M NaCl or NaI), and then subjected to centrifugation to obtain soluble and insoluble fractions. Immunoblot analysis revealed that, after treatment with 0.6M NaCl, microtubules remained insoluble, with tubulin being detected in the precipitate fraction (Fig 8A). However, the dynein complex became detached from the microtubules, with ODA dynein intermediate chain 2 (DNAIC2) being detected in the soluble fraction. Under this condition, CFAP53 was present in the precipitate, suggesting that CFAP53 protein remained associated with microtubules. When the tracheal cilia were treated with 0.6M NaI, which disrupts most protein-protein interactions, microtubules were dissociated and tubulin was detected in the soluble fraction. Under this condition, DNAIC2 and CFAP53 were also found largely in the soluble fraction (Fig 8A). These results suggest that CFAP53 is tightly associated with microtubules in tracheal cilia.

Fig 8. Association of CFAP53 with axonemal microtubules of tracheal cilia as well as with DNAIC proteins and TTC25.

Fig 8

(A) Isolated axonemes of tracheal cilia were treated (or not, Cont) with 0.6 M NaCl or NaI and then centrifuged at 15000 × g for 12 min at 4°C, and the resulting precipitate and supernatant fractions were subjected to immunoblot analysis with antibodies to CFAP53, to DNAIC2 (ODA marker) and to α-Tubulin. (B–E) HEK293T cells transfected with expression vectors for HA-tagged CFAP53 or MYC epitope-tagged DNAIC1, DNAIC2, DYNLL1 (cytoplasmic dynein light chain), TTC25, CCDC114, or CCDC151 (or with the corresponding empty vectors), or GFP-tagged DNAH11 N-terminus fragments 1–1000 aa or 1001–1700 aa, as indicated, were subjected to immunoprecipitation (IP) with antibodies to HA or to MYC or to GFP, and the resulting precipitates as well as the original whole cell lysates (WCLs) were subjected to immunoblot analysis with antibodies to HA, MYC or GFP. CFAP53 interacted specifically with the axonemal dyneins DNAIC1, DNAIC2 and DNAH11 N-terminus and the DC member TTC25.

The tight association of CFAP53 protein with microtubules suggests that CFAP53 may interact with ODA dyneins and/or DC component(s). We therefore examined potential physical interaction of CFAP53 with three ODA dynein components (the dynein intermediate chains DNAIC1, DNAIC2 and the heavy chain DNAH11) and three components of the DC (TTC25, CCDC114 and CCDC151) by co-immunoprecipitation analysis of transfected HEK293T cells (Figs 8B–8E, S9). TTC25 is thought to be the DC component most proximal to the axonemal microtubules [32], while CCDC151 is the most distal DC component [13]. Over-expressed CFAP53 interacted with over-expressed DNAIC1, DNAIC2, DNAH11 and TTC25, but not with CCDC114 or CCDC151 (Fig 8B–8E, S9). These results suggest that in the axoneme of tracheal cilia, CFAP53 is embedded in microtubules and may directly interact with the DC via TTC25. CFAP53 at the centriolar satellites of node and tracheal cilia may also interact with TTC25 and ODA proteins, facilitating their transport into the axoneme.

Differential requirement of CFAP53 for axonemal localization of TTC25 in the node and tracheal cilia

Given that CFAP53 physically interacts with TTC25, we next examined the genetic relationship between CFAP53 and TTC25. In Ttc25-/- mutant mice [32], localization of CFAP53 was maintained in node cilia (Fig 9A–9F), suggesting that the correct localization of CFAP53 does not require TTC25. In contrast, the subcellular localization of TTC25 was dependent on CFAP53, as revealed by the observation that in the node cilia of Cfap53-/- embryos, TTC25 protein was absent from the axonemes (Fig 9G–9L). Given that TTC25 is a DC component located most proximally to the axonemal microtubules and mutation of TTC25 in mice and humans inhibits the association of ODAs with axonemes [32], the lack of TTC25 from the axonemes of Cfap53-/- node cilia is likely to be responsible for their severe lack of ODAs. On the other hand, in tracheal cilia, axonemal localization of TTC25 protein does not strictly require CFAP53 function, and TTC25 was found in the axonemes of tracheal cilia of Cfap53 mutants, although at reduced levels (S10 Fig). This reduced level of TTC25 likely accounts for the partial loss of ODAs from the tracheal cilia (Fig 7K).

Fig 9. Genetic interaction between Cfap53 and Ttc25 in node cilia.

Fig 9

(A–F) Immunofluorescence staining with antibodies to CFAP53 (green) and to acetylated (acet.) Tubulin (magenta) of the node from Ttc25–/–and control embryos at E8.0. CFAP53 was localized at the axoneme and base of node cilia of Ttc25–/–embryos. (G–L) Immunofluorescence staining with antibodies to TTC25 (green) and to acetylated (acet.) Tubulin (magenta) of the node from Cfap53–/–and control embryos at E8.0. TTC25 was lost from the axoneme of node cilia in the Cfap53-/-. Scale bars, 10 μm. Insets show higher magnification views. Scale bars, 2 μm.

Discussion

Motile cilia and flagella are involved in multiple developmental and physiological processes that involve flow of fluids of differing viscosities over epithelial surfaces as well as the locomotory activities of individual cells [15]. In each of these instances, the beating patterns of these organelles is harmonized with the specific kind of biomechanical force that is required for the particular function. In mammals, this is particularly well apparent in the case of ciliary motility in the node for determination of L-R asymmetry, motility of multiple cilia on respiratory MCCs for mucus clearance and movement of flagella for swimming movement of sperm toward the egg during fertilization. Disruption to these specific motility patterns underlie a range of disease phenotypes manifest in PCD patients like situs abnormalities, respiratory insufficiency and infertility. Given these considerations, how these unique patterns of ciliary motility, which are matched with specific functions of the motile cilia, are regulated at the molecular level, is a topic of substantial biological and clinical significance.

Previous work from our group and that of Noël et al. have implicated the coiled-coil containing protein CFAP53 in differentially regulating the motility of zebrafish and human cilia [22,23]. Our current in-depth analysis of CFAP53 function in mouse cilia using stable genetic mutations have clearly established that the protein is absolutely essential for the motility of the 9+0 node cilia, but not of the 9+2 motile cilia such as the tracheal and ependymal cilia. Also, our data show that CFAP53 is not essential for the formation of immotile primary cilia or the multiple cilia on MCCs per se, unlike what has been described by others using transient knock-down of the protein in cultured retinal pigmented epithelial (RPE) cells, cultured human MCCs and epidermal MCCs of Xenopus larvae [25]. As suggested by others [33], acute and chronic loss of CFAP53 may result in distinct ciliary phenotypes. These and other studies have also described several different subcellular localization patterns for the CFAP53 protein: the centriole and actin cytoskeleton in human skin fibroblasts [34], on ciliary axonemes in zebrafish kidneys and human respiratory cells, at the basal body in zebrafish KV and kidney cells [23] and at the basal body and centriolar satellites in RPE cells and human and frog MCCs [25]. Our data now clarify the expression and localization of CFAP53 in vivo: in the mouse, the Cfap53 gene is specifically expressed in cells with motile cilia and not in those that differentiate primary cilia, and the protein is localized differently between the node (9+0) and tracheal (9+2) cilia, similar to what we have described previously for cilia in zebrafish and human MCCs [23]. Thus, the CFAP53 protein is localized prominently at the base (the centriolar satellites) of the node as well as tracheal cilia, and along the axonemes of the tracheal cilia.

In node cilia, CFAP53 at the centriolar satellites may regulate the transport of TTC25 and ODA dyneins by interacting with these proteins at the ciliary base. This is supported by the absence of TTC25, DNAH5 and DNAH11 from the axonemes of Cfap53-/- node cilia (Fig 10A). The mechanism by which ODAs are transported to the axoneme remains largely unknown. As mentioned in the introductory section, ODA proteins are preassembled in the cytoplasm into large complexes by several DNAAFs and are transported to the ciliary base. They then enter into the cilium and get transported toward the tip by IFT [35]. Given that centriolar satellites regulate protein trafficking to cilia and ciliary protein content [36,37], CFAP53 at the centriolar satellites may form a complex with TTC25 and ODAs, including DNAH5 and DNAH11, and regulate their trafficking into the cilium (Fig 10B). On the other hand, in tracheal cilia, CFAP53 is localized not only at the base but also within the axoneme. In the axoneme, CFAP53 is tightly associated with microtubules, likely linking ODAs to microtubules via the DC, and participating in stable attachment of ODAs to microtubules. Consistent with this view, a recent study of various microtubule interacting proteins (MIPs) from Chlamydomonas has shown that CFAP53 is a MIP that is located within the A tubule of the flagella [38]. Although MIPs have been proposed to confer stability to the 9+0 axoneme [39], the morphology and the number of node cilia remained largely normal in Cfap53 mutant mice. CFAP53 may also be located at or near the surface of microtubules of mammalian cilia, but verification of this possibility warrants further investigation. Alternatively, physical association of CFAP53 with TTC25 and DNAH11 (Fig 8) may reflect their interaction at the centriolar satellites.

Fig 10. Differential role of CFAP53 in 9+0 and 9+2 motile cilia.

Fig 10

(A) Schematic diagram for the expression of ODA proteins (DNAH5, DNAH11, DNAH9) in node and tracheal cilia of Cfap53–/–and WT mice. All three dynein heavy chain proteins were maintained in tracheal cilia, whereas DNAH5 and DNAH11 were completely lost in node cilia of the mutant mice. DNAH9 was not detected in node cilia of WT or Cfap53–/–mouse embryos. DNAH5 and DNAH11 (or DNAH9) are indicated by blue color on the axonemes. (B) CFAP53 (53) interacts with TTC25 (25) at the centriolar satellites. It also interacts with ODA proteins including dynein heavy chains such as DNAH11 and possibly DNAH5/9. CFAP53 likely facilitates the transport of TTC25 and the dyneins into cilia. An unknown protein (X) that can also interact with TTC25 and ODA proteins and mediate their transport into the tracheal cilia in the absence of CFAP53 is either not expressed or is nonfunctional in node cells.

ODAs were lost from node cilia, but were largely maintained in tracheal cilia of Cfap53-/- mice. However, it remains unclear whether IDAs are affected in 9+2 cilia of Cfap53-/- mice. Technical difficulties to detect IDAs in vertebrate cilia by TEM and the lack of appropriate antibodies against IDA components prevented us from analyzing this issue. Axonemal localization of DNAH11 and DNAH5 was lost from Cfap53-/- node cilia, but was largely maintained in Cfap53-/- trachea cilia (Fig 10A), implying the presence of a CFAP53-independent mechanism that transports TTC25 and ODAs into the axoneme of 9+2 cilia and also participates in their stable docking with the axonemal microtubules (Fig 10B). Apparently, the axonemal structure of 9+2 cilia is more complex than that of 9+0 cilia, in that the former have additional structures such as the CPA. This may be the reason why cells with 9+2 cilia could possess more elaborate mechanisms for the transport and docking of axonemal dyneins. We have searched for an axonemal protein gene that is expressed in tracheal ciliated cells but not in the node cells. Examination of the expression of 18 ciliary genes, however, failed to identify such a trachea-specific gene (S10 Fig). Alternatively, like what we have described for CFAP53, a protein present in both cilia-types but with differential localization and function in each kind of cilia could also fulfil this role. In any case, further investigation is needed to identify the protein that might function at the base of 9+2 cilia to permit transport of DC members and ODAs into the axoneme or to stabilize the attachment of the ODAs to the axonemal microtubules (Fig 10B).

