Skip to main content
bioRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search
New Results

Connexinplexity: The spatial and temporal expression of connexin genes during vertebrate organogenesis

View ORCID ProfileRachel M. Lukowicz-Bedford, View ORCID ProfileDylan R. Farnsworth, View ORCID ProfileAdam C. Miller
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.11.19.469275
Rachel M. Lukowicz-Bedford
Institute of Neuroscience, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Rachel M. Lukowicz-Bedford
Dylan R. Farnsworth
Institute of Neuroscience, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Dylan R. Farnsworth
Adam C. Miller
Institute of Neuroscience, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Adam C. Miller
  • For correspondence: acmiller@uoregon.edu
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Supplementary material
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Animal development requires coordinated communication between cells. The Connexin family of proteins is a major contributor to intercellular communication in vertebrates by forming gap junction channels that facilitate the movement of ions, small molecules, and metabolites between cells. Additionally, individual hemichannels can provide a conduit to the extracellular space for paracrine and autocrine signaling. Connexin-mediated communication is well appreciated in epithelial, neural, and vascular development and homeostasis, and most tissues likely use this form of communication. In fact, Connexin disruptions are of major clinical significance contributing to disorders developing from all major germ layers. Despite the fact that Connexins serve as an essential mode of cellular communication, the temporal and cell-type specific expression patterns of connexin genes remain unknown in vertebrates. A major challenge is the large and complex connexin gene family. To overcome this barrier, we probed the expression of all connexins in zebrafish using single-cell RNA-sequencing of entire animals across several stages of organogenesis. Our analysis of expression patterns has revealed that few connexins are broadly expressed, but rather, most are expressed in tissue- or cell-type-specific patterns. Additionally, most tissues possess a unique combinatorial signature of connexin expression with dynamic temporal changes across the organism, tissue, and cell. Our analysis has identified new patterns for well-known connexins and assigned spatial and temporal expression to genes with no-existing information. We provide a field guide relating zebrafish and human connexin genes as a critical step towards understanding how Connexins contribute to cellular communication and development throughout vertebrate organogenesis.

Introduction

Animal development and homeostasis requires coordinated cellular communication. One method mediating communication are gap junction (GJ) channels. GJs are intercellular channels that provide a direct path of low resistance for ionic and small molecule exchange between cells1. These channels are formed by the coupling of two apposed hemi-channels each contributed by adjacent communicating cells1–3. Additionally, hemi-channels can work independently within a single cell’s membrane, where they can release small molecules such as ATP and glutamate into the extracellular space for paracrine and autocrine signaling2,3. The proteins that create GJ channels are evolutionarily unrelated in vertebrates and invertebrates4. Yet despite little sequence similarity5, the vertebrate Connexins and the invertebrate Innexin proteins have similar structure, with both classes creating four-pass, transmembrane-domain proteins that oligomerize to form each hemichannel within the plasma membrane4. Moreover, the hemi-channels and intercellular GJs created by Connexins and Innexins have similar structure and function4. Outside of these traditional roles, Connexins can also modulate the formation of tunneling nanotubes, that connect non-adjacent cells to facilitate longer distance communication6–8. These varied functions in cellular communication are likely utilized individually and in combination in all animal tissues9, yet are best studied in epithelial10, neural11, and vascular12 systems. In these systems, mutations in human Connexin-encoding genes have been linked to defects in the development, regulation, and function including skin disorders13–16, cataracts17,18, deafness19–21, cardiovascular disease22–24, and gastrointestinal diseases25–27. While Connexin channels serve as an essential form of cellular communication, the temporal and cell-type specific expression patterns of connexin genes largely remain unknown.

A major challenge in characterizing connexin expression is the complexity of the gene family. In humans, there are 20 distinct connexin genes, and in other vertebrate lineages the number of Connexin-encoding genes is similarly large and varies widely28–30. Cell culture and in vitro work suggests that connexin complexity provides functional diversity governed by four general principles: first, hemichannels are created by hexamers of individual Connexin proteins31; second, single or multiple Connexin proteins can contribute to hemichannel formation (homo- or heteromeric hemichannels, respectively)32–34; third, gap junctions form intercellular channels via hemichannel docking at cell-cell junctions; fourth, each contributed hemichannel can contain the same or different Connexin proteins (homo- or heterotypic channels, respectively)32–34. The combinatorial possibilities of the gene family are restrained by molecular engagement rules that limit which Connexins are compatible to form mixed channels34–37. These diverse possibilities culminate in each hemichannel having its own unique permeability properties, dependent upon the pore-lining amino acids and channel gating properties of the individual Connexins37,38. These rules suggest animals might take advantage of Connexin-based complexity in vivo to generate unique functional outcomes, but given the large number of genes, we know little about how vertebrates deploy this gene family.

Most of our knowledge of connexin expression in vivo comes from only a handful of well-characterized genes. These examples support the idea that connexins can be expressed in distinct tissues, such as in mouse where gap junction a1/Connexin 43 (Gja1/CX43) is expressed extensively in non-neuronal cells, including epithelia39, heart24,40, and glia41. By contrast, Gjd2/CX36 is found almost exclusively in neurons42. Within the same tissue, connexin expression can have distinct temporal patterns, such as Gjb2/CX26 and Gjb1/CX32 that are both found in the developing mouse neocortex at distinct developmental time points43. Within the group of well-studied Connexins, there are also a few enticing examples that suggest the rules of Connexin functional complexity found in vitro are relevant to in vivo function. For example, heteromeric channels formed by Gjb1/CX32 and Gjb2/CX26 are found in the mammary gland and the composition of channels changed during development44. Heterotypic gap junctions composed of gjd2a/Cx35.5 and gjd1a/Cx34.1 are found at electrical synapses of zebrafish Mauthner cells where each Connexin was required for the localization of the other in the adjacent cell and both were necessary for synaptic transmission45,46. Finally, replacing the coding region of Gja1/CX43 with either Gja5/CX40 or Gjb1/CX32 results in sterility, cardiac malformations and arrhythmias, and mothers unable to nourish their pups, suggesting that each Connexin has unique properties that contribute to cellular homeostasis that cannot be simply interchangeable with other Connexins 47. While these examples provide a glimpse of functional complexity, understanding the expression of this gene family through vertebrate development remains as the critical first step to decoding the complexity of connexin usage in vivo.

Here we set out to examine the expression of all connexins in a vertebrate model system, the developing zebrafish, using single-cell RNA-sequencing (scRNA-seq) of cells derived from the entire animal during organogenesis (1-5 days post-fertilization (dpf))48. Our analysis of connexin expression patterns revealed several trends, including that few connexins are broadly expressed, but rather, most connexins are spatially restricted to tissue- or cell-type-specific expression patterns. Most cells contain combinatorial signatures of connexins with unique profiles within distinct tissues. Finally, connexin expression is dynamic with temporal changes across the organism, tissue, and cell type. Our results reveal the complexity of spatiotemporal connexin control, highlighting novel aspects of well-studied connexins and revealing patterns for connexin genes with no prior expression information. We provide a field guide to relate zebrafish and human connexins genes, based on evolutionary homologies and expression similarities. Collectively, this represents an important step towards understanding connexin gene contributions in cellular communication throughout organogenesis and provides a foundation for comparative analysis in vertebrates.

Results

Zebrafish have 41 connexin genes

To understand connexin expression throughout organogenesis we first set out to ensure the entire connexin gene family in zebrafish was identified. Previous efforts28,49 and a recent phylogenetic approach to identify the full teleost connexin family30 captured 40 individual connexin genes. Through reciprocal BLAST analysis between the zebrafish genome and (1) human and (2) other teleost Connexin sequences, coupled with phylogenetic analysis, we identified the 40 previously noted connexins and one previously unreported connexin, gjz1, which is conserved in mammals but forms an outgroup with the rest of the Connexin proteins (Supp Fig. 1, 2).

