Loss of LIN-35 results in enhanced RNAi
The loss of function phenotypes generated by RNAi, like those generated by classic genetics, are highly dependent on the genetic background - many genes have very different RNAi phenotypes in a wild-type worms from those seen in animals mutant for a specific gene. Such genetic interactions can provide insight into how genes are organised into pathways. To begin to map out genetic interactions in the signal transduction and transcriptional networks that underpin
C. elegans development, we used RNAi to individually target approximately 1,700 genes and compare the phenotypes generated in wild-type animals with the phenotypes in each of about 40 mutant strains; each strain carries a mutation in a key signalling component or chromatin regulator (B.L, C.C, J.T, A.F and A.G.F, manuscript submitted). The approximately 1,700 genes targeted encode the great majority of genes involved in signal transduction and transcriptional regulation, as annotated in Kamath
et al. [
4] (Additional data file 1). During this screening, we noticed that the RNAi phenotypes of many genes that had weak phenotypes in wild-type animals were greatly enhanced in the strain
lin-35(n745); this carries a putative null mutation in the
p105Rb ortholog,
lin-35 [
8]. In this strain, the sterility and/or embryonic lethality of approximately 30% of all genes that had a weak phenotype in wild-type worms were enhanced (78 genes; Additional data file 2). Furthermore, 35 genes that had no detectable phenotype in wild-type worms had strong phenotypes in
lin-35 mutants (Additional data file 2). In particular, many RNAi clones that result in partial F1 embryonic lethality in wild-type worms have complete P0 sterility or growth arrest in
lin-35(n745) worms, suggesting a more rapid and complete inhibition of gene expression in the absence of
lin-35 function.
The difference in RNAi phenotype for any gene that we observe in lin-35(n745) compared with wild-type could formally result either from an increase in RNAi sensitivity in the mutant or through some more complex genetic interactions (for example, through genetic buffering between lin-35 and a target gene). We believe the principal effect is through an increase in RNAi sensitivity for four reasons.
First, for genes that have a nonviable RNAi phenotype in lin-35(n745), the genetic null allele is also always nonviable, when known (35 genes) (Additional data file 3), suggesting that the stronger phenotype represents a near-null state.
Second, for genes whose genetic nulls are viable but have distinct postembryonic phenotypes (for example, uncoordinated, dumpy), we also detect enhanced similar postembryonic phenotypes by RNAi (Table ); this group of genes includes genes that affect the neuronal system, which is largely refractory to RNAi in wild-type animals [
4].
| Table 1Enhanced post-embryonic RNAi phenotypes observed in lin-35(n745) worms |
Thirdly, we tested whether inactivation of
lin-35 increases gene silencing resulting from expression of an endogenously transcribed dsRNA. To do this, we took advantage of a system in which worms express GFP exclusively in the hypodermal seam cells, along with a dsRNA targeting the green fluorescent protein (GFP) mRNA [
9]. In wild-type animals, where RNAi works with normal efficiency, there is a low level of GFP fluorescence in the seam cells due to targeting by the co-expressed dsRNA (54% of worms have GFP expression visible in their midbody seam cells; Figure , Table ). If RNAi is used to target genes required for RNAi, however, this reduces GFP knock-down, and there is an observed increase in GFP levels (for example, for
rde-4, 67% of worms have GFP expression visible in their midbody seam cells; Figure , Table ); conversely, targeting genes whose loss increases RNAi efficiency results in a further reduction of GFP expression (for example, for
eri-1, 13% of worms have GFP expression visible in their midbody seam cells; Figure , Table ;
p < 0.001, Chi squared test). We found that targeting
lin-35 causes a strong enhancement of GFP silencing in the seam cells (1% of worms have GFP expression visible in their midbody seam cells; Figure , Table ;
p < 0.001). When combined with the enhanced RNAi phenotypes described above, this result is consistent with a model in which inactivation of
lin-35 enhances the efficiency of RNAi. In addition, since in this system the dsRNA is expressed in the same cells in which the targeting occurs, we conclude that inactivation of
lin-35 must enhance the cellular process of RNAi-induced gene silencing, rather than just altering the uptake or systemic transport of dsRNA. Taken together, these results indicate that mutations in
lin-35 cause an increase in the effectiveness of RNAi and that this results in stronger and more penetrant RNAi phenotypes for many genes, making
lin-35(n745) an invaluable research tool. We note that similar findings were reported by the Ruvkun lab while this manuscript was in preparation [
10].
