LRP1 regulates peroxisome biogenesis and cholesterol homeostasis in oligodendrocytes and is required for proper CNS myelin development and repair
Abstract
Low-density lipoprotein receptor-related protein-1 (LRP1) is a large endocytic and signaling molecule broadly expressed by neurons and glia. In adult mice, global inducible (Lrp1flox/flox;CAG-CreER) or oligodendrocyte (OL)-lineage specific ablation (Lrp1flox/flox;Pdgfra-CreER) of Lrp1 attenuates repair of damaged white matter. In oligodendrocyte progenitor cells (OPCs), Lrp1 is required for cholesterol homeostasis and differentiation into mature OLs. Lrp1 deficient OPC/OLs show a strong increase in the sterol-regulatory element-binding protein-2, yet are unable to maintain normal cholesterol levels, suggesting more global metabolic deficits. Mechanistic studies revealed a decrease in peroxisomal biogenesis factor-2 and fewer peroxisomes in OL processes. Treatment of Lrp1-/- OPCs with cholesterol or activation of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ with pioglitazone alone is not sufficient to promote differentiation; however when combined, cholesterol and pioglitazone enhance OPC differentiation into mature OLs. Collectively, our studies reveal a novel role for Lrp1 in peroxisome biogenesis, lipid homeostasis, and OPC differentiation during white matter development and repair.
Article and author information
Author details
Funding
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (T32HD007505)
- Yevgeniya A Mironova
National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32GM007315)
- Yevgeniya A Mironova
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01NS081281)
- Peter Shrager
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01NS081281)
- Roman J Giger
Schmitt Program on Integrative Brain Research
- Peter Shrager
Dr. Miriam and Sheldon G. Adelson Medical Research Foundation (APNRR)
- Roman J Giger
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.
Ethics
Animal experimentation: 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 protocols approved by the University committee on use and care for animals (IACUC protocols: #00005863 and #00005896) of the University of Michigan.
Copyright
© 2017, Lin 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
-
- 4,519
- views
-
- 735
- downloads
-
- 42
- citations
Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.
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
During rest and sleep, memory traces replay in the brain. The dialogue between brain regions during replay is thought to stabilize labile memory traces for long-term storage. However, because replay is an internally-driven, spontaneous phenomenon, it does not have a ground truth - an external reference that can validate whether a memory has truly been replayed. Instead, replay detection is based on the similarity between the sequential neural activity comprising the replay event and the corresponding template of neural activity generated during active locomotion. If the statistical likelihood of observing such a match by chance is sufficiently low, the candidate replay event is inferred to be replaying that specific memory. However, without the ability to evaluate whether replay detection methods are successfully detecting true events and correctly rejecting non-events, the evaluation and comparison of different replay methods is challenging. To circumvent this problem, we present a new framework for evaluating replay, tested using hippocampal neural recordings from rats exploring two novel linear tracks. Using this two-track paradigm, our framework selects replay events based on their temporal fidelity (sequence-based detection), and evaluates the detection performance using each event's track discriminability, where sequenceless decoding across both tracks is used to quantify whether the track replaying is also the most likely track being reactivated.
-
- Neuroscience
Spinal cord interneurons play critical roles shaping motor output, but their precise identity and connectivity remain unclear. Focusing on the V1 interneuron cardinal class we defined four major V1 subsets in the mouse according to neurogenesis, genetic lineage-tracing, synaptic output to motoneurons, and synaptic inputs from muscle afferents. Sequential neurogenesis delineates different V1 subsets: two early born (Renshaw and Pou6f2) and two late born (Foxp2 and Sp8). Early born Renshaw cells and late born Foxp2-V1 interneurons are tightly coupled to motoneurons, while early born Pou6f2-V1 and late born Sp8-V1 interneurons are not, indicating that timing of neurogenesis does not correlate with motoneuron targeting. V1 clades also differ in cell numbers and diversity. Lineage labeling shows that the Foxp2-V1 clade contains over half of all V1 interneurons, provides the largest inhibitory input to motoneuron cell bodies, and includes subgroups that differ in birthdate, location, and proprioceptive input. Notably, one Foxp2-V1 subgroup, defined by postnatal Otp expression, is positioned near the LMC and receives substantial input from proprioceptors, consistent with an involvement in reciprocal inhibitory pathways. Combined tracing of ankle flexor sensory afferents and interneurons monosynaptically connected to ankle extensors confirmed placement of Foxp2-V1 interneurons in reciprocal inhibitory pathways. Our results validate previously proposed V1 clades as unique functional subtypes that differ in circuit placement, with Foxp2-V1 cells forming the most heterogeneous subgroup. We discuss how V1 organizational diversity enables understanding of their roles in motor control, with implications for their diverse ontogenetic and phylogenetic origins.