Across the family of connexin genes there are seven human connexins for which zebrafish only has a single homolog, eight human connexins for which zebrafish has two homologs, two zebrafish connexins that have no direct homolog but share sequence similarity to human connexins, and sixteen zebrafish connexins that are not present in humans but are conserved in other teleost and mammalian lineages30. We summarize these relationships in Table 1, listing zebrafish connexin genes and their closest relationship with their human counterparts, providing known human and zebrafish expression patterns and phenotypes for comparison. For clarity, we denote connexins by their Greek name and by their predicted molecular weight, a naming structure consistent with HUGO50 and ZFIN standards51 (Table 1, Supp. Table 1). The table is organized to emphasize Connexin similarities based on evolutionary homology, protein sequence, and expression, in alphabetical order of zebrafish connexin genes and denotes human similarity across merged rows. There are a limited number of rows where the zebrafish connexin gene resembles its human counterpart(s), but the genes are not direct homologs. For example, the human GJB2/GJB6 genes are duplicated in the human lineage while having only a single similar gene in zebrafish called gjb830. Despite not being direct homologs, expression and mutant analyses have found that zebrafish gjb8 and human GJB2/GJB6 genes are all involved in inner-ear support cell function and loss of these genes in their respective systems causes deafness20,52,53. The comprehensive list of 41 zebrafish connexin genes provided a basis to examine the expression patterns of this gene family.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

A field guide to zebrafish connexins.

The connexin gene family is broadly expressed, but spatially distinct

Next, we examined the spatio-temporal expression patterns of the zebrafish connexin genes through organogenesis using scRNA-seq. We used our recent scRNA-seq atlas dataset in which cells were dissociated from whole embryos at 1, 2, and 5 days post fertilization (dpf), and resultant single-cell expression profiles were captured using the 10X platform48. In our initial analysis of the data, we found that many of the connexin genes lacked expression information. An examination of the connexin gene models generated by Ensembl (GRCz11_93) that were used for mapping single cell reads revealed that most annotations were truncated at or near the end of the protein coding sequence, with most lacking 3’UTRs leading to a failure in capturing the 3’-biased 10X sequencing information (Supp. Fig. 3). To amend this, we used a recently updated gene annotation file that extends gene models100, evaluated and updated each connexin gene model in reference to bulk RNA-seq data101, and imported the Greek gene names. Using this updated gene annotation file, we processed the scRNA-seq data using Cellranger102 and evaluated clustering and transcriptional profiles with Seurat103. Analysis of the updated scRNA-seq dataset captures transcriptional profiles that appear to represent all major tissues of the developing zebrafish (Fig. 1Ai, Aii) and contains 49,367 cells and 238 clusters. This is 5,355 more cells and 18 more clusters than the original analysis48, as expected due to the richer transcriptional information captured from the updated gene model100. In our original analysis, we extensively annotated each cluster, assigning the most likely anatomical annotation based on comparing the differentially expressed genes for each cluster to RNA in situ patterns48. We transferred these previous annotations to our updated analysis by identifying cell-specific barcodes from the original dataset, identifying them in the updated clusters, and transferring the cluster annotations (Fig. 1Ai, Aii; Supp. Table 1,2). As a result, we identified all 220 original clusters48 and annotated the remaining clusters by analyzing RNA in situ expression information for the most differentially expressed genes (Supp. Table 3). The updated scRNA-seq dataset greatly improves the capture of connexin expression throughout the atlas (Supp. Fig. 3), allowing us to examine their spatio-temporal expression pattern during zebrafish organogenesis.

Figure 1:
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
Figure 1:

scRNA-seq dataset of zebrafish organogenesis and connexin expression. (Ai) Clustered cell types, where each dot represents a single cell and each color represents a set of transcriptionally related cells. (Aii) The age of animals from which cells were dissociated denoted by color – 1 days post fertilization (dpf) cells are blue, 2dpf cells are orange, and 5dpf cells yellow. (Bi-Biii) Expression of well-studied connexins in the dataset, where grey represents low expression and red represents the highest level of expression. (Bi) gjc4b/Cx43.4 is expressed broadly across the dataset. (Bii) gja1b/Cx43 is expressed in a large number of clusters, with notable patterns in liver, endothelial, macrophage, neural crest, spleen, retina, kidney, epiphysis, osteoblast, mesoderm, tailbud, pigment cells and lens clusters. (Biii) gja8b/Cx44.1 is expressed in lens clusters. (Ci) Broadly expressed connexins, gja1b/Cx43 and gjc4b/Cx43.4 and (Cii) the remaining connexin family shown for each sampled time point. Here, all cells from the cooresponding age are pooled and the percent of cells expressing a given connnexin are represented through dot size while the relative expression level is denoted through color intensity.

Using the updated scRNA-seq organogenesis dataset, we examined the expression of each connexin related to its clusters, its correlation with marker gene expression, and with cluster annotations (Supp. Fig. 4A-OO, Supp. Table 4). Overall, connexin genes had a variety of expression patterns, varying from nearly ubiquitous to cluster-specific and showing a variety of temporal profiles, including constant expression over time or temporal specificity (Fig. 1B,C, Supp. Fig.4 A-OO). To begin to evaluate the dataset’s utility, we first turned our attention to several well-studied connexin genes. First, gjc4b/Cx43.4 displayed the broadest expression, with particularly high levels in the nervous system, and with diminishing expression from 1 to 5 dpf (Fig. 1Bi, Ci; Supp. Fig. 5; Supp. Table 4). This is similar to expression reports for gjc4b/Cx43.4 that used RNA in situ and transgenic methods104–106. gja1b/Cx43 is another well-described connexin, with broad expression in the cardiovascular system, non-neuronal cells of the retina and central nervous system, mesenchymal cells such as chondrocytes, and within the digestive system including the pancreas62,107–110. We find that expression of gja1b/Cx43 within the updated clusters largely matches these reported expression patterns (Fig.1 Bii; Supp. Fig.4B; Supp. Table 4). We also find expected patterns for connexins that have well-known, spatially-restricted expression. For example, gja8b/Cx44.1 is expressed almost exclusively in the early developing lens111–114, and in the scRNA-seq dataset we find expression of gja8b/Cx44.1 within clusters with transcriptional profiles consistent with lens cells (Fig. 1Biii; Supp. Figure 5; Supp. Table 4). Further, we find gja2/Cx39.9 expression in presumptive skeletal muscle cells, gjd6/Cx36.7 specifically in presumptive cardiac muscle, and both gja9b/Cx52.9 and gja10b/Cx52.6 in presumptive horizontal cells, all well-matching published reports on the expression of these genes64,99,111,114,115 (Supp. Figure 5; Supp. Table 4). Taken together, we conclude that the data represented in the updated dataset provides a useful resource for determining the spatio-temporal patterns of connexin expression during zebrafish organogenesis.

connexins exhibit complex and combinatorial patterns of expression

To examine the relationship of connexin gene expression relative to one another, we organized the scRNA-seq clusters by their tissue annotations and plotted both expression levels and percentage of cells within each cluster (Fig. 2). When arranged in this fashion, the complexity of connexin expression within putative tissues and cell types is revealed. In particular, unique combinatorial patterns of connexins are observed within tissues developing from all germ layers. For example, within neural clusters (ectoderm), we find that there are four broadly expressed connexins, yet each displays bias to either the retina, gjd1b/Cx34.7 and gjd2b/Cx35.1, or central nervous system, gjd1a/Cx34.1 and gjd2a/Cx35.5 (Fig. 2; Supp. Figure 4 AF-AI; Supp. Table 4). Within the the skeletal muscle clusters (mesoderm), a unique set of connexins are expressed and display a nested hierarchy of expression, with gja2/Cx39.9 in all skeletal muscle clusters, gja5a/Cx45.6 and gjd4/Cx46.8 are restricted to slow muscle clusters, and gje1b/Cx20.3 is restricted to fast muscle clusters (Fig. 2; Supp Fig. 4C, JJ, F, NN). We also observed temporally complex patterns of expression. For example, within presumptive intestinal epithelial cells (endoderm), we find that gjc4b/Cx43.4 expression diminishes from 1 to 5 dpf, while gja13.1/Cx32.3 begins expression at 2 dpf and continues at 5 dpf and gja12.1/Cx28.9 becomes co-expressed at 5 dpf (Fig. 2; Supp. Fig. 4Q, O, Supp. Fig. 6). Finally, we observed that primordial germ cells (PGC) express several different connexins, including gja9a/Cx55.5, gjb8/Cx30.3, gjc4b/Cx43.4, and gjd1b/Cx34.7 (Fig. 2; Supp. Figure 4W, J, GG, EE, Supp. Fig. 7). These observations highlight aspects of the complexity of connexin spatial and temporal expression patterns within and across tissues and cell types during zebrafish organogenesis.

