Salient experiences are represented by unique transcriptional signatures in the mouse brain

  1. Diptendu Mukherjee
  2. Bogna Marta Ignatowska-Jankowska
  3. Eyal Itskovits
  4. Ben Jerry Gonzales
  5. Hagit Turm
  6. Liz Izakson
  7. Doron Haritan
  8. Noa Bleistein
  9. Chen Cohen
  10. Ido Amit
  11. Tal Shay
  12. Brad Grueter
  13. Alon Zaslaver
  14. Ami Citri  Is a corresponding author
  1. The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel
  2. Weizmann Institute of Science, Israel
  3. Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel
  4. Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, United States

Abstract

It is well established that inducible transcription is essential for the consolidation of salient experiences into long-term memory. However, whether inducible transcription relays information about the identity and affective attributes of the experience being encoded, has not been explored. To this end, we analyzed transcription induced by a variety of rewarding and aversive experiences, across multiple brain regions. Our results describe the existence of robust transcriptional signatures uniquely representing distinct experiences, enabling near-perfect decoding of recent experiences. Furthermore, experiences with shared attributes display commonalities in their transcriptional signatures, exemplified in the representation of valence, habituation and reinforcement. This study introduces the concept of a neural transcriptional code, which represents the encoding of experiences in the mouse brain. This code is comprised of distinct transcriptional signatures that correlate to attributes of the experiences that are being committed to long-term memory.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Diptendu Mukherjee

    Department of Biological Chemistry, Silberman Institute for Life Sciences, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Bogna Marta Ignatowska-Jankowska

    The Edmond and Lily Safra Center for Brain Sciences, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Eyal Itskovits

    Department of Genetics, Silberman Institute for Life Sciences, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Ben Jerry Gonzales

    Department of Biological Chemistry, Silberman Institute for Life Sciences, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Hagit Turm

    Department of Biological Chemistry, Silberman Institute for Life Sciences, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Liz Izakson

    Department of Biological Chemistry, Silberman Institute for Life Sciences, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Doron Haritan

    Department of Biological Chemistry, Silberman Institute for Life Sciences, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Noa Bleistein

    Department of Biological Chemistry, Silberman Institute for Life Sciences, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Chen Cohen

    Department of Biological Chemistry, Silberman Institute for Life Sciences, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Ido Amit

    Department of Immunology, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Tal Shay

    Department of Life Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Brad Grueter

    Department of Anesthesiology, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4224-3866
  13. Alon Zaslaver

    Department of Genetics, Silberman Institute for Life Sciences, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Ami Citri

    Department of Biological Chemistry, Silberman Institute for Life Sciences, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
    For correspondence
    ami.citri@mail.huji.ac.il
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9914-0278

Funding

Israel Science Foundation (Personal Grant 393/12 & I-CORE 1796/12)

  • Ami Citri

The Lady Davis Postdoctoral Fellowship (Postdoctoral stipend)

  • Bogna Marta Ignatowska-Jankowska

German-Israeli Foundation for Scientific Research and Development (Young Investigator Award 2299-2291.1./2011)

  • Ami Citri

Brain and Behavior Research Foundation (Young Investigator Award #18795)

  • Ami Citri

Canadian Institute for Advanced Research (Research Support)

  • Ami Citri

Binational United-States Israel Research Foundation (Research Grant #2011266)

  • Ami Citri

Milton Rosenbaum Research Foundation (Research Grant)

  • Ami Citri

National Institutes for Psychobiology in Israel (Research Grant 109-15-16)

  • Ami Citri

Shimon Peres Postdoctoral Award (Postdoctoral stipend)

  • Bogna Marta Ignatowska-Jankowska

ELSC Postdoctoral Award (Postdoctoral stipend)

  • Bogna Marta Ignatowska-Jankowska

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 (#NS-13-13895-3 ; NS-15-14668-3 ; NS-14-14088-3 ; NS-15-14312-3 ; NS-15-14348-3) of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. The protocol was approved by the Committee on the Ethics of Animal Experiments of the Hebrew University. Every effort was made to minimize suffering.

