Edwards NA et al. (2025), Disrupted endosomal trafficking of the Vangl-Ce...

XB-ART-61390

Dev Cell 2025 May 21; doi: 10.1016/j.devcel.2025.04.026.

Show Gene links Show Anatomy links

Disrupted endosomal trafficking of the Vangl-Celsr polarity complex underlies congenital anomalies in Xenopus trachea-esophageal morphogenesis.

Edwards NA , Rankin SA , Kashyap A , Warren A , Agricola ZN , Kenny AP , Kofron M , Shen Y , Chung WK , Zorn AM .

???displayArticle.abstract???
Disruptions in foregut morphogenesis can result in life-threatening conditions where the trachea and esophagus fail to separate, such as esophageal atresia (EA) and tracheoesophageal fistulas (TEFs). The developmental basis of these congenital anomalies is poorly understood, but recent genome sequencing reveals that de novo variants in intracellular trafficking genes are enriched in EA/TEF patients. Here, we confirm that mutation of orthologous genes in Xenopus disrupts trachea-esophageal separation similar to EA/TEF patients. The Rab11a recycling endosome pathway is required to localize Vangl-Celsr polarity complexes at the luminal cell surface where opposite sides of the foregut tube fuse. Partial loss of endosomal trafficking or Vangl-Celsr complexes disrupts epithelial polarity and cell division orientation. Mutant cells accumulate at the fusion point, fail to relocalize cadherin, and do not separate into distinct trachea and esophagus. These data provide insights into the mechanisms of congenital anomalies and general paradigms of tissue fusion during organogenesis.

???displayArticle.pubmedLink??? 40412385
???displayArticle.link??? Dev Cell

Species referenced: Xenopus tropicalis Xenopus laevis
Genes referenced: abra add1 akap13 ap1g2 ap2m1 ap3d1 arhgap17 arhgap21 atp6v1b1 bfar ccdc42 cdh1 celsr1 celsr2 chmp7 cldn10 cltb cltc cog3 dnm2 foxf1 gas2l1 golga2 grip1 hgsnat irf8 itgb4 itpr1 itsn1 lamb4 nkx2-1 pard3 pcdh1 rab11a rab11b rab3gap2 rab5a rab7a rapgef3 rasa2 rasal2 rnf152 sox2 tecpr1 usp9x vangl1 vangl2 wdfy3 zdhhc8
GO keywords: recycling endosome
???displayArticle.antibodies??? Cdh1 Ab1 Foxf1 Ab1 H3f3a Ab2 Lama1 Ab1 Nkx2-1 Ab3 Pard3 Ab1 Rab5a Ab1 Sox2 Ab4 Tjp1 Ab1 Tuba4b Ab2 Vangl2 Ab4
Lines/Strains:

Xla.Tg(CMV:memGFP;cryga:mCherry)NXR Xtr.sox2emHorb

gRNAs referenced: abra gRNA1 add1 gRNA1 akap13 gRNA1 ap1g2 gRNA1 ap3d1 gRNA2 arhgap17 gRNA2 atp6v1b1 gRNA1 celsr1 gRNA1 celsr2 gRNA1 chmp7 gRNA1 cldn10 gRNA1 cog3 gRNA1 dnm2 gRNA1 golga2 gRNA1 itgb4 gRNA1 itpr1 gRNA1 itsn1 gRNA3 lamb4 gRNA1 pcdh1 gRNA1 rab11a gRNA1 rab3gap2 gRNA1 rab5a gRNA1 rab5a gRNA2 rapgef3 gRNA1 rasa2 gRNA1 rasal2 gRNA1 rnf152 gRNA1 slc45a2 gRNA1 sox2 gRNA1 tyr gRNA1 vangl2 gRNA1 wdfy3 gRNA1

???displayArticle.disOnts??? esophageal atresia/tracheoesophageal fistula [+]
???displayArticle.omims??? TRACHEOESOPHAGEAL FISTULA WITH OR WITHOUT ESOPHAGEAL ATRESIA

???attribute.lit??? ???displayArticles.show???

	Graphical Abstract
	Figure 1. Mutating EA/TEF patient endosomal trafficking genes causes TEDs in Xenopus (A) STRING database interactome of endosome-related proteins with potentially pathogenic variants identified in EA/TEF patients and a curated list of core endosome pathway proteins and putative protein cargo. (B) Experimental design of F0 CRISPR-Cas9 X. tropicalis mutagenesis screen to validate candidate risk genes. (C) Confocal images of CRISPR-Cas9 X. tropicalis F0 mutants at NF44 stained for Sox2 (green), Foxf1 (red), and Nkx2-1 (purple). Hashed yellow lines indicate the tracheal (t) and esophageal (e) lumens. Arrows indicate TEFs. Asterisks indicate dysmorphic or occluded esophagus or trachea. Numbers indicate the proportion of mutant tadpoles with TEFs compared with the total mutants screened. Scale bars are 50 μm. See also Figure S1 and Tables S1, S2, and S3.
	Figure 2. Dynamic endosome localization and epithelial remodeling during tracheoesophageal morphogenesis (A–B and I–J) Immunostaining of aPKC, laminin (Lama1), and Cdh1 dynamics in the Xenopus foregut during trachea-esophageal morphogenesis. Scale bars, 50 μm. (C–H and K–P) Immunostaining of Dnm2, Rab5a, and Rab11a in the Xenopus foregut during trachea-esophageal morphogenesis. Scale bar, 50 μm. Diagrams depict the temporospatial dynamics of Cdh1 and Rab11a subcellular localization during tracheoesophageal morphogenesis. (Q) Quantification of Rab11a immunostaining intensity during foregut fusion and separation (mean ± min/max, 2W-ANOVA, ∗∗∗∗p < 0.0001, n = 4–6 embryos analyzed). (R) Cdh1-Rab11a co-localization at the epithelial interface (mean Pearson co-localization coefficient ± SEM, ∗∗∗ p < 0.001, ∗∗∗∗ p < 0.0001 1W-ANOVA, n = 5–13 cells per embryo, N = 6–8 embryos per stage). (S) A model of how endosomal trafficking may mediate Cdh1 relocalization during epithelial fusion. See also Figure S2.
	Figure 3. Endocytosis of Cdh1 is required for trachea-esophageal separation (A) 3D cell-surface rendering of the resolving septum with esophageal cells in green, septal cells in yellow, and tracheal cells in purple. Septal cells significantly decrease surface contact area with each other compared with the contact between tracheal cells and esophageal cells (mean ± min/max, ∗∗∗ p < 0.001 1W-ANOVA, n = 6 cells per embryo, N = 9 embryos). (B) Diagrams of the separating foregut at i) the intact bilayer and ii) at the point where the bilayer is separating. The graph quantifies Cdh1/mbGFP intensity at cell surfaces in the bilayer and the adherent vs. separating side of the cells losing contact (mean ± min/max, ∗∗ p < 0.01 1W-ANOVA, n = 5 cells per embryo, N=6 embryos). (C) Structure of wild-type (WT) and the ΔLL → AA Cdh1 mutant that cannot be internalized by endocytosis.25 (D) Quantification of the TEF phenotype in ΔLL-Cdh1 mutants compared with WT-Cdh1 and no DOX control embryos (mean ± SEM, ∗∗∗∗p < 0.0001 1W-ANOVA, n = 10–35 embryos from 3 transgenesis experiments). (E) Cdh1 immunostaining and confocal microscopy of NF44 transgenic embryos and controls. Scale bars, 50 μm.
	Figure 4. Endosomal trafficking is required for resolution of the epithelial bilayer (A) At NF37, the septum in dnm2, rab5a, and rab11a CRISPR mutants undergoes epithelial fusion similar to controls. Scale bars, 50 μm. (B) At NF41, the epithelial bilayer in endosomal mutants is disorganized compared with controls. Scale bars, 50 μm. (C) dnm2, rab5a, and rab11a CRISPR mutants exhibit TEFs and blisters in the TE septum (asterisks). Scale bars, 50 μm. (D) Quantification of Cdh1/mbGFP intensity in the adherent, separating, and luminal cell surfaces in control septal and endosomal mutant blisters (mean ± min/max, 1W-ANOVA, different letters indicate p < 0.05 between groups, n = 7–40 cells, N = 3–5 embryos) (E) The NF41 mutant septa have more cells across the width compared with controls (mean ± SEM, ∗ p < 0.05 1W-ANOVA, ∗∗ p < 0.01, N = 6–11 embryos). (F and G) (F) There are no significant (n.s.) differences in proliferation (pHH3+/total) or (G) total cells in the septum of mutant embryos compared with controls (mean ± min/max, 1W-ANOVA, N = 46 embryos).
	Figure 6. Recycling endosomes localize Vangl2 to maintain apical memory in the transient trachea-esophageal septum (A–D) Time course of Vangl2-Rab11a immunostaining during Xenopus tracheoesophageal separation. Scale bars, 50 μm and 20 μm (inset). (E) Dynamic Vangl2-Rab11a co-localization at the epithelial interface (mean Pearson co-localization coefficient ± SEM, ∗∗∗ p < 0.001, ∗∗∗∗ p < 0.0001 1W-ANOVA, n = 6 cells per embryo, N = 5 embryos per stage). (F–I) Diagrams of Vangl2-Rab11a localization during foregut separation. (J–M) Vangl2 is mis-localized in septal epithelial cells of endosomal mutants. (N) Endosomal mutant septa have significantly lower Vangl2-Rab11a co-localization relative to controls (mean ± SEM, ∗∗∗∗ p < 0.0001 1W-ANOVA, n = 5 cells per embryo, N = 4–6 embryos per condition). (O–R) CRISPR F0 mutation of patient variant orthologous genes in Xenopus (ap3d1, itsn1, arhgap21, and atp6v1b1) disrupts Vangl2 localization in the TE septum. Scale bars are 50 μm (20 μm in insets). See also Figure S5.
	Figure S1. F0 CRISPR-Cas9 editing strategy generates highly edited embryos, related to Figure 1. S1A Left: XY graph demonstrating correlation between editing efficiency (% alleles with indels) and phenotype penetrance in embryos with mutations in patient risk genes. Right: XY graph demonstrating correlation between editing efficiency, embryonic lethality, and phenotype penetrance in embryos with mutations in endosome and polarity genes.
	Figure S1. F0 CRISPR-Cas9 editing strategy generates highly edited embryos, related to Figure 1. S1B: Heat map displaying the types of indel mutations generated by the indicated gRNA in F0 embryos, mean of n=5-15 individual embryo Sanger sequencing analysis per gRNA.
	Figure S1. F0 CRISPR-Cas9 editing strategy generates highly edited embryos, related to Figure 1. S1C: Immunostaining and confocal microscopy of unilaterally-injected tadpoles at the 2-cell stage with dnm2, rab5a, or rab11a CRISPR reagents and quantification of reduced number of protein-expressing cells and protein abundance on the injected side of the tadpole compared to the control, non-injected side. Graphs are mean ± SEM, *p<0.001, **p<0.0001 Students’ t-test, numbers above dot plots are the mean. S1D: Immunoblotting of Xenopus CRISPR mutants compared to controls. Relative protein abundance indicated by numbers above immunoblots, with control protein abundance normalized to 1.
	Figure S2. Dynamic cell shape and polarity changes during trachea-esophageal separation, related to Figure 2. S2A-C: Before fusion the foregut is a pseudostratified epithelium with apical tight junctions (Tjp1) and Par3. S2D-F: After apical fusion, epithelial cells remodel to localize E-Cadherin (Cdh1) apically and downregulate Tjp1 and Par3.
	Figure S2. Dynamic cell shape and polarity changes during trachea-esophageal separation, related to Figure 2. S2G: Quantification of aPKC downregulation after epithelial fusion (mean ± min/max, ****p<0.00001, 2W-ANOVA, n=6 cells per embryo, N=5 embryos). S2H: Quantification of Dnm2 intensity after epithelial fusion (mean ± min/max, 2W-ANOVA, n=6 cells per embryo, N=5 embryos). S2I: Quantification of Rab5a intensity after epithelial fusion (mean ± min/max, 2W-ANOVA, n=6 cells per embryo, N=5 embryos).
	Figure S2. Dynamic cell shape and polarity changes during trachea-esophageal separation, related to Figure 2. S2J: Before resolution of the septum, the foregut epithelium remodels to a bilayered columnar epithelium with basally positioned nuclei. S2K: The septum resolves after asymmetric relocalization of E-Cadherin and integration of septum cells into either the trachea or esophagus. S2L: Prolate ellipticity is significantly decreased in cells actively resolving in the septum (mean ± min/max, p<0.05, Student’s t-test, n=6 cells per embryo, N=5 embryos). S2M: Quantification of Dnm2 intensity before and after resolution (mean ± min/max, Student’s t-test, n=6 cells per embryo, N=5 embryos) S2N: Quantification of Rab5a intensity before and after resolution (mean ± min/max, p<0.05, Student’s t-test, n=6 cells per embryo, N=5 embryos).
	Figure S3. 3D surface renderings, related to Figure 4. Measurements of the epithelial septum showing that mutants are significantly wider (x axis) and shorter in the rostral- caudal (z axis) axis compared to controls (mean length ± SEM, Student’s t-test compared to control lengths, p<0.05, *p<0.01, n=4-6 embryos per condition). Scale bars are 30 µm
	Figure S4. Mitotic spindle angles are not significantly changed compared to controls in the trachea and esophageal epithelia of endosome mutants, related to Figure 5. S4A: Control embryo trachea and esophagus epithelia most frequently divide between 0-15°C relative to the plane of the tissue. S4B-D: Endosome mutant trachea and esophagus epithelia division angles are not significantly altered, but trend to be more variable than control trachea and esophageal epithelia (Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, n.s. p>0.05, 3-5 cells measured per embryo, 5 embryos measured per condition).
	Figure S5. Celsr1 is localized to the periphery of cells during tracheoesophageal separation, related to Figure 6. S5A: Super-resolution confocal of Rab11a-Vangl2 immunostaining in representative control and rab5a CRISPR mutant embryos. S5B: Quantification of distance between Vangl2-Rab11a spots binned and plotted as relative frequency histograms. Inset: mean percentage of Vangl2 spots within 500nm of Rab11a spots (area under curve in gray box) mean ± SEM, N=3-7 embryos, p<0.05. p<0.001 S5C: Immunostaining of Vangl2 in the trachea and esophageal epithelium. Vangl2 is localized apically in the lumen-facing esophageal epithelia but not in the more basal cell layers and is localized around the membrane periphery in the single cell tracheal epithelium (insets). S5D: Vangl2 intensity at the apical membrane is decreased in dnm2, rab5a, and rab11a CRISPR mutants, while Rab11a remains localized to the apical membranes (mean ± min/max, 2W-ANOVA, p<0.0001, p<0.001, *p<0.01, n=3-5 cells per embryo, 5 embryos analyzed).
	Figure S5. Celsr1 is localized to the periphery of cells during tracheoesophageal separation, related to Figure 6. S5D: Vangl2 intensity at the apical membrane is decreased in dnm2, rab5a, and rab11a CRISPR mutants, while Rab11a remains localized to the apical membranes (mean ± min/max, 2W-ANOVA, **p<0.0001, p<0.001, p<0.01, n=3-5 cells per embryo, 5 embryos analyzed). S5E-H: Time course of Celsr1 immunostaining during Xenopus trachea-esophageal morphogenesis. Diagrams depict Celsr1/Rab11a localization during foregut separation. S5I-M: Celsr1:Rab11a colocalization is significantly decreased in rab5a Xenopus mutants, but Celsr1 cellular localization is not significantly altered in dnm2, rab5a, and rab11a Xenopus mutants (mean ± min/max, 1W-ANOVA, *p<0.01. n=3-5 cells, 5 embryos analyzed).