Figure 2:
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
Figure 2:

connexin expression during zebrafish organogenesis. Clusters are organized by annotations and grouped into tissues and germ layers, denoted on the y-axis. Along the x-axis, connexins are arranged based on spatial expression patterns. Each dot represents a single cluster. The percent of cells expressing a given connnexin are represented through dot size while the relative expression level is denoted through color intensity. Diff. Neuron = Differentiating Neuron, Oligo = Oligodendrocyte, Phar. Endoderm = Pharyngeal Endoderm, Arch = Pharyngeal Arch, PGC = Primordial Germ Cell

Cell-type specific expression of connexins in the integument in vivo

To validate that the connexin expression identified in the updated atlas related to in vivo tissues and cell types, we examined the integument, or the embryonic skin, as it represented one of the most striking trends of combinatorial expression (Fig. 2). Throughout zebrafish organogenesis, the integument is composed of distinct cellular populations including the periderm (the outermost epidermal layer), the basal cells (a keratinocyte stem cell population), the ionocytes (epithelial cells that maintain osmotic homeostasis), and the pigment cells (neural crest derived cells that provide pigmentation)116,117. These individual cell populations are molecularly identifiable using distinct markers including ppl (periderm)104,109, tp63 (basal cells)118, foxi3a (ionocytes)119, and sox10 (pigment cells)116,120 (Fig. 3; Supp. Fig. 8). We used these canonical markers in conjunction with our annotations (Supp. Fig. 8; Supp. Table 2) to identify clusters that represent all four cell types of the integument (Fig. 3Ai). We identified all connexins that are significantly expressed within these presumptive integument clusters (Fig. 3; Supp. Fig. 8). We found that gjb3/Cx35.4, gjb8/Cx30.3, gjb10/Cx34.4, and gjc4b/Cx43.4 are expressed broadly across these clusters (Fig. 3Aii). We then looked for connexins enriched in subsets of clusters and found unique and specific patterns of expression. Within periderm clusters, we discovered gjb9a/Cx28.6, which has not previously been documented in the skin (Fig. 3Aiii). Within the presumptive neural crest derived pigment clusters, we found gja4/Cx39.4 and gja5b/Cx41.8, which are both known to contribute to adult zebrafish skin patterns49,71 (Fig. 3Aiv). Within ionocyte clusters, we identified novel expression for two connexins, gjb7/Cx28.8 and gjb9b/Cx30.9 (Fig. 3Av). Finally, within presumptive basal cell clusters, we found novel expression for two connexins, gjc4a.1/Cx44.2 and gjc4a.2/Cx44.5 (Fig. 3Avi). These results suggest the integument uses a complex set of connexins throughout organogenesis.

Figure 3:
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
Figure 3:

connexin expression in the zebrafish integument during organogenesis. (Ai) The developing integument includes periderm, pigment cells, ionocytes and basal cells. Relevent integument clusters were subsetted from the scRNA-seq dataset. Inset shows the age of animals from which cells were dissociated. (Aii) Four connexins are broadly expressed in integument clusters, gjb3/Cx35.4, gjb8/Cx30.3, gjb10/Cx34.4, and gjc4b/Cx43.4. Grey represents low expression and red represents the highest level of expression. (Aiii) Periderm marker ppl and gjb9a/Cx28.6 are expressed in clusters 40-46. (Aiv) Neural crest derived pigment cell marker sox10 and gja4/Cx39.4 are expressed in clusters 52-57, while gja5b/Cx41.8 is only expressed in clusters 54 and 56. (Av) Ionocyte marker foxi3a and gjb7/Cx28.8 are expressed in clusters 38, 39, 47, 48. (Avi) Basal cell marker tp63 and gjc4a.1/Cx44.2 are expressed in clusters 23, 25-32, 51, 222-224, while gjc4a.2/Cx44.5 is only expressed in clusters 25-29. (Bi) Fluorescent RNA in situ for gjb8/Cx30.3 in a transverse cross section of a 1 dpf zebrafish embryo, contrast is inverted for clarity. Dorsal is up, section is from the trunk. Strong expression of gjb8/Cx30.3 in neural crest cells is denoted with arrow and weaker, but distinct, periderm expression is denoted with arrowhead. (Bii) Within the pigment cell clusters the melanocyte marker dct is expressed in clusters 56 and 57, whereas xanthophore marker aox5 is primarly expressed in clusters 52 and 53. gjb8/Cx30.3 is predominantly expressed in clusters 52 and 53. (Biii) Transverse cross section of a 1 dpf zebrafish embryo stained with DAPI (blue) and fluorescent RNA in situ against aox5 (cyan) and gjb8/Cx30.3 (white), with white box denoting the zoomed panels at the right. Scale bar = 10 uM. (Biv) Expression of ppl and gjb8/Cx30.3 within the periderm clusters. (Bv) Transverse cross section of a 1 dpf zebrafish embryo stained with DAPI (blue) and fluorescent RNA in situ against ppl (purple) and gjb8/Cx30.3 (white) with white box denoting the zoomed panels at the right. (Ci) Within the ionocyte clusters the Na+,K+-ATPase-rich cell and H+-ATPase-rich cell markers atp1b1b and atp6v1aa, respectively, are expressed in conjunction with low expression of gjb7/Cx28.8. (Cii) Fluorescent RNA in situ in a 1dpf zebrafish embryo against atp1b1b (yellow), gjb7/Cx28.8 (white), with merged signal (right). atp1b1b expressing cells are outlined with a dashed yellow line, and gjb7/Cx28.8 signal outside of those cells are marked with yellow arowhead. Scale bar = 10 uM. (Ciii) Fluorescent RNA in situ in a 1dpf zebrafish embryo against atp6v1aa (green), gjb7/Cx28.8 (white), with merged signal (right). atp6v1aa expressing cells are outlined with a dashed yellow line, and gjb7/Cx28.8 signal outside of those cells are marked with yellow arowhead. Scale bar = 10 uM.

We next examined a subset of the identified integument connexins in vivo. We first tested a broadly expressed connexin, gjb8/Cx30.3, to see if it was expressed in the pigment cells and periderm using fluorescent RNA in situ on 1 dpf embryos. Transverse cross sections through the trunk revealed prominent gjb8/Cx30.3 staining in dorsally located cells near the neural tube and additional dim staining was observed in a single layer of cells surrounding the entire embryo (Fig. 3Bi). We first confirmed gjb8/Cx30.3’s expression in pigment cells by subsetting the five clusters that appear to represent pigment cells, including melanophores121,122 (dct+, clusters 56, 57, Fig. 3 Bii; Supp. Table 2) and xanthophores123 (aox5+, clusters 52, 53, Fig. 3 Bii; Supp. Table 2). We find that gjb8/Cx30.3 is highly expressed in only the presumptive xanthophore clusters (Fig. 3 Bii). We then performed fluorescent RNA in situ for aox5 and gjb8/Cx30.3 in a 1 dpf embryo and found robust co-localization of these transcripts, confirming that gjb8/Cx30.3 is expressed in xanthophore cells (Fig. 3Biii). We then examined gjb8/Cx30.3’s expression in the periderm through sub-setting the seven presumptive periderm clusters (ppl+, clusters 40-46, Supp. Table 2) and find expression of gjb8/Cx30.3 in all clusters (Fig. 3 Biv). Indeed, fluorescent RNA in situ for ppl and gjb8/Cx30.3 reveal robust co-localization of these transcripts in the outermost epithelial layer (Fig. 3Bv), confirming that gjb8/Cx30.3 is expressed in the developing periderm.

We next tested a connexin with more specific expression within the integument clusters, gjb7/Cx28.8, which has expression specific to the presumptive ionocytes (Fig. 3Av). Developing foxi3a+ ionocytes form Na+,K+-ATPase-rich (NaR) cells or H+-ATPase-rich (HR) cells, which are characterized by the expression of the specific ATPase genes atp1b1b and atp6v1aa, respectively119. First, we sub-setted all ionocyte clusters119 (foxi3a+, 38, 39, 47, 48) and found unique expression combinations of atp1b1b and atp6v1aa across clusters and low expression of gjb7/Cx28.8 in 3 of 4 clusters (Fig. 3Ci). Fluorescent RNA in situ revealed co-localization of gjb7/Cx28.8 with both atp1b1b (Fig. 3Cii) and atp6v1aa (Fig. 3Ciii), confirming that gjb7/Cx28.8 is expressed in ionocytes. Together, these data confirm the predictive power of the scRNA-seq dataset for connexin expression in the integument and support the utility of the dataset as a novel tool for discovery of investigating connexin complexity in vertebrate development.