Copyright

© 2018, Mukherjee 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

  • 7,002
    views
  • 1,075
    downloads
  • 36
    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. Diptendu Mukherjee
  2. Bogna Marta Ignatowska-Jankowska
  3. Eyal Itskovits
  4. Ben Jerry Gonzales
  5. Hagit Turm
  6. Liz Izakson
  7. Doron Haritan
  8. Noa Bleistein
  9. Chen Cohen
  10. Ido Amit
  11. Tal Shay
  12. Brad Grueter
  13. Alon Zaslaver
  14. Ami Citri
(2018)
Salient experiences are represented by unique transcriptional signatures in the mouse brain
eLife 7:e31220.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.31220

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.31220

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Katie Morris, Edita Bulovaite ... Mathew H Horrocks
    Research Article

    The concept that dimeric protein complexes in synapses can sequentially replace their subunits has been a cornerstone of Francis Crick’s 1984 hypothesis, explaining how long-term memories could be maintained in the face of short protein lifetimes. However, it is unknown whether the subunits of protein complexes that mediate memory are sequentially replaced in the brain and if this process is linked to protein lifetime. We address these issues by focusing on supercomplexes assembled by the abundant postsynaptic scaffolding protein PSD95, which plays a crucial role in memory. We used single-molecule detection, super-resolution microscopy and MINFLUX to probe the molecular composition of PSD95 supercomplexes in mice carrying genetically encoded HaloTags, eGFP, and mEoS2. We found a population of PSD95-containing supercomplexes comprised of two copies of PSD95, with a dominant 12.7 nm separation. Time-stamping of PSD95 subunits in vivo revealed that each PSD95 subunit was sequentially replaced over days and weeks. Comparison of brain regions showed subunit replacement was slowest in the cortex, where PSD95 protein lifetime is longest. Our findings reveal that protein supercomplexes within the postsynaptic density can be maintained by gradual replacement of individual subunits providing a mechanism for stable maintenance of their organization. Moreover, we extend Crick’s model by suggesting that synapses with slow subunit replacement of protein supercomplexes and long-protein lifetimes are specialized for long-term memory storage and that these synapses are highly enriched in superficial layers of the cortex where long-term memories are stored.

    1. Neuroscience
    John P Grogan, Matthias Raemaekers ... Sanjay G Manohar
    Research Article

    Motivation depends on dopamine, but might be modulated by acetylcholine which influences dopamine release in the striatum, and amplifies motivation in animal studies. A corresponding effect in humans would be important clinically, since anticholinergic drugs are frequently used in Parkinson’s disease, a condition that can also disrupt motivation. Reward and dopamine make us more ready to respond, as indexed by reaction times (RT), and move faster, sometimes termed vigour. These effects may be controlled by preparatory processes that can be tracked using electroencephalography (EEG). We measured vigour in a placebo-controlled, double-blinded study of trihexyphenidyl (THP), a muscarinic antagonist, with an incentivised eye movement task and EEG. Participants responded faster and with greater vigour when incentives were high, but THP blunted these motivational effects, suggesting that muscarinic receptors facilitate invigoration by reward. Preparatory EEG build-up (contingent negative variation [CNV]) was strengthened by high incentives and by muscarinic blockade, although THP reduced the incentive effect. The amplitude of preparatory activity predicted both vigour and RT, although over distinct scalp regions; frontal activity predicted vigour, whereas a larger, earlier, central component predicted RT. The incentivisation of RT was partly mediated by the CNV, though vigour was not. Moreover, the CNV mediated the drug’s effect on dampening incentives, suggesting that muscarinic receptors underlie the motivational influence on this preparatory activity. Taken together, these findings show that a muscarinic blocker impairs motivated action in healthy people, and that medial frontal preparatory neural activity mediates this for RT.