Rather unexpectedly, our study has uncovered different roles of DNAH9 in the motility of the nodal cilia between human versus the mouse. Several patients with mutations in the DNAH9 gene have been reported to exhibit laterality defects, suggesting that DNAH9 is required for motility of node cilia in man [30]. Also, Dnah9 mRNA is expressed in the node of the mouse embryo [30]. However, we were unable to detect DNAH9 protein in the mouse node either with an anti-DNAH9 antibody or by imaging the Dnah9Venus mouse. By contrast, the protein could be clearly detected in tracheal cilia using these strategies. Furthermore, mice lacking DNAH9 failed to show laterality defects (Fig 6). The absence of DNAH9 protein in node cilia despite the presence of Dnah9 mRNA at the node is surprising. Dnah9 mRNA may be subject to translation repression in node cells or the translated protein may fail to be targeted to the axoneme. The differential requirement of DNAH9 in node cilia motility between human and mouse is indeed unprecedented. It has been suggested that DNAH5 forms a heterodimer with DNAH9 or DNAH11, and the presence of either DNAH5-9 or DNAH5-11 heterodimer is sufficient for ciliary motility [11]. In view of these interactions, DNAH9 and DNAH11 may be located in distinct portions of human node cilia as they are in tracheal cilia, and both kinds of heterodimers may be required for smooth rotational movement of the node cilia.

In conclusion, our study of CFAP53 function in the mouse has revealed novel molecular differences in the mechanisms that underlie the distinct patterns of motility between mammalian 9+0 and 9+2 cilia. While the current understanding of the motility differences between these cilia-types has majorly focused on the presence or absence of the CPA, our findings highlight the importance of the basal body, and perhaps the associated centriolar satellites, in the differential regulation of axonemal docking protein and ODA dynein transport into the axoneme. In addition, we have documented that 9+0 and 9+2 cilia have unique ODA composition with respect to DNAH9, which is also likely to be a contributory factor to the motility differences that characterize these two kinds of cilia. Importantly, this evolving mechanistic framework underlying distinct cilia motility patterns will allow the interpretation, at the molecular level, of the causal basis of the phenotypic spectrum exhibited by ciliopathy patients with differential effects on the motility of cilia in different regions of their bodies.

Materials and methods

Ethics statement

All mouse experiments were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (Permission number: A2016-01-6) and carried out in accordance with guidelines of RIKEN BDR.

Mice

Mice were maintained at the Animal Facility of Riken Center for Biosystems Dynamics Research (BDR), Japan, under a 12-h light, 12-h dark cycle and were provided with food and water ad libitum. Two types of Cfap53 knockout mice, lacking exon 2 or exons 2 to 8, were generated with the CRISPR-Cas9 system as performed with guide RNA 1 (located upstream of exon 2 5’-CCTCTTAATTTTTACTTATTGTA-3’), guide RNA 2 (5’-GCTTCAACTCCTGCACCACCAGG-3’) and guide RNA 3 (5’-GGTGAGCCAAAATATGGGCC-3’). For generation of Cfap53Venus BAC transgene, the Venus coding sequence was inserted immediately before the stop codon of Cfap53 in the BAC clone RP23-99F21. For generation of the Cfap53lacZ transgene, an IRES (internal ribosome entry site)-lacZ cassette was inserted immediately after the stop codon of Cfap53 in the same BAC clone. The Dnah11Venus allele was generated by inserting Venus into exon 43 of Dnah11 gene in frame. The Dnah9Venus allele was generated by inserting Venus at the carboxyl terminus of DNAH9. The construction of the Ttc25-/- mice has been described previously [32]. Dnah9 knockout mice, lacking exon 30, were generated with the CRISPR-Cas9 system as performed with guide RNA 1 (located upstream of exon 30 5’-TCAGACATAGAAGTGCGAGATGG-3’) and guide RNA 2 (5’-GATCGATCTTACAGCTTGTCTGG-3’). Cfap53 mutant mice were generated and maintained on a BC57BL background, while Cfap53::Venus Bac transgenics were generated by injecting BAC DNA into the pronuclei of (C57BL X C3H) F1 mouse eggs.

In situ hybridization and staining for lacZ expression

Whole-mount in situ hybridization was performed according to standard protocols with specific RNA probes for Nodal. Staining for lacZ expression was performed with the β-galactosidase substrate X-gal (5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indolyl-β-D-galactopyranoside) as described previously [40]. Serial sections (thickness of 10 μm) of the brain, trachea, oviduct, and testis were prepared after X-gal staining.

Antibodies

cDNA for the C-terminal region of mouse CFAP53 was cloned into the bacterial expression vector pMaL-c2X (New England Biolabs) with the use of the forward and reverse primers 5'-AGAGTCTATGCAGCGGGAGT-3' and 5'-TAGAGGAGGCTTGTCAGGGTA-3', respectively. CFAP53 expressed as a fusion protein with maltose binding protein in Escherichia coli was purified from the bacterial cells with the use of amylose resin (New England Biolabs) and injected into rabbits for the generation of antibodies. Specific antibodies were purified from rabbit serum by affinity chromatography. Additional antibodies used in this study are rabbit anti-GFP (Invitrogen, A-11122), mouse anti-acetylated Tubulin (Sigma, T6793), mouse anti- γ-Tubulin (Sigma, T5326), mouse anti-PCM1 (Santa Cruz, SC-398365), mouse anti-human DNAI2 (Abnova, H00064446-MO1), mouse anti-α-Tubulin (Sigma, T5168), mouse anti-HA (Santa Cruz, SC7392), mouse anti-GFP (Abcam, ab1218), rabbit anti-GFP (Santa Cruz SC-8334) mouse anti-MYC (Santa Cruz, SC-40), rabbit anti-HA (Santa Cruz, SC-805) and rabbit anti-MYC (Santa Cruz, SC-289). Antibodies to DNAH5 and DNAH9 were kindly provided by H. Takeda, described previously [41]. Rabbit antibodies to TTC25 were described previously [42]. Alexa Fluor-conjugated secondary antibodies for immunofluorescence staining were obtained from Invitrogen.

Immunofluorescence staining

E8.0 embryos were collected in ice-cold phosphate buffered saline (PBS) and fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde for 30 min on ice. They were then dehydrated at -20°C in methanol, exposed to a blocking reagent (Perkin Elmer FP1020), for 1 h at 4°C, incubated overnight at 4°C with primary antibodies diluted in blocking reagent (Perkin Elmer FP1020), washed for 6 h with PBS containing 0.1% Triton X-100 (PBST), incubated overnight at 4°C with Alexa Fluor–conjugated secondary antibodies diluted in blocking reagent (Perkin Elmer FP1020), solution or Can Get Solution TM A/B (Toyobo), and washed again. The nodes of the stained embryos were excised and placed on glass slides fitted with silicone rubber spacers, and covered with cover glass.

Tracheae of adult mice were isolated, cut longitudinally in ice-cold PBS, fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde for 1 h at 4°C, permeabilized with 1% PBST for 10 min at 4°C, and then processed for immunostaining as for the node. The tissue was then placed on a glass slide with silicone rubber spacers and covered with a cover glass. For preparation of cryosections of the immunostained trachea, samples were exposed overnight at 4°C to sucrose at increasing concentrations of up to 30%, embedded in OCT compound, frozen in liquid nitrogen, and sectioned at a thickness of 10 μm. The sections were dried, washed with PBS, mounted in Antifade Prolong Gold (Invitrogen), and covered with a cover glass.

Tracheal epithelial cells, isolated as described previously [43], were fixed in methanol for 10 min at –20°C, exposed to 1% bovine serum albumin at room temperature for 30 min, and incubated for 1 h at room temperature with primary antibodies diluted in Can Get Solution TM A (Toyobo). After washing with PBST, the cells were incubated for 1 h at room temperature with Alexa Fluor-conjugated secondary antibodies diluted in Can Get Solution A and then washed again. All immunostained samples were observed with Olympus FV1000, FV3000 or Zeiss LSM 880 with Airyscan microscopic systems.

Imaging of ciliary motion

Trachea and brain were collected into HEPES-buffered Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium (DMEM) or high-glucose DMEM (Nacalai), respectively. Embryos were collected into DMEM-HEPES with 10% Fetal bovine serum (FBS). Motility of cilia was examined at 25°C with a high-speed CMOS camera (HAS-500M or HAS-U2, DITECT) at a frame rate of 100 frames/s for node cilia or 500 frames/s for tracheal and brain ependymal cilia. The pattern of ciliary motion was traced and analyzed with ImageJ and Photoshop CC (Adobe).

TEM

E8.0 embryos and adult trachea were fixed with 2% paraformaldehyde and 2.5% glutaraldehyde (and 0.1% tannic acid for the trachea) in 0.1 M cacodylate buffer. The samples were then washed with 4% sucrose in 0.1 M cacodylate buffer, exposed to 1% osmium tetroxide, stained en bloc with 0.5% uranyl acetate, dehydrated with a graded series of ethanol, and embedded with the use of a Poly/Bed 812 Embedding Kit (Polysciences). Ultrathin (60 nm) sections were prepared with a diamond knife, mounted on 200-mesh copper grids, stained with 2% uranyl acetate and 3% lead citrate, and observed with a JEM-1400 plus microscope (JEOL).

Immunoblot analysis

Ciliated cell cortices were prepared from the mouse trachea as described previously [44], with some modifications. In brief, cilia were removed by vortex mixing in a solution containing 20 mM Hepes-NaOH (pH 7.5), 10 mM CaCl2, 1 mM EDTA, 50 mM NaCl, 1 mM dithiothreitol and cOmplete protease inhibitor cocktail (Roche), and the isolated cilia were resuspended in a solution containing 20 mM Hepes-NaOH (pH 7.6), 50 mM KCl, 4 mM MgSO4, 0.5 mM EDTA, 1 mM dithiothreitol, and cOmplete (Roche). The membrane of the cilia was removed by exposure to 0.1% Triton X-100 for 10 min on ice, and the axonemes were then washed with resuspension buffer and treated for 10 min on ice with resuspension buffer supplemented with high salt (0.6 M NaCl or NaI). The high salt-treated axonemes were subjected to centrifugation at 15,000 x g for 12 min at 4°C, and the resulting pellet and supernatant were subjected to immunoblot analysis with antibodies to CFAP53, to DNAIC2, and to α-Tubulin. Immune complexes were detected with horseradish peroxidase-conjugated antibodies to rabbit (NA934, GE HealthCare) or mouse (NA931, GE HealthCare) immunoglobulin G.