Discussion

Here we reveal the details of connexin gene-family expression during zebrafish organogenesis showing that connexin usage is widespread yet displays gene-specific variations across tissue, cell type, and developmental time. The large gene family of connexins in zebrafish (41 genes) is expressed in complex patterns ranging from nearly ubiquitous to celltype specific, with unique combinatorial and nested expression sets restricted to individual tissues. Temporally, connexins display sustained, increasing, and diminishing expression profiles across development, dependent upon gene and tissue. Together, these data reveal the complexity of expression of this critical gene family in a model vertebrate and demonstrate that this critical form of communication is likely to be used by all tissues during organogenesis. These data provide a critical framework facilitating analysis of how these genes contribute to cellular communication in tissues developing from all germ layers, providing a basis to understand connexins in development and in modeling human disease.

We find that all cells express connexins, but each tissue expresses a unique combinations of the gene family with the composition of the expressed set evolves over developmental time. This spatiotemporal complexity of connexin family usage likely contributes to both functional redundancy within tissues as well as functional diversity. The many connexins expressed might allow for a myriad of combinatorial interactions amongst Connexin proteins, which could contribute to heteromeric hemichannels and heterotypic GJs. Importantly, Connexins can only interact with potential partners if they are expressed in the same cell or between interacting cells, thus the work here constrains the combinatorial problem of complex usage by revealing the details of the expression patterns through organogenesis. For example, gjd2a/Cx35.5 and gjd1a/Cx34.1 have been shown to form heterotypic GJs (unique Connexins on each side of the GJ) at electrical synapses of the Mauthner cell neural circuit45. The data here shows extensive overlapping expression of these two connexins throughout the central nervous system, suggesting complex hemi-channels and GJs could be common throughout the brain. Given that each Connexin-mediated hemichannel has its own unique set of compatibilities and permeability properties, this dataset provides a platform for future research to explore whether connexins expressed within the same tissue or cell type form functional channels, and how the molecular identity of these channels influences function.

This dataset presents as a powerful resource for zebrafish and connexin biology. We establish connexin expression in cells previously unknown to express connexins, such as the ionocytes of the skin. Within our dataset there are numerous other cell types with striking connexin expression patterns that have under-appreciated connexin usage inviting exploration, including macrophages (gja13.2/Cx32.2) and primordial germ cells (gja9a/Cx55.5, gjb8/Cx30.3, gjc4b/Cx43.4 and gjd1b/Cx34.7). Another strength of this dataset is the exploration of expression across multiple cell types, tissues, and timepoints simultaneously. For example, gja3/Cx46 has only been examined in the heart 65,66, yet, in our dataset we find robust gja3/Cx46 expression in both heart and lens clusters, which suggests an enticing link to human GJA3/CX46, in which mutations are associated with cataracts67–69. Finally, this dataset provides putative expression to many connexin genes that had no previous expression information (22/41 genes). For example, gjb1a/Cx27.5 and gjc2/Cx47.1 are both highly expressed in the Schwann cell cluster. While neither of these genes had previously known expression information, mutations of their human orthologs GJB1/CX32 and GJC2/CX47 contribute to neuropathy and myelin disorders86,93,94. The identification of tissues and cell type expression patterns for the entire gene family creates a basis to explore connexin related diseases in zebrafish and provide comparisons to human biology. Through exploring the connexin family expression across diverse cell types and tissues, we can begin to envision a holistic view of Connexins utilization and usage in cellular communication throughout organogenesis.

Methods

scRNA-seq

Embryo dissociation and cDNA library prep

As described by Farnsworth et al., 202048, larvae from the Tg(olig2:GFP)vu12 and Tg(elavl3:GCaMP6s) backgrounds were pooled (n=15 per replicate), with 2 replicates at each sampled timepoint (1, 2, 5dpf). Cells from entire larvae were dissociated using standard protocols. Dissociated cells were then run on a 10X Chromium platform using 10x v.2 chemistry aiming for 10,000 cells per run.

Alignment

To ensure that the full transcripts of the Connexin-encoding genes were represented in the dataset, we used gene models with lengthened 3’ UTRs across the zebrafish genome generated and validated by the Lawson Lab100. We ensured that the connexin genes were annotated properly by comparing pooled deep-sequencing information and extended the 3’ UTR regions as needed. Using this updated GTF file, we aligned reads to the zebrafish genome, GRCz11_93, using the 10X Cellranger pipeline (version 3.1).

Computational Analysis

Cells were analyzed using the Seurat (V3.1.5) software package for R (V4.1.0) using standard quality control, normalization, and analysis steps. We performed PCA using 115 PCs based on a Jack Straw-determined significance of P < 0.01. UMAP analysis was performed on the resulting 49,367 cells with 115 PC dimensions and a resolution of 15.0, which produced 238 clusters.

Cluster annotation

The unique barcode assigned to each cell was extracted from the original Farnsworth dataset48 and identified in our updated dataset. For each updated cluster, we analyzed the percentage of cells contributing which were associated with the original Farnsworth’s clusters. Frequently, we found the updated dataset contained clusters with a significant proportion of cells (>80%) from a single Farnsworth cluster, and in such we transferred the annotation from the original cluster to the updated cluster. We also found instances of a single Farnsworth cluster breaking nearly evenly across two of the updated clusters – for example, the original dataset had a single ‘photoreceptor’ cluster (cluster 115), whereas the updated data had two clusters (clusters 13, 14) with cells from original photoreceptor cluster. Further analysis revealed that these two new clusters represented likely rods and cones. Finally, we also found updated clusters that did not have a clear previous annotation. In these instances, we analyzed the most differentially expressed genes from that cluster and compared them with canonical markers.

Fluorescent RNA in-situ

Custom RNAscope probes to target connexin genes were designed and ordered through ACD (https://acdbio.com/). For the fluorescent in situs, we used a modified RNAscope protocol124. Briefly, 1 dpf embryos were fixed for 2 hours at room temp in 4% PFA and then stored in 100% methanol at −20C. The tissue was then exposed to protease plus for 30 min, washed with PBS with 1% Triton X (PBSTx), and then hybridized with the 1x probe overnight at 40C. Standard RNAscope V2 multiplex reagents and Opal fluorophores were used, with the modification that PBSTx which was used for all wash steps. Stained tissue was either mounted (whole mount) or immediately cryo-sectioned and mounted with ProLong Gold Antifade (ThermoFisher).

Zebrafish Husbandry

Fish were maintained by the University of Oregon Zebrafish Facility using standard husbandry techniques125. Embryos were collected from natural matings, staged, and pooled. Animals used in the original Farnsworth data were: Tg(olig2:GFP)vu12 and Tg(elavl3:GCaMP6s)48, and animals used for RNAscope in situs were ABC-WT. Animal use protocol AUP-18-35 was approved by the University of Oregon IACUC committee and animal work was overseen by Dr. Kathy Snell.

Data availability

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in the published article and its supplementary information files. Sequences used in this study were deposited to the NCBI SRA and can be found using the identifier PRJNA564810. Additional files, including the updated GTF and analysis, can be found at https://www.adammillerlab.com/.

Supplemental Figure Legends

Supplemental Figure 1: Phylogeny of human (hs) and zebrafish (dr) Connexin proteins.

Supplemental Figure 2: Protein similarities and phylogeny of the novel gjz1/Cx26.3. (A) Zebrafish (dr.) Gjz1/Cx26.3 aligned with the most similar human (hs.) Connexin protein, GJB3. The predicted intercellular portions (coral), transmembrane domains (green) and extracellular loops (blue) for GJB3 are denoted above the sequence. (B) Ensembl-generated phylogenetic tree of gjz1/Cx26.3 (si:rp71-1c10.10 in red). Bony fishes are highlighted in pink, while lobed-fin lineages from coelacanth to mammals are in other colors. Protacanthopterygii and Euacanthomorphacea sub-trees are collapsed for visual purposes (grey triangle). Each related gene is represented on a node and colored based on Ensembl predications, including a gene node (white box), speciation nodes (dark blue box), duplication nodes (red box), and ambiguous nodes (teal box). Genomic sequence alignment similarity is denoted on the right with black boxes (representing 66-100% alignment), moderate sequence alignment is denoted on the right with green boxes (representing 33-66% sequence alignment) and gaps in alignments are denoted in white.