| Table 2RNAi induced silencing of lin-35 or lin-15B enhances the dsRNA-induced silencing of a GFP transgene |
Finally, although inactivation of LIN-35 results in RNAi hypersensitivity, it is possible that some of the genes with an enhanced phenotype in
lin-35(n745) animals could represent genetic interactions between
lin-35 and a target gene via a mechanism that is independent of the RNAi hypersensitivity of this strain. To directly identify these genes, we took advantage of a strain carrying a mutation in a
lin-35 pathway gene that does not show an increased sensitivity to RNAi. In both mammals and worms, LIN-35/Rb proteins are proposed to function by directly binding E2F family proteins [
11,
12]. The strain
efl-1(se1) [
13] carries a weakloss-of-function mutation in the worm E2F family gene
efl-1, which is known to function with
lin-35 in regulating cell-cycle progression [
14], as well as development of the vulva [
12] and pharynx [
15].
efl-1(se1) animals do not show an increased sensitivity to RNAi, as judged by testing genes with an enhanced RNAi phenotype in
rrf-3(pk1426) animals, or by inhibiting expression of
efl-1 in the RNAi reporter strain GR1401. Thus, to identify genes that interact genetically with the
lin-35 pathway, we tested whether genes that have an enhanced RNAi phenotype in
lin-35(n745) animals, but not in
rrf-3(pk1426) animals, also had enhanced RNAi phenotypes in
efl-1(se1) animals (Additional data file 2). We found three genes that fulfilled these criteria (Table ). The first of these genes is
pha-1, which has previously been identified as genetically interacting with
lin-35 and
efl-1 [
15], so validating the success of our approach. The other two genes represent novel
lin-35 pathway genetic interaction partners:
dpy-22 is predicted to encode a component of the mediator complex that, like LIN-35 and EFL-1, probably also functions in chromatin remodelling [
16], and
Y106G6E.6 encodes a Casein Kinase I family member. Intriguingly, targeting
Y106G6E.6 by RNAi results in abnormalities in early embryonic polarity (C Panbianco and J Ahringer, personal communication); strong reduction of
efl-1 function has previously been shown to affect embryonic polarity [
13]. EFL-1 affects embryonic polarity at least in part through regulation of MAP kinase activity in the oocyte [
13] and our data thus suggest that LIN-35, EFL-1, and Y106G6E.6 cooperate in some way to regulate MAPK activity in the
C. elegans oocyte. There is no previously published functional association between p105Rb, E2F and a CKI family member and this underlies the strength of genetic interaction mapping as a way to reveal gene function.
| Table 3Identification of genes that genetically interact with the lin-35 pathway |
lin-35 animals are more sensitive to RNAi than previously described RNAi hypersensitive strains
We compared the RNAi sensitivity of animals carrying strong loss-of-function mutations in the two previously described genes that are known to negatively regulate RNAi in
C. elegans,
rrf-3 or
eri-1, to that of
lin-35(n745) animals.
rrf-3(pk1426)[
5] and
eri-1(mg366)[
6] enhanced the RNAi phenotypes of 70 and 69 of 1,749 genes tested, respectively, compared to 113 genes enhanced by
lin-35(n745) (Figure ; Additional data file 2). Every gene displaying an increased phenotype with
rrf-3(pk1426) or
eri-1(mg366) also has an increased RNAi phenotype with
lin-35(n745). In addition, many genes that have enhanced RNAi phenotypes in
rrf-3(pk1426) or
eri-1(mg366) have even stronger phenotypes in
lin-35(n745).