Co-immunoprecipitation analysis

The coding sequence of mouse Cfap53 was cloned into the pxj40-HA vector (Roche), whereas those of mouse Dnaic1, Dnaic2, Dynll1, Ccdc114, Ccdc151 and Ttc25 were cloned into pxj40-MYC (Roche) and Dnah11(N-terminus 1-1000aa), Dnah11(N-terminus 1001-1700aa) were cloned into pxj40-GFP (Roche). The indicated combinations of plasmids were introduced into HEK293T cells in 10-cm dishes by transfection for 24 h with the use of the Lipofectamine 2000 reagent (Thermo Fisher Scientific). The cells were then lysed in 1 ml of RIPA buffer (Thermo Fisher Scientific) supplemented with cOmplete Mini protease inhibitors (EDTA-free, Roche) and subjected to immunoprecipitation with 2 μg of mouse monoclonal antibodies to HA, MYC or GFP together with 30 μl of protein A-agarose beads (Roche). The resulting immunoprecipitates as well as the cell lysates were then subjected to immunoblot analysis with rabbit polyclonal antibodies to HA, MYC or GFP. Immune complexes were detected with horseradish peroxidase-conjugated secondary antibodies to mouse (Promega, W4028) or rabbit (Promega, W4018) immunoglobulin G.

Supporting information

S1 Fig. The length of node cilia and tracheal cilia from the Cfap53-/- mouse.

(A) The length of node cilia from Cfap53+/+ and Cfap53-/- embryos. Data are presented as mean ± SD (n = 20 independent variables); two tailed Student’s t-test (*p = 0.0109). (B) The length of tracheal cilia from Cfap53+/+ and Cfap53-/- mice. Data are presented as mean ± SD (n = 16 independent variables); two tailed Student’s t-test (n.s.; p = 0.6608). Note that mutant node cilia are slightly shorter but mutant tracheal cilia retained the normal length.

(TIF)

S2 Fig. TEM images of sperm from Cfap53+/+ and Cfap53-/- male mice.

Sperm from Cfap53+/+ and Cfap53-/- male mice was subjected to TEM analysis. Note that normal axonemal structure is severely disrupted in the mutant sperm. Arrows indicate the center of the cross section of sperm. Note that the 9+2 structure is observed in Cfap53+/+, but is disrupted in Cfap53-/-. N: Nucleus, DF: Outer dense fiber, MI: Mitochondrion. Scale bars, 500 nm.

(TIF)

S3 Fig. The CFAP53::Venus fusion protein is functional.

(A) Construction of a transgenic mouse strain harboring a Cfap53Venus BAC. The coding sequence for Venus together with that for a (Gly4Ser)3 linker and poly(A) (pA) sequence as well as a loxP site was inserted into exon 8 of Cfap53 gene immediately upstream of the TAG stop codon. ORF, open reading frame; UTR, untranslated region. (B) Copy number of the BAC transgene was examined for two transgenic lines (#19, #66) harboring the Cfap53Venus BAC by quantitative PCR. Genomic DNA from Dnah11Venus/Venus mouse, which has two copies of Venus, served as a control. Note that lines #19 and #66 have 2 copies and 1 copy of the transgene, respectively. (C) Genotyping of Cfap53-/- with Cfap53Venus. Cfap53-/-, exon 2 excluded, have two alleles of different length. The male, Cfap53+/- (long alleles: used in other experiments) with Cfap53Venus, was crossed with females, Cfap53+/- (short alleles). We can distinguish between Cfap53-/-, Cfap53Venus and Cfap53+/-, Cfap53Venus by length of Cfap53-/- alleles in F1 mice. (D) Mice genotyped in (C) at 4 weeks of age. Hydrocephalus apparent in Cfap53–/–(KO) mice was rescued by introduction of the Cfap53Venus transgene.

(TIF)

S4 Fig. Localization of CFAP53::Venus fusion protein in tracheal and node cilia.

(A–D) Immunofluorescence staining of the node of Cfap53Venus (A and C) or control (B and D) embryos at E8.0 with antibodies to GFP (A and B) and to acetylated (acet.) Tubulin (C and D). Scale bar, 10 μm. (E–G) Higher magnification images of a node cilium of a Cfap53Venus embryo showing GFP, acetylated Tubulin, and merged staining, respectively. CFAP53::Venus was predominantly localized at the base of node cilia but was also detected at a much lower level in the axoneme. Scale bar, 1 μm. (H–K) Immunofluorescence staining of the trachea of adult Cfap53Venus and control mice with antibodies to GFP (H and I) and to acetylated (acet.) Tubulin (J and K). Scale bars, 20 μm. Insets in H, I show higher magnification views of tracheal cilia. Scale bars, 5 μm. (L–Q) Immunofluorescence analysis of an isolated tracheal MCC from a Cfap53-/- mouse harboring the Cfap53Venus transgene (O-Q) or a Cfap53+/+ mouse without the transgene (L-N). CFAP53::Venus was absent in the distal region of tracheal cilia (O-Q). Scale bars, 5 μm. (R-T) Immunofluorescence staining of the node cilia of Cfap53Venus embryos at E8.0 with antibodies to GFP (R) and to PCM1 (S). Scale bar, 1 μm. (U-W) Immunofluorescence staining of the node cilia of Cfap53Venus embryos at E8.0 with antibodies to GFP (U) and to γ-Tubulin (V). Scale bars, 1 μm.

(TIF)

S5 Fig. Construction of a Dnah11Venus allele encoding a functional DNAH11::Venus fusion protein.

(A) Construction of a transgenic mouse strain harboring a Dnah11Venus allele. The targeting vector contained a neo cassette and loxP sites, and the coding sequence for Venus was inserted into exon 43 (which encodes the second AAA motor domain) of Dnah11 together with that for (Gly4Ser)3 linkers. (B) Laterality of milk spots for WT, Dnah11Venus/Venus, and Dnah11iv/iv (homozygous for a spontaneous Dnah11 mutation that results in situs inversus). All milk spots of Dnah11Venus/Venus mice were located on the left (normal) side (n = 39/39), whereas those of Dnah11iv/iv mice were L-R randomized (n = 3/8). (C) Live fluorescence imaging of DNAH11::Venus (green) in adult tracheal cilia of mice harboring a Dnah11Venus. DNAH11::Venus was detected in proximal region of tracheal cilia. BF, bright-field. D and P in the merged image indicate the distal and proximal region of cilia, respectively. Scale bar, 5 μm.

(TIF)

S6 Fig. Localization of DNAH9 in ciliated cells of the trachea and node.

(A-F) Immunofluorescence staining with antibodies to DNAH9 (green) and to acetylated (acet.) Tubulin (magenta) of the node at E8.0 and adult trachea (G-L) of Cfap53–/–and control mice. DNAH9 was not detected in node cilia of Cfap53+/–or Cfap53–/–embryos (A-F), whereas its expression was maintained in tracheal cilia of the mutant (G-L). Scale bars, 10 μm (A-F) or 2 μm (G-L).

(TIF)

S7 Fig. DNAH9 is present in tracheal cilia but not in node cilia.

(A) Dnah9Venus allele was generated by inserting (G4S)3 Venus at the carboxyl terminus of DNAH9. (B) Live fluorescence imaging of DNAH9::Venus (green) in the node at E8.0 and in adult tracheal cilia of mice harboring a Dnah9Venus transgene. DNAH9::Venus was detected in tracheal cilia but not in node cilia. The dashed lines indicate the outline of the node. Bright-field (BF) and merged images are also shown. Scale bars, 10 μm. (C) Immunofluorescence staining with antibodies to GFP (green) and to acetylated (acet.) Tubulin (magenta) of adult trachea from Dnah9Venus mice. Note that DNAH9::Venus is preferentially localized to the distal region of tracheal cilia. D and P indicate and distal and proximal regions of tracheal cilia, respectively. Quantitative analysis confirms a higher intensity of GFP signals in the distal region. Data are presented as mean ± SD (n = 3 independent variables); two tailed Student’s t-test (*p = 0.0144). Scale bar, 5 μm.

(TIF)

S8 Fig. TEM images of Cfap53-/- tracheal cilia at different proximal-distal levels.

(A) Serial TEM sections were made from Cfap53-/- tracheal cilia along the proximal-distal axis. The level of each section shown in (B-N) is illustrated. (B-H) Lower magnification images of seven sections. Scale bar, 1 μm. (I-N) Higher magnification images. Scale bar, 100 nm. The cilium from which the high magnification image is derived is indicated at the right-top of each panel. For example, panel (I) shows a section image of cilium 1 at the level indicated in (A). Arrowheads denote microtubules lacking ODA.

(TIF)

S9 Fig. Association of CFAP53 with DNAIC proteins and TTC25.

(A-B) HEK293T cells transfected with expression vectors for HA-tagged CFAP53 or MYC epitope–tagged DNAIC1, DNAIC2, DYNLL1 (cytoplasmic dynein light chain), TTC25 (or with the corresponding empty vectors), as indicated, were subjected to immunoprecipitation (IP) with antibodies to HA or to MYC, and the resulting precipitates as well as the original whole cell lysates (WCLs) were subjected to immunoblot analysis with antibodies to HA or MYC. CFAP53 interacted specifically with the axonemal dyneins DNAIC1, DNAIC2 and the DC member TTC25.

(TIF)

S10 Fig. TTC25 localizes to the axoneme of tracheal cilia in Cfap53–/–mice.

Tracheal cilia of adult Cfap53–/–and control mice were subjected to immunofluorescence staining with antibodies to TTC25 (green) and to acetylated (acet.) Tubulin (magenta). TTC25 was maintained in tracheal cilia of Cfap53–/–mice, albeit at a reduced level. Scale bars, 5 μm.

(TIF)

S11 Fig. Search for ciliary protein genes expressed in tracheal ciliated cells but not in node ciliated cells.

Total RNA isolated from adult trachea or E8.0 node of mice was subjected to RT-PCR analysis of the 18 indicated genes. Amplified cDNAs were detected by agarose gel electrophoresis. Representative results for Efhc1 and Cfap20 are shown. No gene was found to be specifically expressed in tracheal ciliated cells and not in node ciliated cells.

(TIF)

S1 Video. Motion of node cilia in Cfap53+/- embryo shown in Fig 2F.

Note that node cilia are motile. The images were captured at 100 frames/s for 2 s. Scale bar is 10 μm.

(MP4)

S2 Video. Motion of node cilia in Cfap53-/- embryo, shown in Fig 2F.

Note that node cilia are immotile. The images were captured at 100 frames/s for 2 s. Scale bar is 10 μm.

(MP4)

S3 Video. Motion of tracheal cilia of Cfap53+/+ and Cfap53-/- mice shown in Fig 2G.

Note that the shape of a cilium is superimposed on the last beat. The images were captured at 200 frames/s for 1 s.

(MP4)

S4 Video. Motion of brain ventricle cilia of Cfap53+/+ and Cfap53-/- mice shown in Fig 2G.

Note that the shape of a cilium is superimposed on the last beat. The images were captured at 200 frames/s for 0.75 s.

(MP4)

S5 Video. Motility of sperm from Cfap53+/+ mice.

Sperm can swim normally. The images were recorded at 200 frames per second (fps) and playing video speed is 20 fps.

(MPEG)

S6 Video. Motility of sperm from Cfap53-/- mice.

Sperm are immotile. The images were recorded at 200 frames per second (fps) and playing video speed is 20 fps.

(MPEG)

S7 Video. Motility of tracheal cilia from Dnah9+/+ mice shown in Fig 6F.

