Sleep deprivation causes memory deficits by negatively impacting neuronal connectivity in hippocampal area CA1

  1. Robbert Havekes  Is a corresponding author
  2. Alan J Park
  3. Jennifer C Tudor
  4. Vincent G Luczak
  5. Rolf T Hansen
  6. Sarah L Ferri
  7. Vibeke M Bruinenberg
  8. Shane G Poplawski
  9. Jonathan P Day
  10. Sara J Aton
  11. Kasia Radwańska
  12. Peter Meerlo
  13. Miles D Houslay
  14. George S Baillie
  15. Ted Abel  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Pennsylvania, United States
  2. Columbia University, United States
  3. University of Groningen, Netherlands
  4. University of Glasgow, United Kingdom
  5. University of Michigan, United States
  6. Nencki Institute of Experimental Biology, Poland
  7. King's College London, United Kingdom

Abstract

Brief periods of sleep loss have long-lasting consequences such as impaired memory consolidation. Structural changes in synaptic connectivity have been proposed as a substrate of memory storage. Here, we examine the impact of brief periods of sleep deprivation on dendritic structure. In mice, we find that five hours of sleep deprivation decreases dendritic spine numbers selectively in hippocampal area CA1 and increased activity of the filamentous actin severing protein cofilin. Recovery sleep normalizes these structural alterations. Suppression of cofilin function prevents spine loss, deficits in hippocampal synaptic plasticity, and impairments in long-term memory caused by sleep deprivation. The elevated cofilin activity is caused by cAMP-degrading phosphodiesterase-4A5 (PDE4A5), which hampers cAMP-PKA-LIMK signaling. Attenuating PDE4A5 function prevents changes in cAMP-PKA-LIMK-cofilin signaling and cognitive deficits associated with sleep deprivation. Our work demonstrates the necessity of an intact cAMP-PDE4-PKA-LIMK-cofilin activation-signaling pathway for sleep deprivation-induced memory disruption and reduction in hippocampal spine density.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Robbert Havekes

    Department of Biology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States
    For correspondence
    r.havekes@rug.nl
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Alan J Park

    Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Jennifer C Tudor

    Department of Biology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3826-3012
  4. Vincent G Luczak

    Department of Biology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Rolf T Hansen

    Department of Biology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Sarah L Ferri

    Department of Biology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Vibeke M Bruinenberg

    Groningen Institute for Evolutionary Life Sciences, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Shane G Poplawski

    Department of Biology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Jonathan P Day

    Institute of Cardiovascular and Medical Science, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Sara J Aton

    LSA Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Kasia Radwańska

    Laboratory of Molecular Basis of Behavior, Nencki Institute of Experimental Biology, Warsaw, Poland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Peter Meerlo

    Groningen Institute for Evolutionary Life Sciences, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Miles D Houslay

    Institute of Pharmaceutical Science, King's College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. George S Baillie

    Institute of Cardiovascular and Medical Science, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Ted Abel

    Department of Biology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States
    For correspondence
    abele@sas.upenn.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2423-4592

Funding

National Institutes of Health (1RO1MH086415)

  • Ted Abel

National Institutes of Health (RO1, AG017628)

  • Ted Abel

Netherlands organization for Scientific Research (postdoctoral fellowship 825.07.029)

  • Robbert Havekes

University of Pennsylvania (UPENN rsearch foundation grant)

  • Robbert Havekes
  • Ted Abel

National Institutes of Health (postdoctoral fellowship, 5K12GM081529)

  • Jennifer C Tudor

National Institutes of Health (postdoctoral fellowship, T32 NS077413)

  • Sarah L Ferri

European Commission (FP7-PEOPLE-2009-RG-Alco_CaMK)

  • Kasia Radwańska

NCN grant Harmonia 2013/08/m/NZ3/00861 (Research grant)

  • Kasia Radwańska

Medical Research Council (Grant MR/J007412/1)

  • George S Baillie

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Ethics

Animal experimentation: This study was performed in strict accordance with the recommendations in the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals of the National Institutes of Health. All of the animals were handled according to approved institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC protocols 804240, 804407, 802784) of the University of Pennsylvania and Head Necki Institute of Experimental Biology, Warsaw.

Copyright

© 2016, Havekes 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

  • 22,463
    views
  • 2,322
    downloads
  • 211
    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. Robbert Havekes
  2. Alan J Park
  3. Jennifer C Tudor
  4. Vincent G Luczak
  5. Rolf T Hansen
  6. Sarah L Ferri
  7. Vibeke M Bruinenberg
  8. Shane G Poplawski
  9. Jonathan P Day
  10. Sara J Aton
  11. Kasia Radwańska
  12. Peter Meerlo
  13. Miles D Houslay
  14. George S Baillie
  15. Ted Abel
(2016)
Sleep deprivation causes memory deficits by negatively impacting neuronal connectivity in hippocampal area CA1
eLife 5:e13424.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.13424

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.13424

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Yafen Li, Yixuan Lin ... Antao Chen
    Research Article

    Concurrent verbal working memory task can eliminate the color-word Stroop effect. Previous research, based on specific and limited resources, suggested that the disappearance of the conflict effect was due to the memory information preempting the resources for distractors. However, it remains unclear which particular stage of Stroop conflict processing is influenced by working memory loads. In this study, electroencephalography (EEG) recordings with event-related potential (ERP) analyses, time-frequency analyses, multivariate pattern analyses (MVPAs), and representational similarity analyses (RSAs) were applied to provide an in-depth investigation of the aforementioned issue. Subjects were required to complete the single task (the classical manual color-word Stroop task) and the dual task (the Sternberg working memory task combined with the Stroop task), respectively. Behaviorally, the results indicated that the Stroop effect was eliminated in the dual-task condition. The EEG results showed that the concurrent working memory task did not modulate the P1, N450, and alpha bands. However, it modulated the sustained potential (SP), late theta (740–820 ms), and beta (920–1040 ms) power, showing no difference between congruent and incongruent trials in the dual-task condition but significant difference in the single-task condition. Importantly, the RSA results revealed that the neural activation pattern of the late theta was similar to the response interaction pattern. Together, these findings implied that the concurrent working memory task eliminated the Stroop effect through disrupting stimulus-response mapping.

    1. Neuroscience
    Takashi Yamamoto, Kayoko Ueji ... Shinya Ugawa
    Research Article

    The concept of ‘kokumi’, which refers to an enhanced and more delicious flavor of food, has recently generated considerable interest in food science. However, kokumi has not been well studied in gustatory physiology, and the underlying neuroscientific mechanisms remain largely unexplored. Our previous research demonstrated that ornithine (L-ornithine), which is abundant in shijimi clams, enhanced taste preferences in mice. The present study aimed to build on these findings and investigate the mechanisms responsible for kokumi in rats. In two-bottle preference tests, the addition of ornithine, at a low concentration that did not increase the favorability of this substance alone, enhanced the animals’ preferences for umami, sweet, fatty, salty, and bitter solutions, with the intake of monosodium glutamate showing the most significant increase. Additionally, a mixture of umami and ornithine synergistically induced significant responses in the chorda tympani nerve, which transmits taste information to the brain from the anterior part of the tongue. The observed preference enhancement and increase in taste-nerve response were abolished by antagonists of the G-protein-coupled receptor family C group 6 subtype A (GPRC6A). Furthermore, immunohistochemical analysis indicated that GPRC6A was expressed in a subset of type II taste cells in rat fungiform papillae. These results provide new insights into flavor-enhancement mechanisms, confirming that ornithine is a kokumi substance and GPRC6A is a novel kokumi receptor.