The genetic basis of neurocranial size and shape across varied lab mouse populations

Abstract

Brain and skull tissues interact through molecular signalling and mechanical forces during head development, leading to a strong correlation between the neurocranium and the external brain surface. Therefore, when brain tissue is unavailable, neurocranial endocasts are often used to approximate brain size and shape. Evolutionary changes in brain morphology may have resulted in secondary changes to neurocranial morphology, but the developmental and genetic processes underlying this relationship are not well understood. Using automated phenotyping methods, we quantified the genetic basis of endocast variation across large genetically varied populations of laboratory mice in two ways: (1) to determine the contributions of various genetic factors to neurocranial form and (2) to help clarify whether a neurocranial variation is based on genetic variation that primarily impacts bone development or on genetic variation that primarily impacts brain development, leading to secondary changes in bone morphology. Our results indicate that endocast size is highly heritable and is primarily determined by additive genetic factors. In addition, a non‐additive inbreeding effect led to founder strains with lower neurocranial size, but relatively large brains compared to skull size; suggesting stronger canalization of brain size and/or a general allometric effect. Within an outbred sample of mice, we identified a locus on mouse chromosome 1 that is significantly associated with variation in several positively correlated endocast size measures. Because the protein‐coding genes at this locus have been previously associated with brain development and not with bone development, we propose that genetic variation at this locus leads primarily to variation in brain volume that secondarily leads to changes in neurocranial globularity. We identify a strain‐specific missense mutation within Akt3 that is a strong causal candidate for this genetic effect. Whilst it is not appropriate to generalize our hypothesis for this single locus to all other loci that also contribute to the complex trait of neurocranial skull morphology, our results further reveal the genetic basis of neurocranial variation and highlight the importance of the mechanical influence of brain growth in determining skull morphology.

Cranial Bone Changes Induced by Mild Traumatic Brain Injuries: A Neglected Player in Concussion Outcomes?

“…Growth of the brain and cranium are dynamic and intimately integrated through common molecular signaling pathways and responsiveness to mechanical forces to ensure an appropriately snug fit. 66 , 67 For example, the growing brain generates tensile strain on the developing cranial bones, which promotes bone remodeling to accommodate the expanding neural tissue. 68 This relationship is well represented by cases of hydrocephalus, in which excess CSF results in abnormal pressure within the cranial vault.…”

Postnatal growth and spatial conformity of the cranium, brain, eyeballs and masseter muscles in the macaque (Macaca mulatta)

“…Another recent mouse study has identified a locus on chromosome 1 linked to AKT3 expression and brain size, which also appears to translate into neurocranial variations via structural interactions (Percival et al, 2022). Interestingly, computational simulations imply that simple plastic deformation coupled with ontogenetic variations of tissue compliance (i.e.…”

“…A multivariate genome‐wide association analysis suggests that neural crest‐derived components of the cranium respond to brain growth via local paracrine signalling, which is driven by physical interactions (Naqvi et al, 2021). Another recent mouse study has identified a locus on chromosome 1 linked to AKT3 expression and brain size, which also appears to translate into neurocranial variations via structural interactions (Percival et al, 2022). Interestingly, computational simulations imply that simple plastic deformation coupled with ontogenetic variations of tissue compliance (i.e.…”