A striatal-enriched intronic GPCR modulates huntingtin levels and toxicity

  1. Yuwei Yao
  2. Xiaotian Cui
  3. Ismael Al-Ramahi
  4. Xiaoli Sun
  5. Bo Li
  6. Jiapeng Hou
  7. Marian Difiglia
  8. James Palacino
  9. Zhi-Ying Wu
  10. Lixiang Ma
  11. Juan Botas
  12. Boxun Lu  Is a corresponding author
  1. Fudan University, China
  2. Baylor College of Medicine, United States
  3. Massachusetts General Hospital, United States
  4. Novartis Institutes for Biomedical Research, United States
  5. Zhejiang University, China

Abstract

Huntington's disease (HD) represents an important model for neurodegenerative disorders and proteinopathies. It is mainly caused by cytotoxicity of the mutant huntingtin protein (Htt) with an expanded polyQ stretch. While Htt is ubiquitously expressed, HD is characterized by selective neurodegeneration of the striatum. Here we report a striatal-enriched orphan G protein-coupled receptor(GPCR) Gpr52 as a stabilizer of Htt in vitro and in vivo. Gpr52 modulates Htt via cAMP-dependent but PKA independent mechanisms. Gpr52 is located within an intron of Rabgap1l, which exhibits epistatic effects on Gpr52-mediated modulation of Htt levels by inhibiting its substrate Rab39B, which co-localizes with Htt and translocates Htt to the endoplasmic reticulum. Finally, reducing Gpr52 suppresses HD phenotypes in both patient iPS-derived neurons and in vivo Drosophila HD models. Thus, our discovery reveals modulation of Htt levels by a striatal-enriched GPCR via its GPCR function, providing insights into the selective neurodegeneration and potential treatment strategies.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Yuwei Yao

    State Key Laboratory of Genetic Engineering, Department of Biophysics, School of Life Sciences, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Xiaotian Cui

    State Key Laboratory of Genetic Engineering, Department of Biophysics, School of Life Sciences, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Ismael Al-Ramahi

    Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Xiaoli Sun

    State Key Laboratory of Genetic Engineering, Department of Biophysics, School of Life Sciences, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Bo Li

    State Key Laboratory of Genetic Engineering, Department of Biophysics, School of Life Sciences, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Jiapeng Hou

    State Key Laboratory of Genetic Engineering, Department of Biophysics, School of Life Sciences, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Marian Difiglia

    MassGeneral Institute for Neurodegenerative Diseases, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. James Palacino

    Developmental Molecular Pathways, Novartis Institutes for Biomedical Research, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Zhi-Ying Wu

    Department of Neurology and Research Center of Neurology, Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Lixiang Ma

    Department of Anatomy, Histology and Embryology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Juan Botas

    Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Boxun Lu

    State Key Laboratory of Genetic Engineering, Department of Biophysics, School of Life Sciences, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
    For correspondence
    luboxun@fudan.edu.cn
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Ethics

Animal experimentation: The mouse experiments were carried out following the general guidelines published by the Association for Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care. The Animal Care and Use Committee of the School of Medicine at Fudan University approved the protocol used in animal experiments (Approval #20140904).

Human subjects: The study involves obtaining dermal fibroblasts from human patients. The study was approved by the ethic community of IBS at Fudan University (No.28), strictly following their general guidelines for experiments involving human subjects. Verbal and written informed consent, and the consent to publish, were obtained from all patients.

Copyright

© 2015, Yao et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 4,027
    views
  • 1,082
    downloads
  • 68
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Yuwei Yao
  2. Xiaotian Cui
  3. Ismael Al-Ramahi
  4. Xiaoli Sun
  5. Bo Li
  6. Jiapeng Hou
  7. Marian Difiglia
  8. James Palacino
  9. Zhi-Ying Wu
  10. Lixiang Ma
  11. Juan Botas
  12. Boxun Lu
(2015)
A striatal-enriched intronic GPCR modulates huntingtin levels and toxicity
eLife 4:e05449.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.05449

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.05449

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Claire Meissner-Bernard, Friedemann Zenke, Rainer W Friedrich
    Research Article

    Biological memory networks are thought to store information by experience-dependent changes in the synaptic connectivity between assemblies of neurons. Recent models suggest that these assemblies contain both excitatory and inhibitory neurons (E/I assemblies), resulting in co-tuning and precise balance of excitation and inhibition. To understand computational consequences of E/I assemblies under biologically realistic constraints we built a spiking network model based on experimental data from telencephalic area Dp of adult zebrafish, a precisely balanced recurrent network homologous to piriform cortex. We found that E/I assemblies stabilized firing rate distributions compared to networks with excitatory assemblies and global inhibition. Unlike classical memory models, networks with E/I assemblies did not show discrete attractor dynamics. Rather, responses to learned inputs were locally constrained onto manifolds that ‘focused’ activity into neuronal subspaces. The covariance structure of these manifolds supported pattern classification when information was retrieved from selected neuronal subsets. Networks with E/I assemblies therefore transformed the geometry of neuronal coding space, resulting in continuous representations that reflected both relatedness of inputs and an individual’s experience. Such continuous representations enable fast pattern classification, can support continual learning, and may provide a basis for higher-order learning and cognitive computations.

    1. Neuroscience
    Mi-Seon Kong, Ethan Ancell ... Larry S Zweifel
    Research Article

    The central amygdala (CeA) has emerged as an important brain region for regulating both negative (fear and anxiety) and positive (reward) affective behaviors. The CeA has been proposed to encode affective information in the form of valence (whether the stimulus is good or bad) or salience (how significant is the stimulus), but the extent to which these two types of stimulus representation occur in the CeA is not known. Here, we used single cell calcium imaging in mice during appetitive and aversive conditioning and found that majority of CeA neurons (~65%) encode the valence of the unconditioned stimulus (US) with a smaller subset of cells (~15%) encoding the salience of the US. Valence and salience encoding of the conditioned stimulus (CS) was also observed, albeit to a lesser extent. These findings show that the CeA is a site of convergence for encoding oppositely valenced US information.