Sex differences in cerebellar synaptic transmission and sex-specific responses to autism-linked Gabrb3 mutations in mice
Abstract
Neurons of the cerebellar nuclei (CbN) transmit cerebellar signals to premotor areas. The cerebellum expresses several autism-linked genes, including Gabrb3, which encodes GABAA receptor β3 subunits and is among the maternal alleles deleted in Angelman syndrome. We tested how this Gabrb3 m-/p+ mutation affects CbN physiology in mice, separating responses of males and females. Wild-type mice showed sex differences in synaptic excitation, inhibition, and intrinsic properties. Relative to females, CbN cells of males had smaller synaptically evoked mGluR1/5-dependent currents, slower Purkinje-mediated IPSCs, and lower spontaneous firing rates, but rotarod performances were indistinguishable. In mutant CbN cells, IPSC kinetics were unchanged, but mutant males, unlike females, showed enlarged mGluR1/5 responses and accelerated spontaneous firing. These changes appear compensatory, since mutant males but not females performed indistinguishably from wild-type siblings on the rotarod task. Thus, sex differences in cerebellar physiology produce similar behavioral output, but provide distinct baselines for responses to mutations.
Article and author information
Author details
Ethics
Animal experimentation: All procedures conformed to institutional guidelines and were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of Northwestern University (Animal Welfare Assurance Number, A3283-01; IACUC Study #IS00000242).
Reviewing Editor
- Michael Häusser, University College London, United Kingdom
Version history
- Received: March 19, 2015
- Accepted: April 13, 2016
- Accepted Manuscript published: April 14, 2016 (version 1)
- Version of Record published: May 24, 2016 (version 2)
- Version of Record updated: June 17, 2016 (version 3)
Copyright
© 2016, Mercer 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
-
- 2,862
- Page views
-
- 592
- Downloads
-
- 30
- Citations
Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Scopus, Crossref, PubMed Central.
Download links
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)
Further reading
-
- Neuroscience
The functional complementarity of the vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR) and optokinetic reflex (OKR) allows for optimal combined gaze stabilization responses (CGR) in light. While sensory substitution has been reported following complete vestibular loss, the capacity of the central vestibular system to compensate for partial peripheral vestibular loss remains to be determined. Here, we first demonstrate the efficacy of a 6-week subchronic ototoxic protocol in inducing transient and partial vestibular loss which equally affects the canal- and otolith-dependent VORs. Immunostaining of hair cells in the vestibular sensory epithelia revealed that organ-specific alteration of type I, but not type II, hair cells correlates with functional impairments. The decrease in VOR performance is paralleled with an increase in the gain of the OKR occurring in a specific range of frequencies where VOR normally dominates gaze stabilization, compatible with a sensory substitution process. Comparison of unimodal OKR or VOR versus bimodal CGR revealed that visuo-vestibular interactions remain reduced despite a significant recovery in the VOR. Modeling and sweep-based analysis revealed that the differential capacity to optimally combine OKR and VOR correlates with the reproducibility of the VOR responses. Overall, these results shed light on the multisensory reweighting occurring in pathologies with fluctuating peripheral vestibular malfunction.
-
- Neuroscience
Genuinely new discovery transcends existing knowledge. Despite this, many analyses in systems neuroscience neglect to test new speculative hypotheses against benchmark empirical facts. Some of these analyses inadvertently use circular reasoning to present existing knowledge as new discovery. Here, I discuss that this problem can confound key results and estimate that it has affected more than three thousand studies in network neuroscience over the last decade. I suggest that future studies can reduce this problem by limiting the use of speculative evidence, integrating existing knowledge into benchmark models, and rigorously testing proposed discoveries against these models. I conclude with a summary of practical challenges and recommendations.