Although the RNAi clones that we tested in each of the four strains represented a functionally biased set of genes, we also found very similar results when using random RNAi clones targeting genes with many diverse functions. In addition to the approximately 1,800 RNAi clones originally screened, we also screened the first 682 RNAi clones targeting genes on C. elegans chromosome III. These genes have very diverse molecular functions (Additional data file 4) and we found that 42 of these clones also had RNAi phenotypes that were stronger in lin-35(n745) than in rrf-3(pk1426) worms (Additional data file 5). In addition, it is not just the number of genes with enhanced RNAi phenotypes that is greater in lin-35 than in the other strains; the strengths of the RNAi phenotypes are also enhanced. For example, 11 of the genes we tested from chromosome III had an RNAi phenotype in rrf-3 worms that was further enhanced in lin-35 worms (Additional data file 5).
These results show that
lin-35(n745) worms are more sensitive to RNAi than any previously described single mutant strain and are an ideal strain for new RNAi-based screens. This is a key finding - merely finding another hypersensitive strain is not a particularly useful research tool unless it is an improvement on the previously identified strains. Our ranking of the three strains is based on the use of a large set of test genes, and thus our conclusion is robust and not a curiosity of a few atypical RNAi phenotypes. We note, however, that Wang
et al. [
10] also provide evidence that a
lin-35(n745); eri-1(mg366) double mutant strain may display a further enhancement in RNAi sensitivity to
lin-35(n745), suggesting that these two genes may partially function in parallel.
lin-35(n745) animals display increased sensitivity to RNAi in the nervous system
For unknown reasons, many neuronally expressed genes appear largely refractory to RNAi in wild-type worms, precluding reverse genetic analyses [
4]. We generated strong phenotypes for several neuronally expressed genes in
lin-35(n745) animals (Table ), suggesting RNAi-based screens for neuronal functions might be feasible in this strain. To test further for enhanced RNAi sensitivity in the nervous system of
lin-35(n745) animals, we focused on genes expressed in the six touch receptor neurons of
C. elegans. These neurons sense gentle touch to the body, and several mechanosensory abnormal (
mec) genes have been identified that are needed for their development or function [
17,
18]. Although RNAi has been detected in these neurons when dsRNA is injected into animals [
19], it is not seen when dsRNA is delivered by feeding in wild-type animals (AC, C Keller, and MC, unpublished data), rendering high-throughput RNAi screens impractical.
We tested the touch sensitivity of wild-type and
lin-35(n745) animals fed on bacteria targeting eight
mec genes (
mec-2,
mec-3,
mec-4,
mec-8,
mec-9,
mec-10,
mec-12 and
mec-18) and two unrelated genes (
gfp and
sym-1). In wild-type worms, none of the bacterial strains caused touch insensitivity - that is, the Mec phenotype - either in adults that had fed on the bacteria throughout their entire larval development or in their progeny (n > 30 for each). Thus, if bacterial-mediated RNAi is having an effect in the touch neurons of wild-type animals, the effect is too small to generate a detectable phenotype. In contrast, in parallel experiments,
lin-35 adults that had been fed with bacteria targeting
mec-2,
mec-3,
mec-4,
mec-9 and
mec-18 throughout their larval development were touch insensitive, although the animals displayed the Mec phenotype with differences in penetrance and expressivity. Penetrance ranged from 47% (
mec-9) to 83% (
mec-2). Bacteria expressing
mec-
2,
mec-3, and
mec-
4 dsRNA consistently gave a highly penetrant phenotype with strong expressivity (that is, the animals had a touch insensitivity similar to animals with null alleles). Bacteria making dsRNA for
mec-12 produced a highly penetrant phenotype (63%) with intermediate strength (the animals responded to a few touches).
mec-18 bacteria produced less consistent but easily detectable results; in some experiments the penetrance was high (60%) and expressivity strong, whereas in others the penetrance was lower (45%) and the expressivity intermediate. Bacteria producing
mec-9 dsRNA gave the weakest positive results with penetrance of 47% and intermediate expressivity. These weaker effects seen with
mec-9,
mec-12 and
mec-18 may be a consequence of the high expression of these genes in the touch neurons [
20], which might overwhelm the RNAi machinery. Animals fed on bacteria targeting
mec-8 or
mec-10 were indistinguishable from those fed on bacteria for the
gfp and
sym-1 controls. Although negative RNAi results are difficult to interpret, genetic experiments [
18] indicate that the amount of
mec-8 activity produced in the embryo is sufficient for subsequent adult touch sensitivity, and elimination of
mec-10 has only a slight effect on touch sensitivity (R O'Hagan, M Goodman, and MC, unpublished data).