Motility of tracheal cilia was recorded at 200 frames per second (fps) and playing video speed is 20 fps.

(AVI)

S8 Video. Motility of tracheal cilia from Dnah9-/- mice shown in Fig 6F.

Motility of tracheal cilia was recorded at 200 frames per second (fps) and playing video speed is 20 fps.

(AVI)

S9 Video. Motility of brain ventricle cilia from Dnah9+/+ mice shown in Fig 6F.

Motility of brain ventricle ependymal cilia was recorded at 200 frames per second (fps) and playing video speed is 20 fps.

(AVI)

S10 Video. Motility of brain ventricle cilia from Dnah9-/- mice shown in Fig 6F.

Motility of brain ventricle ependymal cilia was recorded at 200 frames per second (fps) and playing video speed is 20 fps.

(AVI)

S11 Video. Motility of sperm from Dnah9+/+ mice.

Motility of sperm was recorded at 200 frames per second (fps) and playing video speed is 20 fps.

(AVI)

S12 Video. Motility of sperm from Dnah9-/- mice.

Motility of sperm was recorded at 200 frames per second (fps) and playing video speed is 20 fps.

(AVI)

Acknowledgments

We thank H. Takeda (University of Tokyo) for anti-DNAH5 and anti-DNAH9 antibodies, M. Brueckner for DNAH11 cDNA clones, and Sachiko Tsukita (Osaka University) for invaluable advice on immunostaining.

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

This work was supported by funds from the Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR) of Singapore (Grant No. SC15-R0010, https://www.a-star.edu.sg/) to S.R. and grants from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology (MEXT) of Japan (Grant No.17H01435, https://www.mext.go.jp/en/index.htm) to H.H.,(Grant No. 17K15123) to T.I. and from Core Research for Evolutional Science and Technology (CREST) of the Japan Science and Technology Agency (Grant No. JPMJCR13W5, https://www.jst.go.jp/kisoken/crest/en/index.html) to H.H., grants from Japan Society for Promotion of Science (Grant No. 17H05895, https://www.jsps.go.jp/english/e-grants/index.html) to T.I. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Satir P, Christensen ST. Overview of structure and function of mammalian cilia. Annu Rev Physiol. 2007;69:377–400. Epub 2006/10/03. 10.1146/annurev.physiol.69.040705.141236 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Hirokawa N, Tanaka Y, Okada Y. Cilia, KIF3 molecular motor and nodal flow. Curr Opin Cell Biol. 2012;24(1):31–9. Epub 2012/01/31. 10.1016/j.ceb.2012.01.002 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Basu B, Brueckner M. Cilia multifunctional organelles at the center of vertebrate left-right asymmetry. Curr Top Dev Biol. 2008;85:151–74. Epub 2009/01/17. 10.1016/S0070-2153(08)00806-5 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Fliegauf M, Benzing T, Omran H. When cilia go bad: cilia defects and ciliopathies. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2007;8(11):880–93. 10.1038/nrm2278 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Fowkes ME, Mitchell DR. The role of preassembled cytoplasmic complexes in assembly of flagellar dynein subunits. Mol Biol Cell. 1998;9(9):2337–47. 10.1091/mbc.9.9.2337 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Mitchison HM, Schmidts M, Loges NT, Freshour J, Dritsoula A, Hirst RA, et al. Mutations in axonemal dynein assembly factor DNAAF3 cause primary ciliary dyskinesia. Nat Genet. 2012;44(4):381–9, S1-2. 10.1038/ng.1106 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Dong F, Shinohara K, Botilde Y, Nabeshima R, Asai Y, Fukumoto A, et al. Pih1d3 is required for cytoplasmic preassembly of axonemal dynein in mouse sperm. J Cell Biol. 2014;204(2):203–13. 10.1083/jcb.201304076 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Duquesnoy P, Escudier E, Vincensini L, Freshour J, Bridoux AM, Coste A, et al. Loss-of-function mutations in the human ortholog of Chlamydomonas reinhardtii ODA7 disrupt dynein arm assembly and cause primary ciliary dyskinesia. Am J Hum Genet. 2009;85(6):890–6. 10.1016/j.ajhg.2009.11.008 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Omran H, Kobayashi D, Olbrich H, Tsukahara T, Loges NT, Hagiwara H, et al. Ktu/PF13 is required for cytoplasmic pre-assembly of axonemal dyneins. Nature. 2008;456(7222):611–6. 10.1038/nature07471 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Tarkar A, Loges NT, Slagle CE, Francis R, Dougherty GW, Tamayo JV, et al. DYX1C1 is required for axonemal dynein assembly and ciliary motility. Nat Genet. 2013;45(9):995–1003. 10.1038/ng.2707 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Dougherty GW, Loges NT, Klinkenbusch JA, Olbrich H, Pennekamp P, Menchen T, et al. DNAH11 Localization in the Proximal Region of Respiratory Cilia Defines Distinct Outer Dynein Arm Complexes. Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol. 2016;55(2):213–24. Epub 2016/02/26. 10.1165/rcmb.2015-0353OC [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Onoufriadis A, Paff T, Antony D, Shoemark A, Micha D, Kuyt B, et al. Splice-site mutations in the axonemal outer dynein arm docking complex gene CCDC114 cause primary ciliary dyskinesia. Am J Hum Genet. 2013;92(1):88–98. 10.1016/j.ajhg.2012.11.002 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Hjeij R, Onoufriadis A, Watson CM, Slagle CE, Klena NT, Dougherty GW, et al. CCDC151 mutations cause primary ciliary dyskinesia by disruption of the outer dynein arm docking complex formation. Am J Hum Genet. 2014;95(3):257–74. Epub 2014/09/06. 10.1016/j.ajhg.2014.08.005 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Hjeij R, Lindstrand A, Francis R, Zariwala MA, Liu X, Li Y, et al. ARMC4 mutations cause primary ciliary dyskinesia with randomization of left/right body asymmetry. Am J Hum Genet. 2013;93(2):357–67. Epub 2013/07/16. 10.1016/j.ajhg.2013.06.009 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Zhou F, Roy S. SnapShot: Motile Cilia. Cell. 2015;162(1):224–e1. Epub 2015/07/04. 10.1016/j.cell.2015.06.048 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Castleman VH, Romio L, Chodhari R, Hirst RA, de Castro SC, Parker KA, et al. Mutations in radial spoke head protein genes RSPH9 and RSPH4A cause primary ciliary dyskinesia with central-microtubular-pair abnormalities. Am J Hum Genet. 2009;84(2):197–209. Epub 2009/02/10. 10.1016/j.ajhg.2009.01.011 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Shinohara K, Chen D, Nishida T, Misaki K, Yonemura S, Hamada H. Absence of Radial Spokes in Mouse Node Cilia Is Required for Rotational Movement but Confers Ultrastructural Instability as a Trade-Off. Dev Cell. 2015;35(2):236–46. Epub 2015/10/28. 10.1016/j.devcel.2015.10.001 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Sedykh I, TeSlaa JJ, Tatarsky RL, Keller AN, Toops KA, Lakkaraju A, et al. Novel roles for the radial spoke head protein 9 in neural and neurosensory cilia. Sci Rep. 2016;6:34437 Epub 2016/10/01. 10.1038/srep34437 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Yamaguchi H, Oda T, Kikkawa M, Takeda H. Systematic studies of all PIH proteins in zebrafish reveal their distinct roles in axonemal dynein assembly. Elife. 2018;7 Epub 2018/05/10. 10.7554/eLife.36979 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Supp DM, Brueckner M, Kuehn MR, Witte DP, Lowe LA, McGrath J, et al. Targeted deletion of the ATP binding domain of left-right dynein confirms its role in specifying development of left-right asymmetries. Development. 1999;126(23):5495–504. Epub 1999/11/11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Schwabe GC, Hoffmann K, Loges NT, Birker D, Rossier C, de Santi MM, et al. Primary ciliary dyskinesia associated with normal axoneme ultrastructure is caused by DNAH11 mutations. Hum Mutat. 2008;29(2):289–98. Epub 2007/11/21. 10.1002/humu.20656 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Noel ES, Momenah TS, Al-Dagriri K, Al-Suwaid A, Al-Shahrani S, Jiang H, et al. A Zebrafish Loss-of-Function Model for Human CFAP53 Mutations Reveals Its Specific Role in Laterality Organ Function. Hum Mutat. 2016;37(2):194–200. Epub 2015/11/05. 10.1002/humu.22928 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Narasimhan V, Hjeij R, Vij S, Loges NT, Wallmeier J, Koerner-Rettberg C, et al. Mutations in CCDC11, which encodes a coiled-coil containing ciliary protein, causes situs inversus due to dysmotility of monocilia in the left-right organizer. Hum Mutat. 2015;36(3):307–18. Epub 2014/12/17. 10.1002/humu.22738 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Perles Z, Cinnamon Y, Ta-Shma A, Shaag A, Einbinder T, Rein AJ, et al. A human laterality disorder associated with recessive CCDC11 mutation. J Med Genet. 2012;49(6):386–90. Epub 2012/05/12. 10.1136/jmedgenet-2011-100457 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Silva E, Betleja E, John E, Spear P, Moresco JJ, Zhang S, et al. Ccdc11 is a novel centriolar satellite protein essential for ciliogenesis and establishment of left-right asymmetry. Mol Biol Cell. 2016;27(1):48–63. Epub 2015/11/06. 10.1091/mbc.E15-07-0474 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Hori A, Toda T. Regulation of centriolar satellite integrity and its physiology. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2017;74(2):213–29. Epub 2016/08/04. 10.1007/s00018-016-2315-x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Nothe-Menchen T, Wallmeier J, Pennekamp P, Hoben IM, Olbrich H, Loges NT, et al. Randomization of Left-right Asymmetry and Congenital Heart Defects: The Role of DNAH5 in Humans and Mice. Circ Genom Precis Med. 2019. Epub 2019/10/23. 10.1161/CIRCGEN.119.002686 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Olbrich H, Haffner K, Kispert A, Volkel A, Volz A, Sasmaz G, et al. Mutations in DNAH5 cause primary ciliary dyskinesia and randomization of left-right asymmetry. Nat Genet. 2002;30(2):143–4. Epub 2002/01/15. 10.1038/ng817 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.McGrath J, Somlo S, Makova S, Tian X, Brueckner M. Two populations of node monocilia initiate left-right asymmetry in the mouse. Cell. 2003;114(1):61–73. Epub 2003/07/16. 10.1016/s0092-8674(03)00511-7 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Loges NT, Antony D, Maver A, Deardorff MA, Gulec EY, Gezdirici A, et al. Recessive DNAH9 Loss-of-Function Mutations Cause Laterality Defects and Subtle Respiratory Ciliary-Beating Defects. Am J Hum Genet. 2018;103(6):995–1008. Epub 2018/11/26. 10.1016/j.ajhg.2018.10.020 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Mali GR, Yeyati PL, Mizuno S, Dodd DO, Tennant PA, Keighren MA, et al. ZMYND10 functions in a chaperone relay during axonemal dynein assembly. Elife. 2018;7 Epub 2018/06/20. 10.7554/eLife.34389 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Wallmeier J, Shiratori H, Dougherty GW, Edelbusch C, Hjeij R, Loges NT, et al. TTC25 Deficiency Results in Defects of the Outer Dynein Arm Docking Machinery and Primary Ciliary Dyskinesia with Left-Right Body Asymmetry Randomization. Am J Hum Genet. 2016;99(2):460–9. Epub 2016/08/04. 10.1016/j.ajhg.2016.06.014 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Hall EA, Keighren M, Ford MJ, Davey T, Jarman AP, Smith LB, et al. Acute versus chronic loss of mammalian Azi1/Cep131 results in distinct ciliary phenotypes. PLoS Genet. 2013;9(12):e1003928 Epub 2014/01/15. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1003928 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Gur M, Cohen EB, Genin O, Fainsod A, Perles Z, Cinnamon Y. Roles of the cilium-associated gene CCDC11 in left-right patterning and in laterality disorders in humans. Int J Dev Biol. 2017;61(3-4-5):267–76. Epub 2017/06/18. 10.1387/ijdb.160442yc . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Kobayashi D, Takeda H. Ciliary motility: the components and cytoplasmic preassembly mechanisms of the axonemal dyneins. Differentiation. 2012;83(2):S23–9. 10.1016/j.diff.2011.11.009 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Odabasi E, Gul S, Kavakli IH, Firat-Karalar EN. Centriolar satellites are required for efficient ciliogenesis and ciliary content regulation. EMBO Rep. 2019;20(6). Epub 2019/04/27. 10.15252/embr.201947723 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Tollenaere MA, Mailand N, Bekker-Jensen S. Centriolar satellites: key mediators of centrosome functions. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2015;72(1):11–23. Epub 2014/09/01. 10.1007/s00018-014-1711-3 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Ma M, Stoyanova M, Rademacher G, Dutcher SK, Brown A, Zhang R. Structure of the Decorated Ciliary Doublet Microtubule. Cell. 2019;179(4):909–22 e12. Epub 2019/11/02. 10.1016/j.cell.2019.09.030 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Owa M, Uchihashi T, Yanagisawa HA, Yamano T, Iguchi H, Fukuzawa H, et al. Inner lumen proteins stabilize doublet microtubules in cilia and flagella. Nat Commun. 2019;10(1):1143 Epub 2019/03/10. 10.1038/s41467-019-09051-x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Saijoh Y, Adachi H, Mochida K, Ohishi S, Hirao A, Hamada H. Distinct transcriptional regulatory mechanisms underlie left-right asymmetric expression of lefty-1 and lefty-2. Genes Dev. 1999;13(3):259–69. Epub 1999/02/17. 10.1101/gad.13.3.259 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Matsuo M, Shimada A, Koshida S, Saga Y, Takeda H. The establishment of rotational polarity in the airway and ependymal cilia: analysis with a novel cilium motility mutant mouse. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol. 2013;304(11):L736–45. Epub 2013/03/26. 10.1152/ajplung.00425.2012 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Xu Y, Cao J, Huang S, Feng D, Zhang W, Zhu X, et al. Characterization of tetratricopeptide repeat-containing proteins critical for cilia formation and function. PLoS One. 2015;10(4):e0124378 Epub 2015/04/11. 10.1371/journal.pone.0124378 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.You Y, Richer EJ, Huang T, Brody SL. Growth and differentiation of mouse tracheal epithelial cells: selection of a proliferative population. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol. 2002;283(6):L1315–21. Epub 2002/10/22. 10.1152/ajplung.00169.2002 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Ikegami K, Setou M. Unique post-translational modifications in specialized microtubule architecture. Cell Struct Funct. 2010;35(1):15–22. Epub 2010/03/02. 10.1247/csf.09027 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Gregory S Barsh, Susan K Dutcher

