Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Aldehyde-driven transcriptional stress triggers an anorexic DNA damage response

Abstract

Endogenous DNA damage can perturb transcription, triggering a multifaceted cellular response that repairs the damage, degrades RNA polymerase II and shuts down global transcription1,2,3,4. This response is absent in the human disease Cockayne syndrome, which is caused by loss of the Cockayne syndrome A (CSA) or CSB proteins5,6,7. However, the source of endogenous DNA damage and how this leads to the prominent degenerative features of this disease remain unknown. Here we find that endogenous formaldehyde impedes transcription, with marked physiological consequences. Mice deficient in formaldehyde clearance (Adh5−/−) and CSB (Csbm/m; Csb is also known as Ercc6) develop cachexia and neurodegeneration, and succumb to kidney failure, features that resemble human Cockayne syndrome. Using single-cell RNA sequencing, we find that formaldehyde-driven transcriptional stress stimulates the expression of the anorexiogenic peptide GDF15 by a subset of kidney proximal tubule cells. Blocking this response with an anti-GDF15 antibody alleviates cachexia in Adh5−/−Csbm/m mice. Therefore, CSB provides protection to the kidney and brain against DNA damage caused by endogenous formaldehyde, while also suppressing an anorexic endocrine signal. The activation of this signal might contribute to the cachexia observed in Cockayne syndrome as well as chemotherapy-induced anorectic weight loss. A plausible evolutionary purpose for such a response is to ensure aversion to genotoxins in food.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig 1: Formaldehyde causes transcriptional stress.
Fig. 2: Endogenous formaldehyde accumulation reveals Cockayne syndrome.
Fig. 3: Single cell RNA-seq identifies regions in the nephron that are susceptible to transcriptional stress.
Fig. 4: Transcriptional stress damages a subset of proximal tubule cells that express GDF15.
Fig. 5: GDF15 mediates DNA damage induced cachexia.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

All scRNA-seq data have been deposited in the Gene Expression Omnibus under accession GSE175792.

References

  1. Brueckner, F., Hennecke, U., Carell, T. & Cramer, P. CPD damage recognition by transcribing RNA polymerase II. Science 315, 859–862 (2007).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Xu, J. et al. Structural basis for the initiation of eukaryotic transcription-coupled DNA repair. Nature 551, 653–657 (2017).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Gregersen, L. H. & Svejstrup, J. Q. The cellular response to transcription-blocking DNA damage. Trends Biochem. Sci. 43, 327–341 (2018).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Tufegdžić Vidaković, A. et al. Regulation of the RNAPII pool is integral to the DNA damage response. Cell 180, 1245–1261.e21 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Laugel, V. Cockayne syndrome: the expanding clinical and mutational spectrum. Mech. Ageing Dev. 134, 161–170 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Stern-Delfils, A. et al. Renal disease in Cockayne syndrome. Eur. J. Med. Genet. 63, 103612 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kubota, M. et al. Nationwide survey of Cockayne syndrome in Japan: incidence, clinical course and prognosis. Pediatr. Int. 57, 339–347 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Lans, H., Hoeijmakers, J. H. J., Vermeulen, W. & Marteijn, J. A. The DNA damage response to transcription stress. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 20, (2019).