These data indicate that neuronally expressed genes are effectively targeted by bacterial-mediated RNAi in the lin-35(n745) strain, thus providing a very useful tool to study gene function in these cells. These results also point to the expression and function of lin-35 in post-mitotic neurons.
A subset of synMuv B genes negatively regulate RNAi and somatic transgene silencing
In addition to demonstrating the usefulness of the
lin-35(n745) strain for generating enhanced RNAi phenotypes, we wished to explore the connection between
lin-35 and RNAi.
lin-35 encodes the
C. elegans ortholog of the human tumour suppressor gene
p105Rb and is, therefore, presumed to act as a chromatin regulator. Thus, while
rrf-3 and
eri-1 encode proteins that are intimately connected with dsRNA synthesis and turnover, no clear mechanistic link is known between
lin-35 and RNAi, making the connection between chromatin remodelling and RNAi an intriguing question.
lin-35 functions in the synthetic Multivulva (synMuv) B pathway that is redundantly required with the synMuv A pathway to antagonise the outcome of Ras signalling in the specification of vulval cell lineages [
8]. Although some synMuv genes are of unknown molecular function, several synMuv B genes encode the worm orthologs of components of p105Rb transcriptional repressor complexes identified in mammals and flies [
11,
21-
23]. If the chromatin remodelling function of LIN-35 is important for its effect on RNAi, one would anticipate that strains carrying mutations in othersynMuv B genes would also be hypersensitive to RNAi. To test the RNAi sensitivity of synMuv strains, we used the subset of bacterial feeding clones that gave an enhanced RNAi phenotype in
rrf-3(pk1426) animals. We tested these clones for enhanced RNAi phenotypes in each of the synMuv strains compared to in wild-type worms. We found that strains carrying inactivating mutations in the synMuv B genes
lin-15B (Figure , Table ),
dpl-1, and
lin-9 (Table ) also enhanced the RNAi phenotypes of the majority of these genes. In addition, Sieburth
et al. [
24] have shown that an
eri-1;
lin-15B double mutant is also hypersensitive to neuronal RNAi phenotypes. In contrast, strong loss-of-function mutations in two other synMuv B genes,
lin-36 and
tam-1, or the synMuv A gene
lin-15A did not enhance any RNAi phenotypes for these genes (Table ). We conclude that a subset of synMuv B genes negatively regulate RNAi, which we refer to as synMuv B(R) genes. Wang
et al.[
10] obtained similar results.
| Table 4A subset of synMuv B genes negatively regulate RNAi, somatic transgene silencing and expression of lag-2::gfp |
In addition to increasing sensitivity to RNAi, inactivation of the genes
rrf-3 or
eri-1 also results in the silencing of somatically expressed transgene tandem arrays via an RNAi-dependent mechanism [
9]. Consistent with their having roles as negative regulators of the RNAi pathway, inactivation of synMuv B(R) genes also results in somatic transgene silencing [
25] (data summarised in Tables and and Figure ). In contrast, inactivation of other synMuv B or synMuv A genes does not result in somatic transgene silencing [
25] (Table ). Somatic transgene silencing in animals with inactivated synMuv B(R) genes can be suppressed by inactivation of components of the RNAi machinery (Figure , Table ). Thus we conclude that inactivation of synMuv B(R) genes induces somatic transgene silencing as a result of an increase in RNAi. We also note, however, that mutations in at least one other synMuv B gene,
tam-1, can enhance somatic transgene silencing [
25], but without any observable effect on RNAi sensitivity (Table ). This suggests that other genes may be able to enhance transgene silencing independently of the RNAi pathway via an unknown mechanism. Indeed, we found that RNAi of
dcr-1 does not suppress transgene silencing in a strain carrying a mutation in
tam-1 (reduced transgene silencing was seen in 0 of >300
tam-1(cc567) [
25] animals tested (Additional data file 6)). The general picture is clear, however: the subset of synMuv B genes that affects RNAi sensitivity is very similar to the subset that alters transgene silencing, suggesting that these form a genetically distinct group of synMuv B genes.