25 May 2020

Dear Dr Hamada,

Thank you very much for submitting your Research Article entitled 'Differential requirement of Cfap53 for ciliary motility in 9+0 and 9+2 motile cilia' to PLOS Genetics. Your manuscript was fully evaluated at the editorial level and by independent peer reviewers. The reviewers appreciated the attention to an important problem, but raised some substantial concerns about the current manuscript. Based on the reviews, the editors would be willing to consider a new manuscript in which the current work serves as a starting point, and that includes adressing several points raised by the reviewers.  These include addressing 1.) competition between the tagged and untagged versions of proteins, 2.) addressing localization of the ODA by TEM with respect to the doublets and the proximal/distal position, 3.)  one reviewer felt that data were lacking for a role of cFAP53 in IFT transport , and 4.) the proximal localization of cFAP53.  It is important to address all of the points raised by the reviewers.  We cannot, of course, promise publication at that time. 

Should you decide to revise the manuscript for further consideration here, your revisions should address the specific points made by each reviewer. We will also require a detailed list of your responses to the review comments and a description of the changes you have made in the manuscript.

If you decide to revise the manuscript for further consideration at PLOS Genetics, please aim to resubmit within the next 60 days, unless it will take extra time to address the concerns of the reviewers, in which case we would appreciate an expected resubmission date by email to plosgenetics@plos.org.

If present, accompanying reviewer attachments are included with this email; please notify the journal office if any appear to be missing. They will also be available for download from the link below. You can use this link to log into the system when you are ready to submit a revised version, having first consulted our Submission Checklist.

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see our guidelines.

Please be aware that our data availability policy requires that all numerical data underlying graphs or summary statistics are included with the submission, and you will need to provide this upon resubmission if not already present. In addition, we do not permit the inclusion of phrases such as "data not shown" or "unpublished results" in manuscripts. All points should be backed up by data provided with the submission.

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool.  PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org.

PLOS has incorporated Similarity Check, powered by iThenticate, into its journal-wide submission system in order to screen submitted content for originality before publication. Each PLOS journal undertakes screening on a proportion of submitted articles. You will be contacted if needed following the screening process.

To resubmit, use the link below and 'Revise Submission' in the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder.

[LINK]

We are sorry that we cannot be more positive about your manuscript at this stage. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any concerns or questions.

Yours sincerely,

Susan K. Dutcher

Associate Editor

PLOS Genetics

Gregory Barsh

Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Genetics

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Authors:

Please note here if the review is uploaded as an attachment.

Reviewer #1: see attached file

Reviewer #2: Summary:

Ide and colleagues characterize Cfap53-/- mice in conjunction with other ciliary mouse models (e.g., Dnah9-/-, Rsph4a-/-, etc.) and propose a mechanism for how Cfap53 can differentially regulate nodal / tracheal / ependymal ciliary beating. A particular strength of the study is the characterization of abnormal ciliary waveforms in these ciliated cell types and quantitative analysis of how outer dynein arms are differentially affected in nodal and tracheal cilia. Overall, this study provides novel and interesting insights that advance understanding of the CFAP53 gene and suggest distinct mechanisms that underlie 9+2 as opposed to 9+0 ciliary beating. This manuscript is suitable for PLoS Genetics as the authors use a series of novel, genetically stable ciliary mutants to address how ciliary beating differs among these cell types. However, several concerns need to be adequately addressed and the manuscript extensively revised before it is suitable for publication.

Major concerns:

CFAP53 (also known as CCDC11) has been reported to cause body laterality defects without the typical respiratory symptoms consistent with a diagnosis for primary ciliary dyskinesia (Narasimhan et al., 2015). In the aforementioned study, anti-human CFAP53 antibody was used to demonstrate localization throughout the entire axoneme of respiratory cilia – the specificity was established by its absence in respiratory cilia from a patient with a homozygous loss-of-function CFAP53 mutation. Here, Ide and co-authors describe mouse Cfap53 localization in pericentriolar satellites in nodal cilia and proximal localization in tracheal cilia. The most convincing data is the localization of Cfap53-Venus at the pericentriolar satellites of nodal cilia, where there is a clear colocalization (yellow overlay) with PCM-1 and gamma tubulin (Fig 3). This Cfap53 localization around the pericentriolar region is appreciated in three separate images (Fig. 3E, 3O, and 3R). However, the localization of CFAP53::Venus in nodal cilia also appears as discrete puncta in the distal ciliary region (see Fig. 3O-Q and Fig. 3R-T) as well as accumulation around the ciliary base. This has significant implications for interpreting the mechanism whereby Cfap53 differentially regulates ODAs by either facilitating its transport into nodal cilia or selectively stabilizing ODAs (position 3 and 8) in the axonemes of tracheal cilia.

The authors also note that Cfap53::Venus localized to the proximal ciliary region in respiratory axonemes (Fig. 3). This interpretation is less convincing and appears to conflict with human CFAP53 data, which shows its native detection along the entire respiratory axoneme (Narasimhan 2015). The localization of Cfap53::Venus using anti-GFP antibody in trachea appears diffuse with more intense signal in the proximal region but also signal in the distal ciliary region. This is in contrast to DNAH11, which shows a clearly defined reactivity in only the proximal ciliary region. The conclusion that Cfap53 is axonemal in tracheal cilia (and possibly nodal cilia) seems sufficient and is consistent with other reports describing CFAP53 in other species, whereas the interpretation that Cfap53 has a proximal localization in mouse trachea requires further clarification as to how / why this would be different. This latter point would be significantly strengthened if the authors can specify whether, in the course of quantifying ODAs in TEMs of Cfap53-mutant cilia, the deficiency of ODAs at positions 3 and 8 (or elsewhere) were in the proximal ciliary region of trachea axonemes as opposed to the distal ciliary region. Furthermore, there is no presentation of native Cfap53 localization by immunofluorescence microscopy, which would be very helpful to corroborate the localization pattern of Cfap53-Venus using anti-GFP antibody. Can the authors comment on why anti-Cfap53 protein (which is included in the material and methods section) is not shown / tested for immunofluorescence microscopy? Have the authors used the published anti-human CFAP53 antibody in Narasimhan 2015 to test cross-reactivity with mouse axonemes?

Given the points raised above and the interesting result that a subset of ODAs are preferentially affected in tracheal but not nodal cilia, it is conceivable that Cfap53 axonemal localization is restricted to a subset of microtubule doublets (positions 3 and 8) in trachea cilia but targeted to most or all microtubule doublets in nodal cilia. In this alternate model, Cfap53 is axonemal in both tracheal and nodal cilia and predicts that subsets of MTDs are qualitatively different between these cell types. This is not without precedent, as MTDs at position 5 and 6 have a unique connecting structure that is not present among the other MTDs.

Minor Concerns:

References

- Page 11, lines 209-211: the study by McGrath et al., 2003 (reference 29) does not distinguish / define proximal ciliary region in their study whereas the DNAH11 study from the group of Omran (reference 11) is the first to make this distinction. However, both of these studies note localization of Gfp-Dnah11 throughout the entire nodal cilia axoneme. This sentence should be rephrased to more accurately reflect these points.

Phrasing should be modified

- Page 5, lines 63 – 66: “… those with situs inversus and heterotaxy are typically afflicted exclusively with aberrations in laterality…” This suggests that most cases of situs inversus and heterotaxy occur in isolation but this is not entirely accurate as most cases of laterality cases are associated in conjunction with PCD. This should be reworded to convey that there are certain cases / reports of situs inversus / heterotaxy with no accompanying diagnosis of PCD.