  9. Wilson, M. D., Harreman, M. & Svejstrup, J. Q. Ubiquitylation and degradation of elongating RNA polymerase II: the last resort. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1829, 151–157 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. van der Horst, G. T. et al. Defective transcription-coupled repair in Cockayne syndrome B mice is associated with skin cancer predisposition. Cell 89, 425–435 (1997).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. van der Horst, G. T. J. et al. UVB radiation-induced cancer predisposition in Cockayne syndrome group A (Csa) mutant mice. DNA Repair 1, 143–157 (2002).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Pontel, L. B. et al. Endogenous formaldehyde is a hematopoietic stem cell genotoxin and metabolic carcinogen. Mol. Cell 60, 177–188 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Cheng, G. et al. Reactions of formaldehyde plus acetaldehyde with deoxyguanosine and DNA: formation of cyclic deoxyguanosine adducts and formaldehyde cross-links. Chem. Res. Toxicol. 16, 145–152 (2003).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Marteijn, J. A., Lans, H., Vermeulen, W. & Hoeijmakers, J. H. J. Understanding nucleotide excision repair and its roles in cancer and ageing. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 15, 465–481 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ranes, M. et al. A ubiquitylation site in Cockayne syndrome B required for repair of oxidative DNA damage, but not for transcription-coupled nucleotide excision repair. Nucleic Acids Res. 44, 5246–5255 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Wei, W. et al. S-nitrosylation from GSNOR deficiency impairs DNA repair and promotes hepatocarcinogenesis. Sci. Transl. Med. 2, 19ra13 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Niedernhofer, L. J., Bohr, V. A., Sander, M. & Kraemer, K. H. Xeroderma pigmentosum and other diseases of human premature aging and DNA repair: Molecules to patients. Mech. Ageing Dev. 132, 340–347 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Langevin, F., Crossan, G. P., Rosado, I. V., Arends, M. J. & Patel, K. J. Fancd2 counteracts the toxic effects of naturally produced aldehydes in mice. Nature 475, 53–59 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Garaycoechea, J. I. et al. Genotoxic consequences of endogenous aldehydes on mouse haematopoietic stem cell function. Nature 489, 571–575 (2012).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Young, M. D. et al. Single-cell transcriptomes from human kidneys reveal the cellular identity of renal tumors. Science 361, 594–599 (2018).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Feng, D., Ngov, C., Henley, N., Boufaied, N. & Gerarduzzi, C. Characterization of matricellular protein expression signatures in mechanistically diverse mouse models of kidney injury. Sci. Rep. 9, 16736 (2019).

    Article  ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Vaidya, V. S., Ramirez, V., Ichimura, T., Bobadilla, N. A. & Bonventre, J. V. Urinary kidney injury molecule-1: a sensitive quantitative biomarker for early detection of kidney tubular injury. Am. J. Physiol. 290, 517–529 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  23. Dieterle, F. et al. Urinary clusterin, cystatin C, Β2-microglobulin and total protein as markers to detect drug-induced kidney injury. Nat. Biotechnol. 28, 463–469 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Brooks, C. R. et al. KIM‐1/TIM‐1‐mediated phagocytosis links ATG5/ULK1‐dependent clearance of apoptotic cells to antigen presentation. EMBO J. 34, 2441–2464 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Freitas, M. C. S. et al. Type I interferon pathway mediates renal ischemia/reperfusion injury. Transplantation 92, 131–138 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Liu, J. et al. Molecular characterization of the transition from acute to chronic kidney injury following ischemia/reperfusion. JCI Insight 2, (2017).

  27. Espinosa, J. M., Verdun, R. E. & Emerson, B. M. p53 functions through stress- and promoter-specific recruitment of transcription initiation components before and after DNA damage. Mol. Cell 12, 1015–1027 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Campisi, J. & D’Adda Di Fagagna, F. Cellular senescence: when bad things happen to good cells. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 8, 729–740 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Mullican, S. E. et al. GFRAL is the receptor for GDF15 and the ligand promotes weight loss in mice and nonhuman primates. Nat. Med. 23, 1150–1157 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Tufegdzic Vidakovic, A. et al. Analysis of RNA polymerase II ubiquitylation and proteasomal degradation. Methods 159–160, 146–156 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Wilson, B. T. et al. The Cockayne Syndrome Natural History (CoSyNH) study: clinical findings in 102 individuals and recommendations for care. Genet. Med. 18, 483–493 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Hsu, J. Y. et al. Non-homeostatic body weight regulation through a brainstem-restricted receptor for GDF15. Nature 550, 255–259 (2017).

    Article  ADS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Breen, D. M. et al. GDF-15 neutralization alleviates platinum-based chemotherapy-induced emesis, anorexia, and weight loss in mice and nonhuman primates. Cell Metab. 32, 938–950.e6 (2020).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Enoiu, M., Jiricny, J. & Schärer, O. D. Repair of cisplatin-induced DNA interstrand crosslinks by a replication-independent pathway involving transcription-coupled repair and translesion synthesis. Nucleic Acids Res. 40, 8953–8964 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Knipscheer, P. et al. The Fanconi anemia pathway promotes replication-dependent DNA interstrand cross-link repair. Science 326, 1698–1701 (2009).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Mulderigg, L. & Garaycoechea, J. I. XPF-ERCC1 protects liver, kidney and blood homeostasis outside the canonical excision repair pathways. PLoS Genet. 16, e1008555 (2020).

  37. Vermeij, W. P. et al. Restricted diet delays accelerated ageing and genomic stress in DNA-repair-deficient mice. Nature 537, 427–431 (2016).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Watson, H. J. et al. Genome-wide association study identifies eight risk loci and implicates metabo-psychiatric origins for anorexia nervosa. Nat. Genet. 51, 1207–1214 (2019).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Crossan, G. P. et al. Disruption of mouse Slx4, a regulator of structure-specific nucleases, phenocopies Fanconi anemia. Nat. Genet. 43, 147–152 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. de Vries, A. et al. Increased susceptibility to ultraviolet-B and carcinogens of mice lacking the DNA excision repair gene XPA. Nature 377, 169–173 (1995).

    Article  ADS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Cheo, D. L. et al. Characterization of defective nucleotide excision repair in XPC mutant mice. Mutat. Res. 374, 1–9 (1997).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Liu, L. et al. Essential roles of S-nitrosothiols in vascular homeostasis and endotoxic shock. Cell 116, 617–628 (2004).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Donehower, L. A. et al. Mice deficient for p53 are developmentally normal but susceptible to spontaneous tumours. Nature 356, 215–221 (1992).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Guyenet, S. J. et al. A simple composite phenotype scoring system for evaluating mouse models of cerebellar ataxia. J. Vis. Exp. 39, 1787 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  45. Dingler, F. A. et al. Two aldehyde clearance systems are essential to prevent lethal formaldehyde accumulation in mice and humans. Mol. Cell 80, 996–1012.e9 (2020).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Young, M. D. & Behjati, S. SoupX removes ambient RNA contamination from droplet based single cell RNA sequencing data. Gigascience 9, giaa151 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Wolock, S. L., Lopez, R. & Klein, A. M. Scrublet: computational identification of cell doublets in single-cell transcriptomic data. Cell Syst. 8, 281–291.e9 (2019).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Popescu, D. M. et al. Decoding human fetal liver haematopoiesis. Nature 574, 365–371 (2019).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Stuart, T. et al. Comprehensive integration of single-cell data. Cell 177, 1888–1902.e21 (2019).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Wolf, F. A., Angerer, P. & Theis, F. J. SCANPY: large-scale single-cell gene expression data analysis. Genome Biol. 19, 15 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Benjamini, Y. & Hochberg, Y. Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J. R. Stat. Soc. B 57, 289–300 (1995).

