Since 2007, more than 200 LBSL cases have been reported globally, with patients presenting varied ages of onset and disease severities. Little progress has been made towards the understanding of LBSL’s pathogenic mechanism and mouse models cannot recapitulate the exact nature of LBSL mutations limiting their utility. As embryonic brain tissue is of course inaccessible, hCOs provide an unprecedented way to investigate neurodevelopment and related disorders. Compared to pure neuronal populations produced in 2D culture, the sophisticated 3D structures of hCOs recapitulate vital cytoarchitectures of the developing brain, such as interactive dynamics of multiple cell lineages and complex neural circuits. Broadly, current methodologies for induction of hCOs from hPSCs can be classified into two categories: unguided methods that are dependent on self-organization and development of hPSCs under proper culture conditions [16, 17], and guided methods that utilize small molecules and growth factors to produce brain region-specific organoids [25–28]. Early oligodendrocyte progenitor cells (OPCs) are generated from ventral forebrain and migrate to dorsal forebrain, so oligodendroglial lineages were only identified in Quadrato’s unguided hCOs [29] after long-term culture but absent in most early-stage unguided hCOs [30]. In our study, we adopted Madhavan’s protocol, in which OPCs and myelinating oligodendrocytes (OLs) are induced by means of timed exposure to PDGF-AA, IGF1 and T3 [31]; with this method, however, myelinating OLs are mostly along the edges of hCOs (Fig. 2D), perhaps due to limited penetration [31, 32]. SMART-seq2, as a low-throughput method unfortunately has no advantage in detecting non-mainstream cell types, and consequently OLs and astrocytes were absent from our dataset of 70-day-old hCOs which is a weakness of this study.
The major technical hurdle of organoid models is the insufficient diffusion of oxygen and nutrients to the innermost regions of hCOs, creating a necrotic core over long-term culture. These organoid systems show a preferential expression of genes related to glycolysis and ER stress and cell stress might compromise the subtype specification of cell types [30, 33]. Similarly, we identified a cluster of cells with glycolytic signature (cluster 3, UPRCs), which were also reported as a neuronal subset in hCO models from other labs [23, 34]. However, Tanaka’s synthetic analyses of published scRNA-seq data of hCOs generated by multiple labs via different protocols showed there was no enrichment of genes involved in the given neuropsychiatric or related disorders, indicating the current organoid systems are applicable in modeling these disorders [30, 35, 36].
Transgenic mouse models with Dars2 or Wars2 gene deletion prompt that loss of mitochondrial aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases (mt-aaRSs) could cause impairment of mitochondrial protein synthesis and disruption of protein homeostasis, leading to activation of integrated stress response (ISR) [13, 37]. During cell stress, stress granules (SGs), composed of a series of RNA binding proteins (RBPs), translation initiation factors, 40S ribosomal subunits and mRNA, assemble to cope with the crisis by arresting global translation and regulating mRNA expression - thus affecting cell signaling and apoptosis [38–40]. When cell stress lasts for a long duration, SGs are retained in the cytoplasm, leading to dysregulation of RBP components. Our scRNA-seq data also revealed upregulation of cell stress and apoptosis related genes and downregulation of RBP genes in Group 1 (MIS) LBSL cells, where at least one missense mutation is present. The cell stress phenotype of Group 2 (SPLICE) LBSL cells was milder, and genes involved in oxidative phosphorylation, translation, and RBPs were upregulated, which could be compensatory. To date, there is no consistent evidence of major losses in enzyme activity or of structural perturbations caused by DARS2 missense mutations. Additionally, the splice site mutations in introns 2 and 5 are “leaky” so full-length transcripts and functional proteins can be produced in LBSL patients. Furthermore, no correlation was found between disease severity and residual enzyme activity of mt-AspRS from LBSL patient lymphoblasts [1]. Housekeeping aminoacylation seems not to be the major target of these mutations, pointing to the possibility that mt-AspRS moonlights in the cells by performing non-canonical functions such as angiogenesis, immune response, tumorigenesis or neurodevelopment, as has been reported for several other aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases [41, 42]. Therefore, the possibility that mt-AspRS is directly involved into the regulation of RBPs cannot be ruled out.
For neuronal cells with cellular polarity, RBPs participant in transporting mRNA to axon terminals for local protein synthesis, which plays a crucial role in neuronal differentiation and function. Our study found that genes involved in CNS development and neuronal differentiation were downregulated in both LBSL groups, and we followed up by examining these processes in iPSC-derived neurons using live and long-term cell imaging, only to uncover growth deficits in LBSL neurons. Importantly, oligodendroglial differentiation and myelin formation are highly dependent on neuron-derived growth factors, neuronal firing activity and physical contact between neuronal and oligodendroglial cells, thus growth deficits within neurons can lead to secondary white matter lesions [43].
mRNA metabolism and splicing are found to be dysregulated within a growing number of neurological disorders [38, 44, 45], and although altered within LBSL cells compared to control, their precise role in disease pathogenesis is unclear. To further investigate, we expanded our analyses to transcript-level changes, which are overlooked by DGE analysis, and identified pervasive DTU events in LBSL cells, most of which did not overlap with DEGs. The variance between gene expression and transcript usage may result from antagonistic expression changes in multiple transcripts of one gene which cancels out the net change of gene expression, or that DTU event only occurs in lowly-expressed transcripts [46]. There is an emerging perspective that compared to gene-level changes, transcript-level alterations provide a more specific disease signature [47]. Although LBSL MIS and SPLICE cells present a rather different picture of dysregulated genes, the consequences at the transcript level are more converged, which involve protein translation and metabolism, cell stress and axonal differentiation.
The ISR can be activated by four kinases (PERK, GCN2, PKR and HRI) to maintain protein homeostasis when cells encounter stresses such as mitochondrial dysfunction, oxidative stress, unfolded protein response and nutrition deprivation. The above four kinases inhibit the eukaryotic translation initiation factor eIF2B by phosphorylating eIF2α to inhibit global protein translation while inducing expression of ATF4 and DDIT3. As a result, ISR activation has extensive downstream effects on the expression of genes related to biosynthesis, aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases, translation factors and proapoptosis [48, 49]. Long-term activation of the ISR has been associated with various neurological disorders. In our study, gene-level analysis found a number of upregulated genes related to cell stress and apoptosis (including DDIT3) in LBSL cells, but it failed to detect the expression changes of ISR kinase genes. DTU analysis, however, found both MIS and SPLICE LBSL cells had abnormal transcript usage of EIF2AK1. Looking more closely, LBSL cells showed a higher transcript usage of the protein-coding transcript (EIF2AK1-201) than control cells, whereas, controls cells had higher usage of the nonsense mediated decay transcript (EIF2AK1-203). Overall, this may suggest increased EIF2AK1 protein (HRI kinase) in LBSL cells and activation of the ISR. Of note, DTU analyses also detected a series of DTU events belonging to translation initiation and elongation factors (EIF3C, EIF3E, EIF3F, EIF3I, EIF3L, EIF4A2, EIF4B, EIF4E, EIF4H, EEF1B2, EEF1D and EEF2), as well as genes of proteosome family (PSMA3, PSMA4, PSMB3, PSMC4, PSMD6, PSME2 and PDMG2) in LBSL cells. DTU events in LBSL may have important implications on protein function as switching between protein-coding and non-coding transcripts may affect protein totals, and switching among protein-coding transcripts may change the ratio of multiple protein isoforms with different biological functions and/or subcellular localizations. Increasing evidence supports dysfunctional protein translation and metabolism to contribute at least in part to several neurodevelopmental and neurodegenerative disorders.
Transcript-level quantifications are done by imputation from short-read sequencing data indexed by existing genomic annotations. Consequently, DTU analysis is hindered by incomplete annotations and by the nature of short-read sequencing. To better understand transcript expression within our samples, we performed alternative splicing analysis on cassette exons. With BRIE2, DARS2 (exon 3) was identified as one of the DSEs associated with LBSL, a finding verified by PCR and RT-qPCR which show that exon 3 exclusion was significantly increased in LBSL cells. In these experiments, transcripts lacking exon 3 became predominant after iPSCs differentiated into iNs, a finding consistent with the observed downregulation of DARS2 protein western blots. These data suggest DARS2 is highly expressed in stem cells and plays a more important role during differentiation, which may explain the embryonic lethality of complete Dars2 knock-out mice.
Although it is well accepted that splice site mutations within intron 2 of DARS2 are “leaky”, we revealed, for the first time, that at the single-cell level, some LBSL cells only expressed transcripts lacking exon 3 (PSI = 0), indicating that not all LBSL cells were capable of the “leaky” full length production of DARS2. We also demonstrated that the rather common c.492 + 2T > C mutation could cause exon 5 skipping, and that this mutation is also leaky, resulting in some degree of full-length transcripts. Based on our findings at the time point examined, even in LBSL patients with the same mutations, the dominant DARS2 transcripts and final DARS2 protein level expressed in cells may be random, resulting in phenotype differences among cells and individuals.