The DEG/ENaC cation channel protein UNC-8 drives activity-dependent synapse removal in remodeling GABAergic neurons

  1. Tyne W Miller-Fleming
  2. Sarah C Petersen
  3. Laura Manning
  4. Cristina Matthewman
  5. Megan Gornet
  6. Allison Beers
  7. Sayaka Hori
  8. Shohei Mitani
  9. Laura Bianchi
  10. Janet Richmond
  11. David M Miller III  Is a corresponding author
  1. Vanderbilt University, United States
  2. Kenyon College, United States
  3. University of Illinois at Chicago, United States
  4. University of Miami, United States
  5. Tokyo Women's Medical University, Japan

Abstract

Genetic programming and neural activity drive synaptic remodeling in developing neural circuits, but the molecular components that link these pathways are poorly understood. Here we show that the C. elegans Degenerin/Epithelial Sodium Channel (DEG/ENaC) protein, UNC-8, is transcriptionally controlled to function as a trigger in an activity-dependent mechanism that removes synapses in remodeling GABAergic neurons. UNC-8 cation channel activity promotes disassembly of presynaptic domains in DD type GABA neurons, but not in VD class GABA neurons where unc-8 expression is blocked by the COUP/TF transcription factor, UNC-55. We propose that the depolarizing effect of UNC-8-dependent sodium import elevates intracellular calcium in a positive feedback loop involving the voltage-gated calcium channel UNC-2 and the calcium-activated phosphatase TAX-6/calcineurin to initiate a caspase-dependent mechanism that disassembles the presynaptic apparatus. Thus, UNC-8 serves as a link between genetic and activity-dependent pathways that function together to promote the elimination of GABA synapses in remodeling neurons.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Tyne W Miller-Fleming

    Neuroscience Program, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Sarah C Petersen

    Department of Neuroscien, Kenyon College, Gambier, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Laura Manning

    Department of Biological Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1597-0600
  4. Cristina Matthewman

    Department of Physiology and Biophysics, University of Miami, Miami, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Megan Gornet

    Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Allison Beers

    Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Sayaka Hori

    Department of Physiology, Tokyo Women's Medical University, Tokyo, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Shohei Mitani

    Department of Physiology, Tokyo Women's Medical University, Tokyo, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Laura Bianchi

    Department of Physiology and Biophysics, University of Miami, Miami, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Janet Richmond

    Department of Biological Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. David M Miller III

    Neuroscience Program, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, United States
    For correspondence
    david.miller@vanderbilt.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9048-873X

Copyright

© 2016, Miller-Fleming 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

  • 3,299
    views
  • 584
    downloads
  • 33
    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. Tyne W Miller-Fleming
  2. Sarah C Petersen
  3. Laura Manning
  4. Cristina Matthewman
  5. Megan Gornet
  6. Allison Beers
  7. Sayaka Hori
  8. Shohei Mitani
  9. Laura Bianchi
  10. Janet Richmond
  11. David M Miller III
(2016)
The DEG/ENaC cation channel protein UNC-8 drives activity-dependent synapse removal in remodeling GABAergic neurons
eLife 5:e14599.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.14599

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.14599

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Christine Ahrends, Mark W Woolrich, Diego Vidaurre
    Tools and Resources

    Predicting an individual’s cognitive traits or clinical condition using brain signals is a central goal in modern neuroscience. This is commonly done using either structural aspects, such as structural connectivity or cortical thickness, or aggregated measures of brain activity that average over time. But these approaches are missing a central aspect of brain function: the unique ways in which an individual’s brain activity unfolds over time. One reason why these dynamic patterns are not usually considered is that they have to be described by complex, high-dimensional models; and it is unclear how best to use these models for prediction. We here propose an approach that describes dynamic functional connectivity and amplitude patterns using a Hidden Markov model (HMM) and combines it with the Fisher kernel, which can be used to predict individual traits. The Fisher kernel is constructed from the HMM in a mathematically principled manner, thereby preserving the structure of the underlying model. We show here, in fMRI data, that the HMM-Fisher kernel approach is accurate and reliable. We compare the Fisher kernel to other prediction methods, both time-varying and time-averaged functional connectivity-based models. Our approach leverages information about an individual’s time-varying amplitude and functional connectivity for prediction and has broad applications in cognitive neuroscience and personalised medicine.

    1. Neuroscience
    Jessica Royer, Valeria Kebets ... Boris C Bernhardt
    Research Article Updated

    Complex structural and functional changes occurring in typical and atypical development necessitate multidimensional approaches to better understand the risk of developing psychopathology. Here, we simultaneously examined structural and functional brain network patterns in relation to dimensions of psychopathology in the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) dataset. Several components were identified, recapitulating the psychopathology hierarchy, with the general psychopathology (p) factor explaining most covariance with multimodal imaging features, while the internalizing, externalizing, and neurodevelopmental dimensions were each associated with distinct morphological and functional connectivity signatures. Connectivity signatures associated with the p factor and neurodevelopmental dimensions followed the sensory-to-transmodal axis of cortical organization, which is related to the emergence of complex cognition and risk for psychopathology. Results were consistent in two separate data subsamples and robust to variations in analytical parameters. Although model parameters yielded statistically significant brain–behavior associations in unseen data, generalizability of the model was rather limited for all three latent components (r change from within- to out-of-sample statistics: LC1within = 0.36, LC1out = 0.03; LC2within = 0.34, LC2out = 0.05; LC3within = 0.35, LC3out = 0.07). Our findings help in better understanding biological mechanisms underpinning dimensions of psychopathology, and could provide brain-based vulnerability markers.