Supplemental Figure 3: Gene model updates to capture connexin expression. (A) Aligned sequencing view showing coverage pileups for scRNA-seq (1, 2, 5 dpf) and bulk RNA-seq, as well as bulk RNA-seq reads (grey boxes). The Ensembl GTF (light green) captures few reads associated with gjd4/Cx46.8. Extending the gene model (dark green) in the updated GTF captures these missed transcripts. (B) Comparisons between the Farnsworth et al., 2020 dataset and the updated dataset. (Bi) Farnsworth cluster 57 has robust expression of slow muscle marker smyhc2, but poor expression of gjd4/Cx46.8. In the updated dataset, the related cluster 4 has similar expression of slow muscle marker smyhc2 but a significant increase of gjd4/Cx46.8 representation (right). (Bii) Farnsworth cluster 205 has robust expression of cardiac muscle marker myl17 and gjd6/Cx36.7. The corresponding cluster in the updated dataset did not significantly alter either of these expression patterns (right). (Biii) Farnsworth cluster 173 has low expression of Schwann Cell marker, mbpa, as well as gjb1a/Cx27.5. The corresponding cluster in the updated dataset captures robust expression for both mbpa and gjb1a/Cx27.5.

Supplemental Figure 4: connexin expression throughout the atlas. Note that this figure extends across 41 pages, one for each connexin gene, labeled A-OO. Expression of each connexin is plotted on the scRNAseq atlas and visualized through color intensity on UMAP plots and by violin plots for each gene and cluster.

Supplemental Figure 5: Tissue and cell type markers with corresponding connexin expression. (Ai) Central nervous system clusters express snap25a and pcna, and gjc4b/Cx43.4. (Aii) Lens clusters (193, 112 and 237) express lens markers crybb1 and crybab2, and gja8b/Cx44.1. (Aiii) Skeletal muscle clusters express slow muscle marker smyhc1 (4, 5, 234), fast muscle marker myhz2 (7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 233), and gja2/Cx39.9. (Aiv) Cardiac muscle cluster 233 expresses markers nppa and myl17, and gjd6/Cx36.7. (Av) Retinal horizonal neurons, cluster 203, express marker mdka and gja9b/Cx52.9 and gja10b/Cx52.6.

Supplemental Figure 6: Temporal expression patterns of connexins within the intestine. (Ai) Intestinal clusters (3, 60, 67, 140) selected for expression of canonical markers cldnc, fabp2, and foxa3. (Aii) These clusters display an evolution of connexin expression at different developmental time points. gjc4b/Cx43.4 (left) is expressed at 1 and 2 dpf, gja13.1/Cx23.3 is expressed at 2 and 5 dpf, and gja12.1/Cx28.9 is expressed at 5 dpf.

Supplemental Figure 7: Primordial germ cells express several connexins. Putative primordial germ cell (PGC) cluster (128) expressing PGC markers like ddx4 and nanos3, in addition to connexins including gja9a/Cx55.5, gjb8/Cx30.3, gjc4b/Cx43.4, and gjd1b/Cx34.7.

Supplemental Figure 8: connexin expression in the integument. Clusters classified into cell types are grouped and labelled accordingly. (Ai) gjb3/Cx35.4, gjb8/Cx30.3, gjb10/Cx34.4, and gjc4b/Cx43.4 are all expressed broadly through the integument clusters. (Aii) ppl, krt4, and evpla are expressed highly in periderm clusters, with gjb9a/Cx28.6 being primarily expressed in periderm clusters. (Aiii) sox10 and aox5 expression identifying pigment cell clusters with gja4/Cx39.4 and gja5b/Cx41.8. (Aiv) foxi3a expression identifying ionocyte clusters with gjb7/Cx28.8 and gjb9b/Cx30.9. (Av) tp63 expression identifying basal cell clusters with gjc4a.1/Cx44.2 and gjc4a.2/Cx44.5.

Supplemental Table 1: The zebrafish connexin family.

Supplemental Table 2: Transferring Farnsworth et. al, 2020 cluster annotations to the updated dataset. Updated cluster number (Column A) and the corresponding Farnsworth cluster (Column B). The count of cells from the Farnsworth cluster that ended in the corresponding updated cluster (Column C), and the proportion of cells from a given Farnsworth cluster that contribute to the updated cluster (Column D, E). Total cell counts are colored in blue and bolded. All previous Farnsworth annotations were transferred over (columns H-AE), and update cluster markers are included in orange. The most significant Farnsworth cluster contributor is denoted in black font.

Supplemental Table 3: List of differentially expressed genes for each cluster. (Sheet1) For each cluster (Column A), annotations at germ layer, tissue, cell type, and subtype (Columns B – E) level are listed. For each cluster, the top 16 most differentially expressed genes are listed (Column F - U). (Sheet 2) All differentially expressed genes for each updated cluster, generated using the FindAllMarkers command of Seurat, using the Wilcoxon rank sum test. Pct.1 (Column D) and Pct.2 (Column E) reflect the fraction of cells expressing each marker gene (Boolean) within each cluster and for all other cells, respectively.

Supplemental Table 4: The proportion of cells within each cluster that express each connexin.

Supplemental Table 5: All reagents used for fluorescent RNA in-situ and other immunohistochemistry in this study.

Acknowledgments

We thank the entire Miller Lab ongoing support, comments, and discussions on this manuscript. We thank Clay Small for discussions and expertise in regards to data handling, statistics, and annotation transfer from the original to updated atlas. We thank the University of Oregon AqACS facility for superb animal care. We thank the ZFIN team, and Svein-Ole Mikalsen, for communication regarding the connexin gene names. This work was supported by the NIH National Institute of General Medical Sciences, Genetics Training Grant T32GM007413 to R.M.L., and the NIH Office of the Director R24OD026591 and the NIH National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke R01NS105758 to A.C.M.

References

  1. 1.↵
    Evans, W. H. et al. Gap junctions : structure and function (Review) Gap junctions : structure and function (Review). 7688, (2009).
  2. 2.↵
    Xing, L., Yang, T., Cui, S. & Chen, G. Connexin Hemichannels in Astrocytes : Role in CNS Disorders. 12, 1–10 (2019).
    OpenUrl
  3. 3.↵
    Orellana, J. A., Martinez, A. D. & Retamal, M. A. Gap junction channels and hemichannels in the CNS: regulation by signaling molecules. Neuropharmacology 75, 567–582 (2013).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  4. 4.↵
    Beyer, E. C. & Berthoud, V. M. Gap junction gene and protein families: Connexins, innexins, and pannexins. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Biomembranes 1860, 5–8 (2018).
    OpenUrl
  5. 5.↵
    Alexopoulos, H. et al. Evolution of gap junctions : the missing link? Current Biology 14, 879–880 (2004).
    OpenUrl
  6. 6.↵
    Tishchenko, A., Azor, D. D. & Vidal-brime, L. Cx43 and Associated Cell Signaling Pathways. Cancers 1–25 (2020).
  7. 7.
    Okafo, G., Prevedel, L. & Eugenin, E. Tunneling nanotubes (TNT) mediate long-range gap junctional communication : Implications for HIV cell to cell spread. Scientific Reports 1–9 (2017) doi:10.1038/s41598-017-16600-1.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  8. 8.↵
    Soares, A. R. et al. Gap junctional protein Cx43 is involved in the communication between extracellular vesicles and mammalian cells. Nature Publishing Group 1–14 (2015) doi:10.1038/srep13243.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  9. 9.↵
    Oyamada, M., Oyamada, Y. & Takamatsu, T. Regulation of connexin expression. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 1719, 6–23 (2005).
    OpenUrlPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    Chanson, M., Watanabe, M. & Martin, P. E. Connexin Communication Compartments and Wound Repair in Epithelial Tissue. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 19, 1–19 (2018).
    OpenUrl
  11. 11.↵
    Rozental, R. Gap junctions in the nervous system. Brain Researach Reviews 32, 11–15 (2000).
    OpenUrl
  12. 12.↵
    Figueroa, X. F. & Duling, B. R. Gap Junctions in the Control of Vascular Function. ANTIOXIDANTS & REDOX SIGNALING 11, (2009).
  13. 13.↵
    Richard, G. Connexin disorders of the skin. Clinics in Dermatology 23, 23–32 (2005).
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  14. 14.
    Richard, G. et al. Missense Mutations in GJB2 Encoding Connexin-26 Cause the Ectodermal Dysplasia Keratitis-Ichthyosis-Deafness Syndrome. The American Journal of Human Genetics 70, 1341–1348 (2002).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  15. 15.
    Richard, G. et al. Mutations in the human connexin gene GJB3 cause erythrokeratodermia variabilis. Nature Genetics 20, 366–369 (1998).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  16. 16.↵
    Richard, G. et al. The spectrum of mutations in erythrokeratodermias--novel and de novo mutations in GJB3. Human genetics 106, 321–329 (2000).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  17. 17.↵
    Willoughby, C. E. et al. A novel &lt;em&gt;GJA8&lt;/em&gt; mutation in an Iranian family with progressive autosomal dominant congenital nuclear cataract. Journal of Medical Genetics 40, e124 LP–e124 (2003).
    OpenUrl
  18. 18.↵
    Wei, C., Xu, X. & Lo, C. W. Connexins and Cell Signaling in Development and Disease. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol 20, 811–38 (2004).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  19. 19.↵
    Kelsell, D. P. et al. Connexin 26 mutations in hereditary non-syndromic sensorineural deafness. Nature 387, 80–83 (1997).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  20. 20.↵
    Grifa, A. et al. Mutations in GJB6 cause nonsyndromic autosomal dominant deafness at DFNA3 locus. Nature Genetics 23, 16–18 (1999).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  21. 21.↵
    Xia., J. et al. Mutations in the gene encoding gap junction protein β-3 associated with autosomal dominant hearing impairment. Nature Genetics 20, 370–373 (1998).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  22. 22.↵
    Jongsma, H. J. & Wilders, R. Gap Junctions in Cardiovascular Disease. 1193–1197 (2000).
  23. 23.
    Yeh, H.-I., Chou, Y., Liu, H.-F., Chang, S.-C. & Tsai, C.-H. Connexin37 gene polymorphism and coronary artery disease in Taiwan. International Journal of Cardiology 81, 251–255 (2001).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  24. 24.↵
    Li, W. E. I. et al. An essential role for connexin43 gap junctions in mouse coronary artery development. Development (Cambridge, England) 129, 2031–2042 (2002).
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  25. 25.↵
    Maes, M., Cogliati, B., Crespo Yanguas, S., Willebrords, J. & Vinken, M. Roles of connexins and pannexins in digestive homeostasis. Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS 72, 2809–2821 (2015).
    OpenUrl
  26. 26.
    Maes, M., Crespo Yanguas, S., Willebrords, J., Cogliati, B. & Vinken, M. Connexin and pannexin signaling in gastrointestinal and liver disease. Translational research : the journal of laboratory and clinical medicine 166, 332–343 (2015).
    OpenUrl
  27. 27.↵
    Temme, A. et al. High incidence of spontaneous and chemically induced liver tumors in mice deficient for connexin32. Current Biology 7, 713–716 (1997).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  28. 28.↵
    Eastman, S. D., Chen, T. H. P., Falk, M. M., Mendelson, T. C. & Iovine, M. K. Phylogenetic analysis of three complete gap junction gene families reveals lineagespecific duplications and highly supported gene classes. Genomics 87, 265–274 (2006).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  29. 29.
    Mikalsen, S. Evolutionary selection pressure and family relationships among connexin genes a. 388, 253–264 (2007).
    OpenUrl
  30. 30.↵
    Mikalsen, S. & Tausen, M. Phylogeny of teleost connexins reveals highly inconsistent intra- and interspecies use of nomenclature and misassemblies in recent teleost chromosome assemblies. BMC Genomics 1–19 (2020).
  31. 31.↵
    Tarzemany, R., Jiang, G., Jiang, J. X., Larjava, H. & Häkkinen, L. Connexin 43 Hemichannels Regulate the Expression of Wound Healing-Associated Genes in Human Gingival Fibroblasts. Scientific Reports 7, 1–15 (2017).
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  32. 32.↵
    He, D. S., Jiang, J. X., Taffet, S. M. & Burt, J. M. Formation of heteromeric gap junction channels by connexins 40 and 43 in vascular smooth muscle cells. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 96, 6495 LP – 6500 (1999).
    OpenUrl
  33. 33.
    Brink, P. R. et al. Evidence for heteromeric gap junction channels formed from rat connexin43 and human connexin37. The American journal of physiology 273, C1386–96 (1997).
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  34. 34.↵
    Koval, M., Molina, S. A. & Burt, J. M. Mix and match: Investigating heteromeric and heterotypic gap junction channels in model systems and native tissues. FEBS Lett 588, 1193–1204 (2015).
    OpenUrl
  35. 35.
    Koval, M. Pathways and control of connexin oligomerization. Trends in cell biology 16, 159–166 (2006).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  36. 36.
    Bruzzone, R., Haefliger, J. A., Gimlich, R. L. & Paul, D. L. Connexin40, a component of gap junctions in vascular endothelium, is restricted in its ability to interact with other connexins. Molecular biology of the cell 4, 7–20 (1993).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  37. 37.↵
    C. Elfgang H. Lichtenberg-Frate, A. Butterweck, O. Traub, R. A. Klein, D. F. Hulser, and K. Willeck, R. E. et al. Specific permeability and selective formation of gap junction channels in connexin-transfected HeLa cells. Journal of Cell Biology 129, 805–817 (1995).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  38. 38.↵
    Weber, P. A., Chang, H. C., Spaeth, K. E., Nitsche, J. M. & Nicholson, B. J. The permeability of gap junction channels to probes of different size is dependent on connexin composition and permeant-pore affinities. Biophysical Journal 87, 958–973 (2004).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  39. 39.↵
    Grueterich, M., Espana, E. & Tseng, S. C. G. Connexin 43 expression and proliferation of human limbal epithelium on intact and denuded amniotic membrane. Investigative ophthalmology & visual science 43, 63–71 (2002).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  40. 40.↵
    Beardslee, M. A., Laing, J. G., Beyer, E. C. & Saffitz, J. E. Rapid turnover of connexin43 in the adult rat heart. Circulation research 83, 629–635 (1998).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  41. 41.↵
    Contreras, J. E. et al. Metabolic inhibition induces opening of unapposed connexin 43 gap junction hemichannels and reduces gap junctional communication in cortical astrocytes in culture. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 99, 495–500 (2002).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  42. 42.↵
    Srinivas, M. et al. Functional properties of channels formed by the neuronal gap junction protein connexin36. Journal of Neuroscience 19, 9848–55 (1999).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  43. 43.↵
    Nadarajah, B., Jones, A. M., Evans, W. H. & Parnavelas, J. G. Differential Expression of Connexins during Neocortical Development and Neuronal Circuit Formation. J. Neuroscience 17, 3096–3111 (1997).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  44. 44.↵
    Locke, D. et al. Developmental Expression and Assembly of Connexins Into Homomeric and Heteromeric Gap Junction Hemichannels in the Mouse Mammary Gland. 237, 228–237 (2000).
    OpenUrl
  45. 45.↵
    Miller, A. C. et al. A genetic basis for molecular asymmetry at vertebrate electrical synapses. eLife 6, (2017).
  46. 46.↵
    Lasseigne, A. M. et al. Electrical synaptic transmission requires a postsynaptic scaffolding protein. eLife 10, e66898 (2021).
    OpenUrl
  47. 47.↵
    Plum, A. et al. Unique and shared functions of different connexins in mice. Current Biology 10, 1083–1091 (2000).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  48. 48.↵
    Farnsworth, D. R., Saunders, L. M. & Miller, A. C. A single-cell transcriptome atlas for zebra fish development. Developmental Biology (2019) doi:10.1016/j.ydbio.2019.11.008.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  49. 49.↵
    Watanabe, M. Gap Junction in the Teleost Fish Lineage : Duplicated Connexins May Contribute to Skin Pattern Formation and Body Shape Determination. Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology 5, 1–8 (2017).
    OpenUrl
  50. 50.↵
    Bruford, E. A. et al. Guidelines for human gene nomenclature. Nature genetics 52, 754–758 (2020).
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  51. 51.↵
    Sprague, J., Doerry, E., Douglas, S. & Westerfield, M. The Zebrafish Information Network (ZFIN): a resource for genetic, genomic and developmental research. Nucleic acids research 29, 87–90 (2001).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  52. 52.↵
    Snoeckx, R. L. et al. GJB2 mutations and degree of hearing loss: a multicenter study. American journal of human genetics 77, 945–957 (2005).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  53. 53.↵
    Chang-Chien, J. et al. The connexin 30.3 of zebrafish homologue of human connexin 26 may play similar role in the inner ear. Hearing Research 313, 55–66 (2014).
    OpenUrl
  54. 54.
    Dasgupta, C. et al. Identification of connexin43 (α1) gap junction gene mutations in patients with hypoplastic left heart syndrome by denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE). Mutation Research/Fundamental and Molecular Mechanisms of Mutagenesis 479, 173–186 (2001).
    OpenUrl
  55. 55.
    Paznekas, W. A. et al. Connexin 43 (GJA1) Mutations Cause the Pleiotropic Phenotype of Oculodentodigital Dysplasia. The American Journal of Human Genetics 72, 408–418 (2003).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  56. 56.
    Paznekas, W. A. et al. GJA1 mutations, variants, and connexin 43 dysfunction as it relates to the oculodentodigital dysplasia phenotype. Human Mutation 30, 724–733 (2009).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  57. 57.
    Brice, G. et al. A novel mutation in GJA1 causing oculodentodigital syndrome and primary lymphoedema in a three generation family. Clinical Genetics 84, 378–381 (2013).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  58. 58.
    Hu, Y. et al. A Novel Autosomal Recessive GJA1 Missense Mutation Linked to Craniometaphyseal Dysplasia. PLOS ONE 8, e73576 (2013).
    OpenUrl
  59. 59.
    Haffter, P. et al. Mutations affecting pigmentation and shape of the adult zebrafish. Development Genes and Evolution 206, 260–276 (1996).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  60. 60.
    Henke, K. et al. Genetic Screen for Postembryonic Development in the Zebrafish (Danio rerio): Dominant Mutations Affecting Adult Form. Genetics 207, 609–623 (2017).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  61. 61.
    Misu, A. et al. Two Different Functions of Connexin43 Confer Two Different Bone Phenotypes in Zebrafish *. Journal of Biological Chemistry 291, 12601–12611 (2016).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  62. 62.↵
    Hoptak-solga, A. D. et al. Connexin43 (GJA1) is required in the population of dividing cells during fin regeneration. Developmental Biology 317, 541–548 (2008).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  63. 63.
    Zhang, J. et al. Wnt-PLC-IP3-Connexin-Ca2+ axis maintains ependymal motile cilia in zebrafish spinal cord. Nature Communications (2020) doi:10.1038/s41467-020-15248-2.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  64. 64.↵
    Hirata, H. et al. Connexin 39.9 protein is necessary for coordinated activation of slow-twitch muscle and normal behavior in zebrafish. Journal of Biological Chemistry 287, 1080–1089 (2012).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  65. 65.↵
    Chi, N. C. et al. Cardiac conduction is required to preserve cardiac chamber morphology. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107, 14662 LP – 14667 (2010).
    OpenUrl
  66. 66.↵
    Chi, N. C. et al. Genetic and Physiologic Dissection of the Vertebrate Cardiac Conduction System. PLOS Biology 6, e109 (2008).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  67. 67.↵
    Mackay, D. et al. Connexin46 Mutations in Autosomal Dominant Congenital Cataract. The American Journal of Human Genetics 64, 1357–1364 (1999).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  68. 68.
    Burdon, K. P. et al. A novel mutation in the Connexin 46 gene causes autosomal dominant congenital cataract with incomplete penetrance. Journal of Medical Genetics 41, e106 LP–e106 (2004).
    OpenUrl
  69. 69.↵
    Yao, K. et al. A novel GJA3 mutation associated with congenital nuclear pulverulent and posterior polar cataract in a chinese family. Human Mutation 32, 1367–1370 (2011).
    OpenUrlPubMed
  70. 70.
    Yang, Y.-Q. et al. Connexin40 nonsense mutation in familial atrial fibrillation. Int J Mol Med 26, 605–610 (2010).
    OpenUrlPubMed
  71. 71.↵
    Watanabe, M., Sawada, R., Aramaki, T., Skerrett, I. M. & Kondo, S. The Physiological Characterization of Connexin41.8 and Connexin39.4, Which Are Involved in the Striped Pattern Formation of Zebrafish *. The Journal of Biological Chemistry 291, 1053–1063 (2016).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  72. 72.
    Denis, J.-F. et al. KLF4-Induced Connexin40 Expression Contributes to Arterial Endothelial Quiescence. Frontiers in Physiology vol. 10 80 (2019).
    OpenUrl
  73. 73.
    Groenewegen, W. A. et al. A Cardiac Sodium Channel Mutation Cosegregates With a Rare Connexin40 Genotype in Familial Atrial Standstill. Circulation Research 92, 14–22 (2003).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  74. 74.
    Makita, N. et al. Congenital atrial standstill associated with coinheritance of a novel SCN5A mutation and connexin 40 polymorphisms. Heart Rhythm 2, 1128–1134 (2005).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  75. 75.
    Gollob, M. H. et al. Somatic Mutations in the Connexin 40 Gene (GJA5) in Atrial Fibrillation. New England Journal of Medicine 354, 2677–2688 (2006).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  76. 76.
    Wirka, R. C. et al. A Common Connexin-40 Gene Promoter Variant Affects Connexin-40 Expression in Human Atria and Is Associated With Atrial Fibrillation. Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology 4, 87–93 (2011).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  77. 77.
    Frohnhöfer, H. G. et al. Spermidine, but not spermine, is essential for pigment pattern formation in zebrafish. Biology Open 5, 736–744 (2016).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  78. 78.
    Berry, V. et al. Connexin 50 mutation in a family with congenital “zonular nuclear” pulverulent cataract of Pakistani origin. Human Genetics 105, 168–170 (1999).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  79. 79.
    Polyakov, A. V, Shagina, I. A., Khlebnikova, O. V & Evgrafov, O. V. Mutation in the connexin 50 gene (GJA8) in a Russian family with zonular pulverulent cataract. Clinical Genetics 60, 476–478 (2001).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  80. 80.
    Hansen, L. et al. Genetic Heterogeneity in Microcornea-Cataract: Five Novel Mutations in CRYAA, CRYGD, and GJA8. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science 48, 3937–3944 (2007).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  81. 81.
    Ping, X. et al. Rapamycin relieves the cataract caused by ablation of Gja8b through stimulating autophagy in zebrafish. Autophagy 1–15 (2021) doi:10.1080/15548627.2021.1872188.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  82. 82.
    Klaassen, L. J. et al. Synaptic Transmission from Horizontal Cells to Cones Is Impaired by Loss of Connexin Hemichannels. PLOS Biology 9, e1001107 (2011).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  83. 83.
    Ionasescu, V., Ionasescu, R. & Searby, C. Correlation between connexin 32 gene mutations and clinical phenotype in X-linked dominant Charcot-Marie-tooth neuropathy. American Journal of Medical Genetics 63, 486–491 (1996).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  84. 84.
    Bergoffen, J. et al. Connexin mutations in X-linked Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease. Science (New York, N.Y.) 262, 2039–2042 (1993).
    OpenUrl
  85. 85.
    Charlton-Perkins, M., Almeida, A. D., MacDonald, R. B. & Harris, W. A. Genetic control of cellular morphogenesis in Müller glia. Glia 67, 1401–1411 (2019).
    OpenUrl
  86. 86.↵
    López-Bigas, N. et al. Connexin 31 (GJB3) is expressed in the peripheral and auditory nerves and causes neuropathy and hearing impairment. Human Molecular Genetics 10, 947–952 (2001).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  87. 87.
    Willems, P. J. Genetic Causes of Hearing Loss. New England Journal of Medicine 342, 1101–1109 (2000).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  88. 88.
    Iossa, S., Marciano, E. & Franzé, A. GJB2 Gene Mutations in Syndromic Skin Diseases with Sensorineural Hearing Loss. Current genomics 12, 475–785 (2011).
    OpenUrl
  89. 89.
    del Castillo, I. et al. A Deletion Involving the Connexin 30 Gene in Nonsyndromic Hearing Impairment. New England Journal of Medicine 346, 243–249 (2002).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  90. 90.
    Lamartine, J. et al. Mutations in GJB6 cause hidrotic ectodermal dysplasia. Nature Genetics 26, 142–144 (2000).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  91. 91.
    Okamoto, R. et al. Gap junction protein beta 4 plays an important role in cardiac function in humans, rodents, and zebrafish. PLOS ONE 15, e0240129 (2020).
    OpenUrl
  92. 92.
    Macari, F. et al. Mutation in the Gene for Connexin 30.3 in a Family with Erythrokeratodermia Variabilis. The American Journal of Human Genetics 67, 1296–1301 (2000).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  93. 93.↵
    Uhlenberg, B. et al. Mutations in the Gene Encoding Gap Junction Protein α12 (Connexin 46.6) Cause Pelizaeus-Merzbacher–Like Disease. The American Journal of Human Genetics 75, 251–260 (2004).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  94. 94.↵
    Orthmann-Murphy, J. L., Enriquez, A. D., Abrams, C. K. & Scherer, S. S. Loss-of-function GJA12/Connexin47 mutations cause Pelizaeus–Merzbacher-like disease. Molecular and Cellular Neuroscience 34, 629–641 (2007).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  95. 95.
    Ferrell, R. E. et al. GJC2 Missense Mutations Cause Human Lymphedema. The American Journal of Human Genetics 86, 943–948 (2010).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  96. 96.
    Hatler, J. M., Essner, J. J. & Johnson, R. G. A gap junction connexin is required in the vertebrate left – right organizer. Developmental Biology 336, 183–191 (2009).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  97. 97.
    Wang, J. et al. Epilepsy-associated genes. Seizure 44, 11–20 (2017).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  98. 98.
    Quint, W. H. et al. Loss of Gap Junction Delta-2 (GJD2) gene orthologs leads to refractive error in zebrafish. Communications Biology 2, 1–14.
  99. 99.↵
    Sultana, N. et al. regulates myofibril orientation and heart morphogenesis by establishing Nkx2. 5 expression BIOLOGY. 105, (2008).
  100. 100.↵
    Lawson, N. D. et al. An improved zebrafish transcriptome annotation for sensitive and comprehensive detection of cell type-specific genes. 1–28 (2020).
  101. 101.↵
    Miller, A. C., Obholzer, N. D., Shah, A. N., Megason, S. G. & Moens, C. B. RNA-seq – based mapping and candidate identification of mutations from forward genetic screens. 679–686 (2013) doi:10.1101/gr.147322.112.23.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  102. 102.↵
    Zheng, G. X. Y. et al. Massively parallel digital transcriptional profiling of single cells. Nature Communications 8, 14049 (2017).
    OpenUrl
  103. 103.↵
    Satija, R., Farrell, J. A., Gennert, D., Schier, A. F. & Regev, A. A n a ly s i s Spatial reconstruction of single-cell gene expression data. 33, (2015).
  104. 104.↵
    Thisse, B., Pflumio, S., Fürthauer, M., Loppin, B., Heyer, V., Degrave, A., Woehl, R., Lux, A., Steffan, T., Charbonnier, X.Q. and Thisse, C. Expression of the zebrafish genome during embryogenesis. ZFIN Direct Data Submission : (Unpublished) (2001).
  105. 105.
    Baxendale, S. et al. Identification of compounds with anti-convulsant properties in a zebrafish model of epileptic seizures. Disease Models & Mechanisms 5, 773–784 (2012).
    OpenUrl
  106. 106.↵
    Wierson, W. A. et al. Efficient targeted integration directed by short homology in zebrafish and mammalian cells. eLife 9, e53968 (2020).
    OpenUrl
  107. 107.↵
    Iovine, M. K., Higgins, E. P., Hindes, A., Coblitz, B. & Johnson, S. L. Mutations in connexin43 (GJA1) perturb bone growth in zebrafish fins. Developmental Biology 278, 208–219 (2005).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  108. 108.
    Chatterjee, B. et al. Developmental Regulation and Expression of the Zebrafish Connexin43 Gene. Developmental Dynamics 233, 890–906 (2005).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  109. 109.↵
    Thisse, B., Thisse, C. Fast Release Clones: A High Throughput Expression Analysis. ZFIN Direct Data Submission : (Unpublished) (2004).
  110. 110.↵
    Yang, Y. H. C. et al. Innervation modulates the functional connectivity between pancreatic endocrine cells. bioRxiv 2020.11.04.368084 (2020) doi:10.1101/2020.11.04.368084.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  111. 111.↵
    Yoshikawa, S. et al. Zebrafish Connexin 79.8 (Gja8a): A Lens Connexin Used as an Electrical Synapse in Some Neurons. 8, 548–561 (2016).
    OpenUrl
  112. 112.
    Cason, N., White, T. W., Cheng, S. & Goodenough, D. A. Molecular Cloning, Expression Analysis, and Functional Characterization of Connexin44.1 : A Zebrafish Lens Gap Junction Protein. Developmental Dynamics 247, 238–247 (2001).
    OpenUrl
  113. 113.
    Thisse, C., and Thisse, B. High Throughput Expression Analysis of ZF-Models Consortium Clones. ZFIN Direct Data Submission : (Unpublished) (2005).
  114. 114.↵
    Farnsworth, D. R., Posner, M. & Miller, A. C. Single cell transcriptomics of the developing zebrafish lens and identification of putative controllers of lens development. Experimental Eye Research 206, 108535 (2021).
    OpenUrl
  115. 115.↵
    Greb, H. et al. An Alternative Splice Variant of Zebrafish Cx52.6 is Expressed in Retinal Horizontal Cells. Neuroscience 388, 191–202 (2018).
    OpenUrl
  116. 116.↵
    Eisenhoffer, G. T. et al. A toolbox to study epidermal cell types in zebrafish. Journal of cell science 130, 269–277 (2017).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  117. 117.↵
    Guellec, D. L. E., Morvan-dubois, G. & Sire, J. Skin development in bony fish with particular emphasis on collagen deposition in the dermis of the zebrafish (Danio rerio). 231, 217–231 (2004).
    OpenUrl
  118. 118.↵
    Lee, H. & Kimelman, D. A Dominant-Negative Form of p63 Is Required for Epidermal Proliferation in Zebrafish. Developmental Cell 2, 607–616 (2002).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  119. 119.↵
    Jänicke, M., Carney, T. J. & Hammerschmidt, M. Foxi3 transcription factors and Notch signaling control the formation of skin ionocytes from epidermal precursors of the zebrafish embryo. Developmental Biology 307, 258–271 (2007).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  120. 120.↵
    Budi, E. H., Patterson, L. B. & Parichy, D. M. Embryonic requirements for ErbB signaling in neural crest development and adult pigment pattern formation. Development 135, 2603–2614 (2008).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  121. 121.↵
    Kelsh, R. N., Schmid, B. & Eisen, J. S. Genetic Analysis of Melanophore Development in Zebrafish Embryos. Developmental Biology 225, 277–293 (2000).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  122. 122.↵
    Parichy, D. M., Ransom, D. G., Paw, B., Zon, L. I. & Johnson, S. L. An orthologue of the kit-related gene fms is required for development of neural crest-derived xanthophores and a subpopulation of adult melanocytes in the zebrafish, Danio rerio. Development (Cambridge, England) 127, 3031–3044 (2000).
    OpenUrlAbstract
  123. 123.↵
    Parichy, D. M. et al. An orthologue of the kit-related gene fms is required for development of neural crest-derived xanthophores and a subpopulation of adult melanocytes in the zebrafish, Danio rerio. Development 3044, 3031–3044 (2000).
    OpenUrl
  124. 124.↵
    Gross-Thebing, T., Paksa, A. & Raz, E. Simultaneous high-resolution detection of multiple transcripts combined with localization of proteins in whole-mount embryos. BMC biology 12, 55 (2014).
    OpenUrl
  125. 125.↵
    Westerfield, M. A Guide for the Laboratory Use of Zebrafish Danio (Brachydanio) rerio. (University of Oregon Press, 2000).
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted November 20, 2021.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about bioRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Connexinplexity: The spatial and temporal expression of connexin genes during vertebrate organogenesis
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from bioRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the bioRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Connexinplexity: The spatial and temporal expression of connexin genes during vertebrate organogenesis
Rachel M. Lukowicz-Bedford, Dylan R. Farnsworth, Adam C. Miller
bioRxiv 2021.11.19.469275; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.11.19.469275
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Connexinplexity: The spatial and temporal expression of connexin genes during vertebrate organogenesis
Rachel M. Lukowicz-Bedford, Dylan R. Farnsworth, Adam C. Miller
bioRxiv 2021.11.19.469275; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.11.19.469275

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Developmental Biology
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Animal Behavior and Cognition (4383)
  • Biochemistry (9599)
  • Bioengineering (7092)
  • Bioinformatics (24863)
  • Biophysics (12615)
  • Cancer Biology (9957)
  • Cell Biology (14354)
  • Clinical Trials (138)
  • Developmental Biology (7948)
  • Ecology (12107)
  • Epidemiology (2067)
  • Evolutionary Biology (15989)
  • Genetics (10925)
  • Genomics (14742)
  • Immunology (9869)
  • Microbiology (23675)
  • Molecular Biology (9485)
  • Neuroscience (50868)
  • Paleontology (369)
  • Pathology (1539)
  • Pharmacology and Toxicology (2683)
  • Physiology (4015)
  • Plant Biology (8657)
  • Scientific Communication and Education (1508)
  • Synthetic Biology (2397)
  • Systems Biology (6436)
  • Zoology (1346)