| Table 5lin-35 and lin-15B enhance somatic transgene silencing by an RNAi dependent mechanism |
Additional evidence suggests this subclassification of synMuv B genes is functionally relevant. Inactivation of a subset of synMuv B genes results in ectopic expression of a
lag-2::gfp reporter gene [
26]. Strikingly, all of the synMuv B genes that we found to be negative regulators of the RNAi pathway and negative regulators of somatic transgene silencing also negatively regulate
lag-2::gfp expression [
26] (Table ). This result suggests a similar synMuv B(R) pathway may regulate both the RNAi pathway and correct expression of this transgene, and supports the classification of synMuv B genes into at least two distinct functional subsets.
An increase in RNAi efficiency does not cause the lineage defects of synMuv B mutants
The precise molecular functions of the synMuv B(R) genes and of mes-4 and zfp-1 in vulva development and in RNAi are unknown; however many of these genes are predicted by sequence homology to regulate chromatin structure. One intriguing possibility is that a key function of the synMuv B(R) genes during vulva development may be to repress RNAi. The Muv phenotype might thus be due in part to alterations in RNAi-related processes. We investigated this in two complementary ways. Firstly, if the sole effect of synMuv B(R) genes on vulval development was through their effect on RNAi sensitivity, then other genes that similarly increase RNAi sensitivity should act as synMuv B genes. However, while targeting lin-35 by RNAi produces a strong Muv phenotype in a lin-15A mutant animal (as expected given its synMuv B activity), targeting eri-1 has no similar effect. Secondly, inactivation of the synMuv B(R) genes enhances RNAi and in the absence of synMuv A activity leads to multivulval development; to determine if these two functions were causally related, we asked whether inactivation of other genes that are essential for RNAi (rde-1, rde-4, rde-5, mut-7 or mut-16) suppresses the Muv phenotype of lin-15A;B(n765) - they do not. Hence, we find that genes that enhance RNAi do not all act as synMuv B genes and, conversely, that the RNAi machinery is not necessary for the synMuv phenotype. Thus, alterations in the efficacy of RNAi cannot alone account for the action of lin-35 in vulval development, although it may contribute to lin-35's role.
Wang
et al. [
10] suggest that the enhanced RNAi seen in synMuv B mutants may result from the misexpression of germline genes in somatic cells. Although this may contribute to the enhanced somatic RNAi seen in synMuv B strains, we found that
lin-35(n745) animals also showed enhanced germline RNAi phenotypes (>50 genes gave strong sterility in
lin-35(n745) but not in wild-type worms) (Additional data file 2). Although some of these sterile phenotypes may result from defects in somatic cells, a subset of these genes has been previously shown to function within the germline itself. In
C. elegans, the Notch and MAP kinase pathways are both required within the germline for correct germline development [
29,
30], and we found that four genes that function in these pathways also show strongly enhanced RNAi-induced sterility in
lin-35(n745) worms (the genes
glp-1,
lag-1,
let-60 and
lin-45; Additional data file 3). Since the enhanced sterility seen with these genes must result from enhanced gene silencing within the germline itself, these data demonstrate that RNAi is also enhanced in the germline of
lin-35(n745) worms, and that somatic misexpression of germline genes does not alone account for the enhanced RNAi seen in synMuv B mutants. We favour a model in which the synMuv B(R) genes and
mes-4/zfp-1 act antagonistically to regulate the expression of a common set of target genes. These targets could include genes that are required for vulval development and genes required for RNAi, or the genes targeted by RNAi themselves. The antagonism may involve the direct repression of
mes-4 and
zfp-1 by the synMuv B(R) genes, or the antagonistic action of
mes-4/zfp-1 and the synMuv B(R) genes on a common set of target genes (Figure ). Alternatively, MES-4/ZFP-1 and the synMuv B(R) gene products may antagonise each other's functions by competing for a common set of co-factors.