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  52. Park, J. et al. Single-cell transcriptomics of the mouse kidney reveals potential cellular targets of kidney disease. Science 360, 758–763 (2018).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  53. Traag, V. A., Waltman, L. & van Eck, N. J. From Louvain to Leiden: guaranteeing well-connected communities. Sci. Rep. 9, 5233 (2019).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. McInnes, L., Healy, J., Saul, N. & Großberger, L. UMAP: uniform manifold approximation and projection. J. Open Source Softw. 3, 861 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank members of the K.J.P., G.P.C. and J.I.G. laboratories for critical reading of the manuscript. We thank J. Svejstrup and A. Tufegdzic Vidakovic for the pGEX-Dsk2 plasmid, E. Friedberg, G. T. van der Horst and J. Hoeijmakers for sharing the Xpc−/−, Xpa−/− and Csbm/m mice and S. Wells, M. Stewart and H. Cater for work done at MRC Harwell. We thank Pfizer for the GDF15 monoclonal antibody. K.J.P. is supported by MRC, CRUK (C42693/A23273), Wellcome Trust (106202/Z/14/Z) and European Union Research and Innovation programme Horizon 2020 (Grant Agreement Number 730879). L.M., F.A.D. and G.P.C. were supported by CRUK (C42693/A23273). J.I.G. is supported by the Hubrecht Institute. C.L.M. is supported by the Wellcome Trust (106202/Z/14/Z). M.R.C. is funded by an NIHR Research Professorship (RP-2017-08-ST2-002). J.R.F. is funded by NIHR Cambridge Blood and Transplant Research Unit Organ Donation. Z.K.T. and M.R.C. are funded by MRC HCA grant MR/S035842/1. L.G. is funded from CRUK (FC0001166), the UK Medical Research Council (FC001166) and the Wellcome Trust (FC001166). S.O. is supported by the Medical Research Council MRC.MC.UU.12012.1, a Wellcome Senior Investigator Award 214274/Z/18/Z and the NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre. J.A.T. is supported by an NIHR Clinical Lectureship (CL-2019-14-504).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

K.J.P., J.I.G. and G.P.C. conceived the study. K.J.P. wrote the manuscript. L.M. and J.I.G. designed and performed the majority of the experiments. F.A.D. performed GDF15 measurements. M.R.C. and J.R.F. designed the scRNA-seq experiment, J.R.F. prepared tissues for sequencing and processed the scRNA-seq data. Z.K.T. analysed the scRNA-seq data. C.L.M. measured formaldehyde adducts. L.G. generated CSB KO HEK 293 cells. J.A.T. performed in situ hybridization experiments. M.J.A. characterized the kidney pathology. S.O. provided crucial insight on the study.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ketan J. Patel.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Peer review information Nature thanks Stephan Herzig, Ruben van Boxtel and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Peer reviewer reports are available.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Extended data figures and tables

Extended Data Fig. 1 TC-NER and formaldehyde detoxification cooperate to protect cells from formaldehyde toxicity.

a-c, Cytotoxicity of UV (a) and formaldehyde (b) in Csbm/m (a,b) or Adh5-/-Csbm/m (c) tMEF cell lines complemented with either WT or K991R CSB. Data plotted as mean and s.e.m; experiments performed in triplicate. d-e, Cytotoxicity of UV and formaldehyde in HEK293 cell lines, data shown as mean and s.e.m., experiments performed in triplicate.

Extended Data Fig. 2 Adh5-/-Csbm/m mice are born at sub-Mendelian ratios and have reduced body weight.

a, Ratios of pups from Csb+/m , Xpc+/- and Xpa+/- crosses showing that homozygous mice are born at Mendelian ratios (P calculated by two-sided Chi-squared test) b, Ratios of pups born from Adh5-/-Csb+/m, Adh5-/-Xpc+/- and Adh5-/-Xpa+/- crosses showing that both Adh5-/-Csbm/m and Adh5-/-Xpa-/- pups are born at sub-Mendelian ratios (P calculated by two-sided Chi-squared test). c, Ratios of pups born from Adh5+/- Csb+/m and Adh5-/-Csb+/m crosses showing the ratio of Adh5-/-Csbm/m pups is partially rescued when the mother is aldehyde-detoxification proficient (Adh5 +/- instead of Adh5 -/- in b, P calculated by two-sided Chi-squared test). For a, b, and c, mice were genotyped between 2-3 wk of age. d, Weights of adult male and female mice at 8 wk of age (Data shown as mean and s.e.m.; P calculated by two-sided Mann-Whitney test; n = 14, 19, 13, 12, 4, 9, 3, 7 for males left to right and 24, 30, 22, 21, 12, 9, 4, 5 for females left to right). e, Image of Csbm/m and Adh5-/-Csbm/m littermates at 12 months of age.