The description of Dnah9-/- mice is novel and regarding analysis of laterality, the authors state that 2/2 embryos showed normal situs composition. This is a low number to strictly rule out randomization of laterality and especially heterotaxy – if the authors have not analyzed additional embryos it would be helpful to state that laterality defects especially heterotaxy cannot be fully excluded with the analysis of only 2 embryos. This would be compatible with Dnah9 mRNA protein expression at the node and the possibility that loss of Dnah9 in mice could have very subtle / low frequency effect on laterality development including heterotaxy. Have the authors tested anti-Dnah9 antibody by Western blotting to support its specificity?

Regarding the speculation that outer dynein arms in nodal cilia may be composed of a hetero-trimeric complex (page 18, lines 380-383), is there any published evidence to support the existence of three-headed dynein arm complexes in mammalian cilia?

The title does not appreciably convey the novelty of the findings, as previous publications have already demonstrated a differential role for CFAP53 in tracheal versus nodal ciliary motility. This could be strengthened by possibly mentioning selective versus complete ODA deficiency between these cell types.

As the authors also indicate Cfap53 expression in male testes, can they comment on the fertility status of Cfap53-/- males?

In Figure 9, the authors state that Ttc25 is lost in Cfap53-/- node cilia. However, considering the inset highlighting the cilia, the signal looks much weaker for Ttc25 in heterozygous control (Fig. 9J) than in homozygous null (inset Fig.9M), and cilia are more easily discerned with even some level of colocalization in this sample (Fig. 9O). Can the authors comment further on this?

Regarding the model of Cfap53 in motile cilia (Fig. 10), point (B) refers to interaction of Cfap53 with IFT components (page 34). Is there published evidence for the interaction of Cfap53 with IFT components?

The authors conclude that Cfap53 interacts with the ODA docking machinery, specifically TTC25, as well as dyneins associated with the outer dynein arms (Dnai1, Dnai2, Dnah11). There are no control lanes for Western blots in Fig. 8C and 8G, which ideally should be compared on the same blot / exposure to interpret strength of signal relative to control. The interaction of Dnah11 fragment aa 1000-1700 with Cfap53 is extremely weak (Fig. 8D) and should be interpreted with caution, as this fragment was more robustly immunoprecipitated than the aa 1-1000 construct (compare band intensities of anti-GFP with Dnah11 1-1000 and Dnah11 1000-1700, top panel) but shows a much weaker / almost negligible signal for Cfap53 (middle panel, anti-HA antibody). Additionally, the expected molecular weight of Ttc25 is approximately 72 kDa, however the blots (Fig. 8E, top and bottom panels) indicate a migration closer to 50 kDa – can the authors provide further information including whether a smaller isoform of Ttc25 was tested?

Regarding the use of NaI solution to discriminate proteins tightly associated with axonemal microtubules, are there published references using this technique to analyze axonemes in other ciliary models / species?

The combined phenotype of Cfap53-/- + Rsph4a-/- mice show a reduction in ODAs in tracheal cilia (Fig. 7M). This is an interesting result but also unexpected as radial spoke proteins are not expected to interact with outer dynein arm proteins. Can the authors further comment on how this synergy may regulate ODAs and also if there are previous studies that support a functional association between radial spoke and outer dynein arms?

Cfap53 has been proposed to function as a microtubule-interacting protein within the A-tubule of Chlamydomonas axonemes. If Cfap53 is strictly confined to the inside of the A-tubule, how are interactions with dynein associated components (e.g., Ttc25, Dnah11) possible? Is Cfap53 in some way accessible to the surface of the A-tubule? Also, MIPs have been proposed to confer stability to the 9+0 axoneme, yet the significant phenotype in Cfap53-/- axonemes is partial or complete ODA deficiency (trachea and node, respectively) with no indication of shorter / less stable axonemal MTDs. Can the authors comment on morphology / stability of Cfap53-/- node cilia compared to control? Are their differences between Chlamydomonas and mouse axonemes that can help explain these differences?

Reviewer #3: OVERVIEW:

The molecular and structural differences underlying mammalian motile cilia diversity in terms of function and waveform is largely unknown. Here, Ide, Twan and Lu et al have carried out a detailed functional and molecular analysis of the coiled-coil domain containing protein CFAP53 in mammalian motile cilia. Homozygous crispant null alleles of CFAP53 disrupt ciliary beat waveform in the MCCs of the ependymal and respiratory epithelia and show reduced beat frequency in tracheal cells. In contrast, structure and motility of the nodal (9 + 0) cilia is more strongly affected- by TEM that ODAs are heavily depleted. This likely underlies the isolated situs defects, as opposed to more syndromic primary ciliary dyskinesia (PCD), previously published for human patients. Even in the mildly affected MCC axonemes from Cfap53-/- mice, the authors could demonstrate ODAs on specific doublets were preferentially lost, those in the plane of beating in 9 + 2 axonemes. This hypothesis is elegantly test by generating Rsph4a-/- Cfap53+/- - which now show complete loss of ODAs across the field in these rotational mutant MCCs.

The authors have developed an impressive arsenal of BAC transgenic mouse lines to monitor expression and localization of gene of interest CFAP53 as well as two ODA dynein heavy chain tagged lines (DNAH9 and 11). Beyond this study, these reagents are very useful tools for those working in the mammalian motile cilia field. In their BAC transgenics, they show the expression of Cfap53 transcripts in mouse motile ciliated tissues of the mouse and importantly demonstrate that their CFAP53-Venus fusion is functional- rescuing the hydrocephaly phenotype of Cfap53 mutant mice. Using endogenous tagging approaches for axonemal dynein heavy chain fusion lines- they show that nodal but not tracheal cells lack ODA heavy chain staining. Moreover, they suggest that that unlike humans, mice seem to lack DNAH9 from the nodal cilia and do not require it for correct organ positioning (n=2 embryos).

Finally, in fractionation studies, they demonstrate CFAP53 is associated with microtubule axoneme under conditions where ODAs become detached. In a series of transient transfections in HEKs to pulldown interactors of CFAP53- they demonstrate that CFAP53 interacts with selected ODA proteins and the docking complex protein TTC25 but not more distal CCDC114 or 151. They further demonstrate that axonemal localisation of TTC25 is reliant on CFAP53, but not vice versa. This leads to their model which suggests that CFAP53 functions to help transport ODAs into the axoneme and assists in their docking there and that this function is redundant in respiratory cilia where is likely another protein compensates for CFAP53.

Overall, it is a very elegant mouse genetics paper to functionally dissect roles for known human disease gene CFAP53 in diverse mammalian cilia types. The motile-specific phenotypes are unexpected given the KD/morphant phenotypes from other species and mammalian cell culture, where a role in ciliogenesis was reported. However, this story is much cleaner in terms of explaining the phenotypes in patients with CFAP53 variants. Overall, the work is of very high quality, careful analysis and broad significance to the cilia community. Major points are for proper analysis of data presented (quantitation, expanded analysis and/or discussion).

Major points:

1) BAC generation and experiments: While BAC clones are useful for preserving endogenous regulatory elements- levels and patterns of expression- I think these CFAP53 localization experiments were done in the background of wild type CFAP53. Given this, I would caution a little- dampen the emphasis made on differential localizations of CFAP53 between different motile cilia types. ‘Competition’ between tagged and untagged isoforms for cilia localization could be limited- we know this is the case for IFT proteins. You get higher labelling density within cilia if the tagged-isoform is the only one expressed. One workaround would be to validate using the endogenous CFAP53 expression using the antibody they have generated- for Fig8 if it works by IF.

i. Regardless, with the current images, quantitative image analysis of the distributions would be very helpful- average arbitrary units of fluorescence down the axonemes of different cilia types.

ii. Also, I did not find the numbers of BAC integrations (often concatomers, as well as locus effects) expression relative to endogenous locus. If the authors have this information- authors should include in the methods how many founders, how many copies, relative expression, screening?

iii. The literature suggests that CFAP53 is widely expressed in primary ciliated cells where it seems to function in ciliogenesis (i.e. Silva et al 2015)- however none of the previous work in human cell lines RPE1 or Xenopus over-expression shows cilia localization. This is an important finding of the current study and discrepancy should be discussed a little more clearly. This is important for the field.

2) CFAP53 allele characterization: Minor point for two CRIPSR alleles- how do the genomic changes affect protein (i.e. premature termination, in frame deletion). Please add in this information to Fig.2 A. Were the authors able to validate these predictions with their endogenous antibody they use in Figure 8A? Is any protein still present- truncated proteins are not null alleles. This is important given the potential discrepancies with the morphant/KD experiments in Xenopus and zebrafish- Mitchell and Mahjoub, as well as Khoka labs, as well as mammalian cells where ciliogenesis is affected. This should be discussed.

3) DNAH9-Venus and DNAH11-Venus localizations: Beautiful endogenous tagging approaches for axonemal dynein heavy chain fusion lines will be great resources for the community. If this paper is to be where they are referenced/introduced, I suggest however that more image analysis is needed in terms of the proximal-distal intensities- could a plot of average axoneme distributions for Venus-tagged molecules be shown next to the image panels in Figure 5 and 6. For example, DNAH11 is expected to be proximal in its localization but in fact in 5G and 5J it looks like it is excluded (non-overlapping) with the AcTub staining. A graph capturing the signals would be much easier to interpret. Similarly, Fig6, DNAH9-Venus looks much more broadly than restricted to the distal tip. Moreover, do these boundaries change at all in the mutants? In the text authors make the statement (lines 218)- ‘distal localization of Dnah9 was maintained, although its level was reduced compared with that apparent in control mice’. There is no quantitation here- quantitating the signals similar to distribution is required if these statements are to be made. For example, 6J-L- if you averaged the DNAH11/acTub signal intensity, the apparent decreased in DNAH11 would likely not hold. Again quantitation for the nodal cilia would also be helpful- magnifications of the DNAH9-Venus nodal cilia would also be necessary.

Minor points:

1) Phenotype: CFAP53 is highly expressed in testes- is there a sperm defect suggest it is a trafficking module for the paralogues DNAH17 and DNAH8? Or is it not required? Similarly, given the hydrocephaly phenotype why not characterize ependymal distribution (localization and levels) of the heavy chains in these cilia, or TEM analysis? By only looking at two cilia types, it is possible that the respiratory cilia are the odd ones out and not the nodal cilia (i.e. ependymal cilia are also affected more severely or sperm motility). How penetrant is the gross hydrocephaly phenotype- 100% have domed heads or subclinical between animals? Along the same vein, which background were the animals made on and maintained on to understand this phenotype.

2) Nomenclature: Throughout mouse proteins should be in all caps (i.e. CFAP53) whereas genes italics title case (i.e. Cfap53). This needs careful and extensive changing throughout the manuscript- TTC25, DNAH9 , DNAH11 and intermediate chains please use DNAI1 and DNAI2, which is the correct form of the protein.

3) Figure 2H- the spread in the control frequencies is unusual- hyperkinetic to hypokinetic almost overlapping mutants- but it is a ‘pool’ of control animals-wild type and het. We recommend identifying genotypes by symbols- are the hets intermediate?

4) Along with major point 3, the language is currently strong in suggesting that that unlike humans, mice seem to lack DNAH9 from the nodal cilia and do not require it for correct organ positioning (n=2 embryos). Given the small numbers of Dnah9 mutants examined, I would temper conclusions to ‘suggesting DNAH9 is not expressed in, nor required for mouse nodal cilia motility’. Given mRNA expression by WISH, can the authors rule out issues with the signal-noise ratio for low protein expression may confound this interpretation for DNAH9? The DNAH11-Venus levels (GFP IF) are also significantly lower than say DNAH5 IF- the enrichment in the cilia not very apparent (see Figure 5A- cytoplasm to axoneme). A GFP-IP of E8.5 embryos pooled- no tagged protein pulled down? Something else to bolster. If not use language, like ‘appears’ and ‘suggests’.

5) Inner dynein arms: While the authors have demonstrated that there is an effect on ODAs in Cfap53 mutants, there is no mention of the effect on IDAs. While this is not necessarily expected given the evidence from patient cells it is nevertheless an important consideration. What would the mechanism be? This could be mitigated with expanded discussion on previous observations about IDAs and why you think it is right not to investigate them in this study. Quantitate IDAs from mutant TEM

6) Clarify Figure 9 shows some images of the node, however the cilia are very hard to see with the staining used. The labelling of G-I is also a bit unclear. Label G-I to indicate that these are Cfap53+/+ mice. Make the magnified boxes larger and make the entire image brighter so the cilia are easier to see.

7) Line 33-34: edit to ‘albeit with an altered beat pattern’

8) Centriolar satellites is used as plural by the field, even in cells with a single cilium like the node. They are highly dynamic and tend to migrate, fuse and divide in short time scales. See line 34 and throughout.

9) Lines 46-50: This sentence is too long. Split into 9+0 and 9+2 motile cilia sentences, each with a full stop.

10) Line 149: typo ‘lacking exon 2’.

11) Line 171: typo ‘that the Cfap53.’

12) Line 267: for clarity add ‘TT25 is thought to be most proximal to the microtubule’ currently unclear proximal to what.

13) Lines 355-359: The sentence needs work ‘It may also not necessarily be the issue of absence of a particular protein from 9+0 and presence of it in 9+2 cilia that confers the observed differences on the effects of the loss of CFAP53 on ODAs and DC in the two types of cilia, rather like CFAP53, a protein present in both cilia-types but with differential localization and function in each kind of cilia could also fulfil this role.’ Wouldn’t a differential localization and function likely involve the presence/absence of another protein to execute these changes- the logic is fuzzy.

14) Line 381-383: Isn’t it much more likely that there is a heterogenous mix heterodimers than a heterotrimer. i.e. not spatially separated dimers in the human node.

15) Line 448: Specify what is the ‘blocking solution’.

16) Line 451: Change to ‘Can Get SolutionTM A/B’, and on line 466.

17) Line 637: Change to ‘Figure Legends’

18) Line 704: typo ‘ODAs are…’

19) Line 754: reference for the interaction with IFTs if shown, if presumed state explicitly.

20) Line 781: provide n= for how many animals were examined for laterality defects in the legend.

21) Accessibility: most of the IF data is two color/merge- consider choosing red-green colour-blind friendly combinations. https://imagej.nih.gov/ij/docs/guide/146-9.html and https://www.ascb.org/science-news/how-to-make-scientific-figures-accessible-to-readers-with-color-blindness/

**********

Have all data underlying the figures and results presented in the manuscript been provided?

Large-scale datasets should be made available via a public repository as described in the PLOS Genetics data availability policy, and numerical data that underlies graphs or summary statistics should be provided in spreadsheet form as supporting information.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: None

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

Attachment

Submitted filename: PGenetics-D-20-00551.pdf

Decision Letter 1

Gregory S Barsh, Susan K Dutcher

29 Oct 2020

Dear Dr Hamada,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript entitled "Cfap53 regulates mammalian cilia-type motility patterns through differential localization and recruitment of axonemal dynein components" has been editorially accepted for publication in PLOS Genetics. Congratulations!  Please make the minor changes suggested by Reviewer 3 before submitting the final version.

Before your submission can be formally accepted and sent to production you will need to complete our formatting changes, which you will receive in a follow up email. Please be aware that it may take several days for you to receive this email; during this time no action is required by you. Please note: the accept date on your published article will reflect the date of this provisional accept, but your manuscript will not be scheduled for publication until the required changes have been made.

Once your paper is formally accepted, an uncorrected proof of your manuscript will be published online ahead of the final version, unless you’ve already opted out via the online submission form. If, for any reason, you do not want an earlier version of your manuscript published online or are unsure if you have already indicated as such, please let the journal staff know immediately at plosgenetics@plos.org.

In the meantime, please log into Editorial Manager at https://www.editorialmanager.com/pgenetics/, click the "Update My Information" link at the top of the page, and update your user information to ensure an efficient production and billing process. Note that PLOS requires an ORCID iD for all corresponding authors. Therefore, please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field.  This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager.

If you have a press-related query, or would like to know about one way to make your underlying data available (as you will be aware, this is required for publication), please see the end of this email. If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming article at this point, to enable them to help maximise its impact. Inform journal staff as soon as possible if you are preparing a press release for your article and need a publication date.

Thank you again for supporting open-access publishing; we are looking forward to publishing your work in PLOS Genetics!

Yours sincerely,

Susan K. Dutcher

Associate Editor

PLOS Genetics

Gregory Barsh

Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Genetics

www.plosgenetics.org

Twitter: @PLOSGenetics

----------------------------------------------------

Comments from the reviewers (if applicable):

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Authors:

Please note here if the review is uploaded as an attachment.

Reviewer #1: The authors have made a serious effort to address the comments and criticisms of all three reviewers. The most significant improvement has been the clarification about the localization of the three DHCs (DHC5, DHC9, and DHC11) in nodal versus tracheal cilia in the presence and absence of CFAP53. It remains unclear why loss of CFAP53 disrupts the assembly of DHC5 and DHC11 in nodal cilia, with no apparent effect on tracheal cilia.

Reviewer #2: The authors have significantly improved the manuscript and adequately addressed all concerns. Overall, this manuscript makes an important contribution to the literature, especially in the field of cilia and ciliopathies, and is thus strongly recommended for publication.“

Reviewer #3: The revised manuscript by Ide, Twan and Lu et al. is an elegant tour-de-force work for mammalian cilia motility- the authors should be very proud. The authors have addressed the majority of my concerns, aside from nomenclature which has been very confusing for the field. As such it is important that all the mouse proteins in this manuscript are listed according to proper nomenclature, in an attempt to promote consistency, which aids data retrieval and improves communication. Protein symbols are in capital letters for both human and mouse. Even JAX which they cite as a rebuttal clearly states ‘1.5.2 Protein symbols Protein designations follow the same rules as gene symbols, with the following two distinctions: Protein symbols use all uppercase letters.

Protein symbols are not italicized.’ http://www.informatics.jax.org/mgihome/nomen/gene.shtml#ps These rules are elaborated here in these references (Sundberg, J P, and P N Schofield. “Mouse genetic nomenclature. Standardization of strain, gene, and protein symbols.” Veterinary pathology vol. 47,6 (2010): 1100-4. doi:10.1177/0300985810374837; International Protein Nomenclature Guidelines https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genome/doc/internatprot_nomenguide/)

Minor points- many of the figures are still red-green combinations- this ~10% of your audience won’t be able to fully appreciate your beautiful images. It is a little more effort but really encourages accessibility and inclusiveness of science.

Edits: Page 12, Line 243: instead of the human proteins in sperm given your species differences in heavy chains between cilia types, a more relevant reference would be Mali et al 2018 eLIFE doi: 10.7554/eLife.34389 (Figure 5D) which clearly shows which heavy chains are present in mice sperm and which are missing.

Figure 8 D,E: typo for Cfap53-HA (currently Cafp53)

Figure 10B: left panel add ‘s’ ‘centriolar satellites’

Supp Figure 3B: Venus should be capitalized on all your animal names for consistency

Supp Figure S9B: : typo for Cfap53-HA (currently Cafp53)

**********

Have all data underlying the figures and results presented in the manuscript been provided?

Large-scale datasets should be made available via a public repository as described in the PLOS Genetics data availability policy, and numerical data that underlies graphs or summary statistics should be provided in spreadsheet form as supporting information.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

----------------------------------------------------

Data Deposition

If you have submitted a Research Article or Front Matter that has associated data that are not suitable for deposition in a subject-specific public repository (such as GenBank or ArrayExpress), one way to make that data available is to deposit it in the Dryad Digital Repository. As you may recall, we ask all authors to agree to make data available; this is one way to achieve that. A full list of recommended repositories can be found on our website.

The following link will take you to the Dryad record for your article, so you won't have to re‐enter its bibliographic information, and can upload your files directly: 

http://datadryad.org/submit?journalID=pgenetics&manu=PGENETICS-D-20-00551R1

More information about depositing data in Dryad is available at http://www.datadryad.org/depositing. If you experience any difficulties in submitting your data, please contact help@datadryad.org for support.

Additionally, please be aware that our data availability policy requires that all numerical data underlying display items are included with the submission, and you will need to provide this before we can formally accept your manuscript, if not already present.

----------------------------------------------------

Press Queries

If you or your institution will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, or if you need to know your paper's publication date for media purposes, please inform the journal staff as soon as possible so that your submission can be scheduled accordingly. Your manuscript will remain under a strict press embargo until the publication date and time. This means an early version of your manuscript will not be published ahead of your final version. PLOS Genetics may also choose to issue a press release for your article. If there's anything the journal should know or you'd like more information, please get in touch via plosgenetics@plos.org.

Acceptance letter

Gregory S Barsh, Susan K Dutcher

4 Dec 2020

PGENETICS-D-20-00551R1

CFAP53 regulates mammalian cilia-type motility patterns through differential localization and recruitment of axonemal dynein components

Dear Dr Hamada,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript entitled "CFAP53 regulates mammalian cilia-type motility patterns through differential localization and recruitment of axonemal dynein components" has been formally accepted for publication in PLOS Genetics! Your manuscript is now with our production department and you will be notified of the publication date in due course.

The corresponding author will soon be receiving a typeset proof for review, to ensure errors have not been introduced during production. Please review the PDF proof of your manuscript carefully, as this is the last chance to correct any errors. Please note that major changes, or those which affect the scientific understanding of the work, will likely cause delays to the publication date of your manuscript.

Soon after your final files are uploaded, unless you have opted out or your manuscript is a front-matter piece, the early version of your manuscript will be published online. The date of the early version will be your article's publication date. The final article will be published to the same URL, and all versions of the paper will be accessible to readers.

Thank you again for supporting PLOS Genetics and open-access publishing. We are looking forward to publishing your work!

With kind regards,

Livia Horvath

PLOS Genetics

On behalf of:

The PLOS Genetics Team

Carlyle House, Carlyle Road, Cambridge CB4 3DN | United Kingdom

plosgenetics@plos.org | +44 (0) 1223-442823

plosgenetics.org | Twitter: @PLOSGenetics

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Fig. The length of node cilia and tracheal cilia from the Cfap53-/- mouse.

    (A) The length of node cilia from Cfap53+/+ and Cfap53-/- embryos. Data are presented as mean ± SD (n = 20 independent variables); two tailed Student’s t-test (*p = 0.0109). (B) The length of tracheal cilia from Cfap53+/+ and Cfap53-/- mice. Data are presented as mean ± SD (n = 16 independent variables); two tailed Student’s t-test (n.s.; p = 0.6608). Note that mutant node cilia are slightly shorter but mutant tracheal cilia retained the normal length.

    (TIF)

    S2 Fig. TEM images of sperm from Cfap53+/+ and Cfap53-/- male mice.

    Sperm from Cfap53+/+ and Cfap53-/- male mice was subjected to TEM analysis. Note that normal axonemal structure is severely disrupted in the mutant sperm. Arrows indicate the center of the cross section of sperm. Note that the 9+2 structure is observed in Cfap53+/+, but is disrupted in Cfap53-/-. N: Nucleus, DF: Outer dense fiber, MI: Mitochondrion. Scale bars, 500 nm.

    (TIF)

    S3 Fig. The CFAP53::Venus fusion protein is functional.

    (A) Construction of a transgenic mouse strain harboring a Cfap53Venus BAC. The coding sequence for Venus together with that for a (Gly4Ser)3 linker and poly(A) (pA) sequence as well as a loxP site was inserted into exon 8 of Cfap53 gene immediately upstream of the TAG stop codon. ORF, open reading frame; UTR, untranslated region. (B) Copy number of the BAC transgene was examined for two transgenic lines (#19, #66) harboring the Cfap53Venus BAC by quantitative PCR. Genomic DNA from Dnah11Venus/Venus mouse, which has two copies of Venus, served as a control. Note that lines #19 and #66 have 2 copies and 1 copy of the transgene, respectively. (C) Genotyping of Cfap53-/- with Cfap53Venus. Cfap53-/-, exon 2 excluded, have two alleles of different length. The male, Cfap53+/- (long alleles: used in other experiments) with Cfap53Venus, was crossed with females, Cfap53+/- (short alleles). We can distinguish between Cfap53-/-, Cfap53Venus and Cfap53+/-, Cfap53Venus by length of Cfap53-/- alleles in F1 mice. (D) Mice genotyped in (C) at 4 weeks of age. Hydrocephalus apparent in Cfap53–/–(KO) mice was rescued by introduction of the Cfap53Venus transgene.

    (TIF)

    S4 Fig. Localization of CFAP53::Venus fusion protein in tracheal and node cilia.

    (A–D) Immunofluorescence staining of the node of Cfap53Venus (A and C) or control (B and D) embryos at E8.0 with antibodies to GFP (A and B) and to acetylated (acet.) Tubulin (C and D). Scale bar, 10 μm. (E–G) Higher magnification images of a node cilium of a Cfap53Venus embryo showing GFP, acetylated Tubulin, and merged staining, respectively. CFAP53::Venus was predominantly localized at the base of node cilia but was also detected at a much lower level in the axoneme. Scale bar, 1 μm. (H–K) Immunofluorescence staining of the trachea of adult Cfap53Venus and control mice with antibodies to GFP (H and I) and to acetylated (acet.) Tubulin (J and K). Scale bars, 20 μm. Insets in H, I show higher magnification views of tracheal cilia. Scale bars, 5 μm. (L–Q) Immunofluorescence analysis of an isolated tracheal MCC from a Cfap53-/- mouse harboring the Cfap53Venus transgene (O-Q) or a Cfap53+/+ mouse without the transgene (L-N). CFAP53::Venus was absent in the distal region of tracheal cilia (O-Q). Scale bars, 5 μm. (R-T) Immunofluorescence staining of the node cilia of Cfap53Venus embryos at E8.0 with antibodies to GFP (R) and to PCM1 (S). Scale bar, 1 μm. (U-W) Immunofluorescence staining of the node cilia of Cfap53Venus embryos at E8.0 with antibodies to GFP (U) and to γ-Tubulin (V). Scale bars, 1 μm.

    (TIF)

    S5 Fig. Construction of a Dnah11Venus allele encoding a functional DNAH11::Venus fusion protein.

    (A) Construction of a transgenic mouse strain harboring a Dnah11Venus allele. The targeting vector contained a neo cassette and loxP sites, and the coding sequence for Venus was inserted into exon 43 (which encodes the second AAA motor domain) of Dnah11 together with that for (Gly4Ser)3 linkers. (B) Laterality of milk spots for WT, Dnah11Venus/Venus, and Dnah11iv/iv (homozygous for a spontaneous Dnah11 mutation that results in situs inversus). All milk spots of Dnah11Venus/Venus mice were located on the left (normal) side (n = 39/39), whereas those of Dnah11iv/iv mice were L-R randomized (n = 3/8). (C) Live fluorescence imaging of DNAH11::Venus (green) in adult tracheal cilia of mice harboring a Dnah11Venus. DNAH11::Venus was detected in proximal region of tracheal cilia. BF, bright-field. D and P in the merged image indicate the distal and proximal region of cilia, respectively. Scale bar, 5 μm.

    (TIF)

    S6 Fig. Localization of DNAH9 in ciliated cells of the trachea and node.

    (A-F) Immunofluorescence staining with antibodies to DNAH9 (green) and to acetylated (acet.) Tubulin (magenta) of the node at E8.0 and adult trachea (G-L) of Cfap53–/–and control mice. DNAH9 was not detected in node cilia of Cfap53+/–or Cfap53–/–embryos (A-F), whereas its expression was maintained in tracheal cilia of the mutant (G-L). Scale bars, 10 μm (A-F) or 2 μm (G-L).

    (TIF)

    S7 Fig. DNAH9 is present in tracheal cilia but not in node cilia.

    (A) Dnah9Venus allele was generated by inserting (G4S)3 Venus at the carboxyl terminus of DNAH9. (B) Live fluorescence imaging of DNAH9::Venus (green) in the node at E8.0 and in adult tracheal cilia of mice harboring a Dnah9Venus transgene. DNAH9::Venus was detected in tracheal cilia but not in node cilia. The dashed lines indicate the outline of the node. Bright-field (BF) and merged images are also shown. Scale bars, 10 μm. (C) Immunofluorescence staining with antibodies to GFP (green) and to acetylated (acet.) Tubulin (magenta) of adult trachea from Dnah9Venus mice. Note that DNAH9::Venus is preferentially localized to the distal region of tracheal cilia. D and P indicate and distal and proximal regions of tracheal cilia, respectively. Quantitative analysis confirms a higher intensity of GFP signals in the distal region. Data are presented as mean ± SD (n = 3 independent variables); two tailed Student’s t-test (*p = 0.0144). Scale bar, 5 μm.

    (TIF)

    S8 Fig. TEM images of Cfap53-/- tracheal cilia at different proximal-distal levels.

    (A) Serial TEM sections were made from Cfap53-/- tracheal cilia along the proximal-distal axis. The level of each section shown in (B-N) is illustrated. (B-H) Lower magnification images of seven sections. Scale bar, 1 μm. (I-N) Higher magnification images. Scale bar, 100 nm. The cilium from which the high magnification image is derived is indicated at the right-top of each panel. For example, panel (I) shows a section image of cilium 1 at the level indicated in (A). Arrowheads denote microtubules lacking ODA.

    (TIF)

    S9 Fig. Association of CFAP53 with DNAIC proteins and TTC25.

    (A-B) HEK293T cells transfected with expression vectors for HA-tagged CFAP53 or MYC epitope–tagged DNAIC1, DNAIC2, DYNLL1 (cytoplasmic dynein light chain), TTC25 (or with the corresponding empty vectors), as indicated, were subjected to immunoprecipitation (IP) with antibodies to HA or to MYC, and the resulting precipitates as well as the original whole cell lysates (WCLs) were subjected to immunoblot analysis with antibodies to HA or MYC. CFAP53 interacted specifically with the axonemal dyneins DNAIC1, DNAIC2 and the DC member TTC25.

    (TIF)

    S10 Fig. TTC25 localizes to the axoneme of tracheal cilia in Cfap53–/–mice.

    Tracheal cilia of adult Cfap53–/–and control mice were subjected to immunofluorescence staining with antibodies to TTC25 (green) and to acetylated (acet.) Tubulin (magenta). TTC25 was maintained in tracheal cilia of Cfap53–/–mice, albeit at a reduced level. Scale bars, 5 μm.

    (TIF)

    S11 Fig. Search for ciliary protein genes expressed in tracheal ciliated cells but not in node ciliated cells.

    Total RNA isolated from adult trachea or E8.0 node of mice was subjected to RT-PCR analysis of the 18 indicated genes. Amplified cDNAs were detected by agarose gel electrophoresis. Representative results for Efhc1 and Cfap20 are shown. No gene was found to be specifically expressed in tracheal ciliated cells and not in node ciliated cells.

    (TIF)

    S1 Video. Motion of node cilia in Cfap53+/- embryo shown in Fig 2F.

    Note that node cilia are motile. The images were captured at 100 frames/s for 2 s. Scale bar is 10 μm.

    (MP4)

    S2 Video. Motion of node cilia in Cfap53-/- embryo, shown in Fig 2F.

    Note that node cilia are immotile. The images were captured at 100 frames/s for 2 s. Scale bar is 10 μm.

    (MP4)

    S3 Video. Motion of tracheal cilia of Cfap53+/+ and Cfap53-/- mice shown in Fig 2G.

    Note that the shape of a cilium is superimposed on the last beat. The images were captured at 200 frames/s for 1 s.

    (MP4)

    S4 Video. Motion of brain ventricle cilia of Cfap53+/+ and Cfap53-/- mice shown in Fig 2G.

    Note that the shape of a cilium is superimposed on the last beat. The images were captured at 200 frames/s for 0.75 s.

    (MP4)

    S5 Video. Motility of sperm from Cfap53+/+ mice.

    Sperm can swim normally. The images were recorded at 200 frames per second (fps) and playing video speed is 20 fps.

    (MPEG)

    S6 Video. Motility of sperm from Cfap53-/- mice.

    Sperm are immotile. The images were recorded at 200 frames per second (fps) and playing video speed is 20 fps.

    (MPEG)

    S7 Video. Motility of tracheal cilia from Dnah9+/+ mice shown in Fig 6F.

    Motility of tracheal cilia was recorded at 200 frames per second (fps) and playing video speed is 20 fps.

    (AVI)

    S8 Video. Motility of tracheal cilia from Dnah9-/- mice shown in Fig 6F.

    Motility of tracheal cilia was recorded at 200 frames per second (fps) and playing video speed is 20 fps.

    (AVI)

    S9 Video. Motility of brain ventricle cilia from Dnah9+/+ mice shown in Fig 6F.

    Motility of brain ventricle ependymal cilia was recorded at 200 frames per second (fps) and playing video speed is 20 fps.

    (AVI)

    S10 Video. Motility of brain ventricle cilia from Dnah9-/- mice shown in Fig 6F.

    Motility of brain ventricle ependymal cilia was recorded at 200 frames per second (fps) and playing video speed is 20 fps.

    (AVI)

    S11 Video. Motility of sperm from Dnah9+/+ mice.

    Motility of sperm was recorded at 200 frames per second (fps) and playing video speed is 20 fps.

    (AVI)

    S12 Video. Motility of sperm from Dnah9-/- mice.

    Motility of sperm was recorded at 200 frames per second (fps) and playing video speed is 20 fps.

    (AVI)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: PGenetics-D-20-00551.pdf

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLoS Genetics are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES