The N-terminus of the prion protein is a toxic effector regulated by the C-terminus

  1. Bei Wu
  2. Alex J McDonald
  3. Kathleen Markham
  4. Celeste B Rich
  5. Kyle P Mchugh
  6. Jörg Tatzelt
  7. David W Colby
  8. Glenn L Millhauser
  9. David A Harris  Is a corresponding author
  1. Boston University School of Medicine, United States
  2. University of California, Davis, United States
  3. University of Delaware, United States
  4. Institute of Biochemistry and Pathobiochemistry, Ruhr University Bochum, Germany
  5. UC Santa Cruz, United States

Abstract

PrPC, the cellular isoform of the prion protein, serves to transduce the neurotoxic effects of PrPSc, the infectious isoform, but how this occurs is mysterious. Here, using a combination of electrophysiological, cellular, and biophysical techniques, we show that the flexible, N-terminal domain of PrPC functions as a powerful toxicity-transducing effector whose activity is tightly regulated in cis by the globular C-terminal domain. Ligands binding to the N-terminal domain abolish the spontaneous ionic currents associated with neurotoxic mutants of PrP, and the isolated N-terminal domain induces currents when expressed in the absence of the C-terminal domain. Anti-PrP antibodies targeting epitopes in the C-terminal domain induce currents, and cause degeneration of dendrites on murine hippocampal neurons, effects that entirely dependent on the effector function of the N-terminus. NMR experiments demonstrate intramolecular docking between N- and C-terminal domains of PrPC, revealing a novel auto-inhibitory mechanism that regulates the functional activity of PrPC.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Bei Wu

    Department of Biochemistry, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Alex J McDonald

    Department of Biochemistry, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Kathleen Markham

    Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of California, Davis, Santa Cruz, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Celeste B Rich

    Department of Biochemistry, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Kyle P Mchugh

    Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, University of Delaware, Newark, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Jörg Tatzelt

    Department of Biochemistry of Neurodegenerative Diseases, Institute of Biochemistry and Pathobiochemistry, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5017-5528
  7. David W Colby

    Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, University of Delaware, Newark, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Glenn L Millhauser

    Department of Chemistry, UC Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. David A Harris

    Department of Biochemistry, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, United States
    For correspondence
    daharris@bu.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-6985-5790

Funding

National Institutes of Health (R01 NS065244)

  • Bei Wu
  • Alex J McDonald
  • Celeste B Rich
  • David A Harris

National Institutes of Health (R01 GM065790)

  • Kathleen Markham
  • Glenn L Millhauser

National Institutes of Health (GM104316)

  • Kyle P Mchugh
  • David W Colby

National Science Foundation (Grant 1454508)

  • Kyle P Mchugh
  • David W Colby

German Research Foundation ((TA 167/6))

  • Jörg Tatzelt

N.I.H. R01 NS065244 to D.A.H had a role in study design, data collection and interpretation.N.I.H. R01 GM065790 to G.L.M. had a role in data collection.N.I.H. GM104316 to D.W.C. and N.S.F. grant 1454508 to D.W.C. had a role in data collection.German Research Foundation (TA 167/6) to J.T. had a role in data collection.

Reviewing Editor

  1. J Paul Taylor, St Jude Children's Research Hospital, United States

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 (#AN14997) of Boston University.

Version history

  1. Received: November 21, 2016
  2. Accepted: May 17, 2017
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: May 20, 2017 (version 1)
  4. Accepted Manuscript updated: May 23, 2017 (version 2)
  5. Accepted Manuscript updated: May 24, 2017 (version 3)
  6. Version of Record published: June 13, 2017 (version 4)

Copyright

© 2017, Wu 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

  • 3,007
    views
  • 656
    downloads
  • 60
    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. Bei Wu
  2. Alex J McDonald
  3. Kathleen Markham
  4. Celeste B Rich
  5. Kyle P Mchugh
  6. Jörg Tatzelt
  7. David W Colby
  8. Glenn L Millhauser
  9. David A Harris
(2017)
The N-terminus of the prion protein is a toxic effector regulated by the C-terminus
eLife 6:e23473.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23473

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23473

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Sanggeon Park, Yeowool Huh ... Jeiwon Cho
    Research Article

    The brain’s ability to appraise threats and execute appropriate defensive responses is essential for survival in a dynamic environment. Humans studies have implicated the anterior insular cortex (aIC) in subjective fear regulation and its abnormal activity in fear/anxiety disorders. However, the complex aIC connectivity patterns involved in regulating fear remain under investigated. To address this, we recorded single units in the aIC of freely moving male mice that had previously undergone auditory fear conditioning, assessed the effect of optogenetically activating specific aIC output structures in fear, and examined the organization of aIC neurons projecting to the specific structures with retrograde tracing. Single-unit recordings revealed that a balanced number of aIC pyramidal neurons’ activity either positively or negatively correlated with a conditioned tone-induced freezing (fear) response. Optogenetic manipulations of aIC pyramidal neuronal activity during conditioned tone presentation altered the expression of conditioned freezing. Neural tracing showed that non-overlapping populations of aIC neurons project to the amygdala or the medial thalamus, and the pathway bidirectionally modulated conditioned fear. Specifically, optogenetic stimulation of the aIC-amygdala pathway increased conditioned freezing, while optogenetic stimulation of the aIC-medial thalamus pathway decreased it. Our findings suggest that the balance of freezing-excited and freezing-inhibited neuronal activity in the aIC and the distinct efferent circuits interact collectively to modulate fear behavior.

    1. Neuroscience
    Jonathan S Tsay, Hyosub E Kim ... Richard B Ivry
    Review Article

    Motor learning is often viewed as a unitary process that operates outside of conscious awareness. This perspective has led to the development of sophisticated models designed to elucidate the mechanisms of implicit sensorimotor learning. In this review, we argue for a broader perspective, emphasizing the contribution of explicit strategies to sensorimotor learning tasks. Furthermore, we propose a theoretical framework for motor learning that consists of three fundamental processes: reasoning, the process of understanding action–outcome relationships; refinement, the process of optimizing sensorimotor and cognitive parameters to achieve motor goals; and retrieval, the process of inferring the context and recalling a control policy. We anticipate that this ‘3R’ framework for understanding how complex movements are learned will open exciting avenues for future research at the intersection between cognition and action.