Extended Data Fig. 3 Adh5-/-Csbm/m mice exhibit features of human Cockayne Syndrome.

a, Growth curves of female mice based on weekly weights. Data shown as mean and s.e.m. n = 14, 14, 18 and 14. Along with fat mass from EchoMRI performed at 11 wk (young) and 53 wk (old). P calculated by two-sided Mann-Whitney test; data shown as mean and s.e.m.; n = 13, 14, 18, 14, 11, 13, 6 and 6 left to right. b, Bar graph of grip strength for young (3 months) and old (1 yr) mice, determined by placing all four limbs on a grid attached to a force gauge. P calculated by two-sided Mann-Whitney test, data shown as mean and s.e.m.; n = 13, 15, 18, 20, 5, 12, 12 and 8 for males left to right and 13, 14, 18, 14, 5, 3, 14 and 8 for females left to right. c, Left, age of onset plot for kyphosis. P calculated by two-sided Mantel-Cox logrank test, n = 21, 19, 22 and 9. Right, representative x-rays of Csbm/m and Adh5-/-Csbm/m mice at 1 yr of age showing kyphosis in the Adh5 -/-Csbm/m mouse. d, Brain weights of mice taken at 3 months (young) and 18 months (old). P calculated by two-tailed Student’s t-test; data shown as mean and s.e.m., n = 3 mice.

Extended Data Fig. 4 Adh5-/-Csbm/m mice succumb to chronic kidney failure and have liver abnormalities.

a, Survival and cancer-free survival curve of Adh5-/-Csbm/m and control mice. b, Bar chart indicating the cause of death for wild type, Adh5-/-, Csbm/m and Adh5 -/-Csbm/m mice (n = 18, 31, 16 and 19). c, Weights of Adh5-/-Csbm/m male and female kidneys at 12 months relative to tibia length, data shown as mean and s.e.m. (n=8, 22, 20, 16, 10, 4, 22, 17 from left to right). d, Representative H&E stained sections of kidney from Csbm/m and Adh5-/-Csbm/m mice at sequential timepoints (n=4, 3, 4, 5, from left to right). e, Bar chart of the percentage of fibrosis in the cortex of H&E stained kidney sections at sequential time points in Adh5-/-Csbm/m and terminal controls, data shown as mean and s.e.m. (n=4, 4, 4, 3, 4, 5, from left to right). f, Representative PAS stained sections of kidney showing intratubular casts from Csbm/m and Adh5-/-Csbm/m terminal mice (n=3). g, Urine obtained from indicated mice were tested for the presence of proteinuria by multistix 10SG. h, Blood counts from terminal blood samples of Adh5-/-Csbm/m and controls P calculated by two-sided Mann-Whitney test; data show as mean and s.e.m.; n = 9, 8, 6, 5 from left to right. i, Terminal serum measurements of albumin, alkaline phosphatase and alanine transaminase. P calculated by two-sided Mann-Whitney test; data show as mean and s.e.m.; n = 33, 10, 13 and 16. j, Representative H&E stained sections of liver from age-matched Csbm/m and Adh5-/-Csbm/m mice, arrows indicate cells with enlarged nuclei (n=3). k, Quantification of hepatocyte nuclear DNA content in young (3 month) and old (18 month) mice. P calculated by two-sided Student’s t-test for the content of 8n nuclei; data shown as mean and s.e.m.; n = 3 mice.

Extended Data Fig. 5 Methanol exposure exacerbates the Cockayne Syndrome phenotype in Adh5-/-Csbm/m mice.

a, Scheme outlining weekly intra-peritoneal (I.P.) injection of 1.5 g/kg methanol (or saline) and analysis of treated mice. b-c, Monthly serum levels of urea (b) and creatinine (c) from mice exposed to methanol and saline controls, data plotted as mean and s.e.m.; n = 4. d, Kidney failure-free survival curve of Adh5-/-Csbm/m mice with and without methanol exposure (P calculated by two-sided Mantel-Cox logrank test; n = 7 and 19). e, Representative image of kidneys from age-matched mice exposed to methanol or saline, taken after 24 hr of fixation. f, Representative H&E stained sections of kidney from Adh5-/-Csbm/m mice exposed to methanol or saline, G indicates glomeruli and arrows indicate atrophic tubules (n=4). g, Brain weights of age-matched mice exposed to methanol or saline. P calculated by two tailed Student’s t-test; data shown as mean and s.e.m., n = 3 mice. h, Quantification of the number of MAC2+ cells per field in mice exposed to methanol or saline. P calculated by two tailed Student’s t-test; data shown as mean and s.e.m., n = 3 mice. i, Representative immunofluorescence images of the cerebellum of Adh5-/-Csbm/m mice exposed to methanol or saline stained with MAC2 and DAPI at 40x (n=3).

Extended Data Fig. 6 Methanol reveals kidney failure in Adh5-/-Xpa-/- mice but ethanol does not in Aldh2-/-Csbm/m mice.

a, Serum measurements of albumin, alkaline phosphatase and alanine transaminase after 6 months of methanol treatment along with saline-treated controls. P calculated by two-sided Mann-Whitney test; data show as mean and s.e.m.; n = 4 mice. b, Kaplan-Meier survival curve of wild type, Adh5-/-, Xpa-/- and Adh5-/-Xpa-/- mice (n = 18, 31, 10 and 13). c, Kidney failure-free survival curve of Adh5-/-Xpa-/- mice with and without methanol exposure (P calculated by two-sided Mantel-Cox logrank test; n = 4 and 13). d, Monthly serum levels of urea and creatinine from mice exposed to methanol or saline, data plotted as mean and s.e.m.; n = 4. e, Kaplan-Meier survival curve of wild-type, Aldh2-/-, Csbm/m and Aldh2-/-Csbm/m mice (n = 18, 5, 16 and 5). f, Kaplan-Meier survival curve of wild-type, Aldh2-/-, Csbm/m and Aldh2-/-Csbm/m mice treated with 20% ethanol continuously in the drinking water (n = 6). g, Monthly serum levels of urea and creatinine from mice exposed to 20% ethanol continuously in the drinking water, data plotted as mean and s.e.m.; n = 6.

Extended Data Fig. 7 scRNA-seq reveals cells susceptible to formaldehyde transcriptional stress.

a, Scheme outlining the scRNA-seq experiment. b, UMAP plots of murine kidney scRNA-seq data for wild type, Adh5-/-, Csbm/m and Adh5-/-Csbm/m mice, n = 3 and n = 31,624, 16,023, 29,082, 29,802 cells (pDC, plasmacytoid dendritic cell; MNP, mononuclear phagocyte; LOH, loop of henle; CT, connecting tubule; DCT, distal convoluted tubules; CD-PC, collecting duct – principle cell; CD-IC, collecting duct – intercalated cell; T_NK, T cells/NK cells; B, B cells). c, Bar chart showing the composition of cell types in the scRNA-seq data. d, UMAP plot of all scRNA-seq data with each genotype labelled a different colour, arrow indicates PT cells that are distinct to Adh5-/-Csbm/m kidneys. e, UMAP plot of PT sub-clusters split by genotype. f, Heatmap indicating the top two marker genes for each PT sub-cluster (marker genes are calculated by comparing the expression of each PT sub-cluster against all remaining PTs). g, top, Feature plots of Kim-1 expression from PT sub-clusters of Adh5-/-Csbm/m cells and controls, bottom, immunofluorescence images of Adh5-/-Csbm/m and control kidney sections stained with Kim-1 taken from mice aged 12 months. h, Log2 fold change plot of DEGs from PT-4 made relative to wild-type PT-4 cells. i, top, Feature plots of Gdf15 expression from PT sub-clusters of Adh5-/-Csbm/m cells and controls, bottom, representative images of In situ hybridisation for Gdf15 mRNA (red spots) performed on Adh5-/-Csbm/m and control kidney sections, n=3.

Extended Data Fig. 8 scRNA-seq gene expression analysis of PT-4 sub-cluster cells.

a, Feature plots of Cyr61, Spp1 and B2m expression from PT sub-clusters of Csbm/m and Adh5-/-Csbm/m cells. b, Network of top 100 marker genes from PT sub-cluster PT-4 (marker genes were calculated by comparing expression of genes in PT-4 to all other PT cells). Data visualised in cytoscape v3.7.1 using the STRING app. Nodes are coloured based on top GO term enrichment pathway. c, Feature plots of p21, Phlda3 and Btg2 expression from PT sub-clusters of Csbm/m and Adh5-/-Csbm/m cells. d, Heatmap of expression of p53 target genes in PT cells of Adh5-/-Csbm/m and control mice.

Extended Data Fig. 9 Gdf15 expression in mouse tissues.

a and b, Representative images of in situ hybridisation for Gdf15 mRNA (red spots) performed on Adh5-/-Csbm/m and control kidney sections, n=3 c, Feature plots of Gdf15 expression from LOH and CD cells for Adh5-/-Csbm/m and control mice. d, Dot plot of mean expression and fraction of cells expressing Gdf15 in the loop of henle (LOH) and collecting duct (CD) for Adh5-/-Csbm/m and control mice. e, Feature plots of Gdf15 expression from LOH and CD cells for Adh5-/-Csbm/m mice treated with methanol or untreated. f, Dot plot of mean expression and fraction of cells expressing Gdf15 in Adh5-/-Csbm/m mice treated with methanol or untreated.

Extended Data Fig. 10 Metabolic analysis of Adh5-/-Csbm/m mice.

a-b, Male and female mice were placed in metabolic chambers and respiratory exchange rate (R.E.R) and energy expenditure were measured over a 20-hr period, data shown as mean and s.e.m. n = 3, 5, 13 and 2 for males and n = 7, 4, 11 and 10 for females. c, male and female mice were placed in open field chambers and activity was measured over 20 min, data shown as mean and s.e.m (n=5, 10, 16 and 14 for males and n= 4, 4, 14 and 12 for females). d, Bar chart of weekly food intake from Adh5-/-Csbm/m and control mice singly housed and averaged out over 5 wk, data shown as mean and s.e.m, n=3.

Extended Data Fig. 11 GDF15 release in response to cisplatin is increased in Csbm/m mice but absent in p53-/- mice.

a, Daily weights of wild-type and Csbm/m mice exposed to weekly 0.5 mg/kg cisplatin intra-peritoneal injections alongside serum GDF15 measurements taken before and 4 wk after weekly injections. P calculated using two-sided Mann-Whitney test; data shown as mean and s.e.m.; n = 6 mice. b, Daily weights of wild-type and p53-/- mice exposed to weekly 4 mg/kg cisplatin intra-peritoneal injections alongside serum GDF15 measurements taken before and 6 wk after weekly injections. P calculated using two-sided Mann-Whitney test; data shown as mean and s.e.m.; n = 6 mice. c, In situ hybridisation for Gdf15 mRNA (red spots) performed on wild-type and p53-/- kidney sections 24 h after 4 mg/kg cisplatin treatment (n=3).

Supplementary information

Supplementary Fig. 1

| Uncropped western blots. Uncropped western blots for Fig. 1e–g.

Reporting Summary

Supplementary Table 1

| Top 100 marker genes for each PT sub-cluster. Table of the top 100 marker genes from each PT sub-cluster from scRNA-seq analysis of murine kidneys.

Peer Review File

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mulderrig, L., Garaycoechea, J.I., Tuong, Z.K. et al. Aldehyde-driven transcriptional stress triggers an anorexic DNA damage response. Nature 600, 158–163 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-04133-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-04133-7

This article is cited by

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing