DNAAF5 is a dynein motor assembly factor associated with the autosomal heterogenic recessive condition of motile cilia, primary ciliary dyskinesia (PCD). The effects of allele heterozygosity on motile cilia function are unknown. We used CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing in mice to recreate a human missense variant identified in patients with mild PCD and a second, frameshift-null deletion in Dnaaf5. Litters with Dnaaf5 heteroallelic variants showed distinct missense and null gene dosage effects. Homozygosity for the null Dnaaf5 alleles was embryonic lethal. Compound heterozygous animals with the missense and null alleles showed severe disease manifesting as hydrocephalus and early lethality. However, animals homozygous for the missense mutation had improved survival, with partially preserved cilia function and motor assembly observed by ultrastructure analysis. Notably, the same variant alleles exhibited divergent cilia function across different multiciliated tissues. Proteomic analysis of isolated airway cilia from mutant mice revealed reduction in some axonemal regulatory and structural proteins not previously reported in DNAAF5 variants. Transcriptional analysis of mouse and human mutant cells showed increased expression of genes coding for axonemal proteins. These findings suggest allele-specific and tissue-specific molecular requirements for cilia motor assembly that may affect disease phenotypes and clinical trajectory in motile ciliopathies.
Amjad Horani, Deepesh Kumar Gupta, Jian Xu, Huihui Xu, Lis del Carmen Puga-Molina, Celia M. Santi, Sruthi Ramagiri, Steven K. Brennan, Jiehong Pan, Jeffrey R. Koenitzer, Tao Huang, Rachael M. Hyland, Sean P. Gunsten, Shin-Cheng Tzeng, Jennifer M. Strahle, Pleasantine Mill, Moe R. Mahjoub, Susan K. Dutcher, Steven L. Brody
Usage data is cumulative from March 2024 through March 2025.
Usage | JCI | PMC |
---|---|---|
Text version | 949 | 356 |
100 | 91 | |
Figure | 251 | 7 |
Table | 41 | 0 |
Supplemental data | 465 | 37 |
Citation downloads | 68 | 0 |
Totals | 1,874 | 491 |
Total Views | 2,365 |
Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.
Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.