Selective Rab11 transport and the intrinsic regenerative ability of CNS axons

  1. Hiroaki Koseki
  2. Matteo Donegá
  3. Brian YH Lam
  4. Veselina Petrova
  5. Susan van Erp
  6. Giles SH Yeo
  7. Jessica CF Kwok
  8. Charles ffrench-Constant
  9. RIchard Eva  Is a corresponding author
  10. James Fawcett  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Cambridge, United Kingdom
  2. University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom
  3. University of Leeds, United Kingdom

Abstract

Neurons lose intrinsic axon regenerative ability with maturation, but the mechanism remains unclear. Using an in-vitro laser axotomy model, we show a progressive decline in the ability of cut CNS axons to form a new growth cone and then elongate. Failure of regeneration was associated with increased retraction after axotomy. Transportation into axons becomes selective with maturation; we hypothesized that selective exclusion of molecules needed for growth may contribute to regeneration decline. With neuronal maturity Rab11 vesicles (which carry many molecules involved in axon growth) became selectively targeted to the somatodendritic compartment and excluded from axons. Their transport changed from bidirectional to retrograde. However, on overexpression Rab11 was mistrafficked into proximal axons, and these axons showed less retraction and enhanced regeneration after axotomy. These results suggest that the decline of intrinsic axon regenerative ability is associated with selective exclusion of key molecules, and that manipulation of transport can enhance regeneration.

Data availability

The following data sets were generated
    1. Lam B
    2. Koseki H
    (2016) Maturation of cortical neurons
    Publicly available at NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus (accession no: GSE92856).

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Hiroaki Koseki

    Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Matteo Donegá

    Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Brian YH Lam

    Metabolic Research Laboratories and MRC Metabolic Diseases Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Veselina Petrova

    Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Susan van Erp

    MRC Centre of Regenerative Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0883-2795
  6. Giles SH Yeo

    Metabolic Research Laboratories and MRC Metabolic Diseases Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Jessica CF Kwok

    School of Biomedical Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Charles ffrench-Constant

    MRC Centre for Regenerative Medicine, Centre for Multiple Sclerosis Research, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. RIchard Eva

    Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    re263@cam.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. James Fawcett

    John van Geest Centre for Brain Repair, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    jf108@cam.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-7990-4568

Funding

Medical Research Council (G1000864)

  • James Fawcett

Christopher and Dana Reeve Foundation (International Consortium)

  • James Fawcett

European Research Council (ECMneuro)

  • James Fawcett

GlaxoSmithKline International Scholarship

  • Hiroaki Koseki

Honjo International Scholarship Foundation

  • Hiroaki Koseki

Bristol Myers Squibb Graduate Studentship

  • Hiroaki Koseki

National Institute of Health Research (Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre)

  • James Fawcett

Czech ministry of education (CZ.02.1.01/0.0./0.0/15_003/0000419)

  • Jessica CF Kwok
  • James Fawcett

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. K VijayRaghavan, National Centre for Biological Sciences, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, India

Version history

  1. Received: March 18, 2017
  2. Accepted: August 7, 2017
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: August 8, 2017 (version 1)
  4. Accepted Manuscript updated: August 10, 2017 (version 2)
  5. Accepted Manuscript updated: August 30, 2017 (version 3)
  6. Version of Record published: September 22, 2017 (version 4)

Copyright

© 2017, Koseki 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

  • 3,562
    views
  • 626
    downloads
  • 57
    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. Hiroaki Koseki
  2. Matteo Donegá
  3. Brian YH Lam
  4. Veselina Petrova
  5. Susan van Erp
  6. Giles SH Yeo
  7. Jessica CF Kwok
  8. Charles ffrench-Constant
  9. RIchard Eva
  10. James Fawcett
(2017)
Selective Rab11 transport and the intrinsic regenerative ability of CNS axons
eLife 6:e26956.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.26956

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.26956

Further reading

    1. Genetics and Genomics
    2. Neuroscience
    Kenneth Chiou, Noah Snyder-Mackler
    Insight

    Single-cell RNA sequencing reveals the extent to which marmosets carry genetically distinct cells from their siblings.

    1. Neuroscience
    Flavio J Schmidig, Simon Ruch, Katharina Henke
    Research Article

    We are unresponsive during slow-wave sleep but continue monitoring external events for survival. Our brain wakens us when danger is imminent. If events are non-threatening, our brain might store them for later consideration to improve decision-making. To test this hypothesis, we examined whether novel vocabulary consisting of simultaneously played pseudowords and translation words are encoded/stored during sleep, and which neural-electrical events facilitate encoding/storage. An algorithm for brain-state-dependent stimulation selectively targeted word pairs to slow-wave peaks or troughs. Retrieval tests were given 12 and 36 hr later. These tests required decisions regarding the semantic category of previously sleep-played pseudowords. The sleep-played vocabulary influenced awake decision-making 36 hr later, if targeted to troughs. The words’ linguistic processing raised neural complexity. The words’ semantic-associative encoding was supported by increased theta power during the ensuing peak. Fast-spindle power ramped up during a second peak likely aiding consolidation. Hence, new vocabulary played during slow-wave sleep was stored and influenced decision-making days later.