Early-onset generalized torsion dystonia (DYT1) is an autosomal dominant movement disorder, commonly caused by a GAG base-pair deletion in the TOR1A gene coding for torsinA protein, without gross brain structural defects or other detectable neuropathology (Ozelius et al., 1997; Ledoux et al., 2013). Intriguingly, only 30–40% of DYT1 mutation carriers develop dystonia, typically in childhood-early adolescence (Bressman et al., 2000). However, what triggers the clinical onset of symptoms is currently unknown, although the presence of a critical developmental period of susceptibility is highly probable, since mutation carriers that do not develop symptoms in that time-window remain unaffected for their entire life (Pappas et al., 2014).

Plasticity changes include functional and structural synaptic specialization, leading to experience-dependent acquisition of motor skills. However, genetic or acquired alterations may lead to maladaptive plasticity changes. Accordingly, human studies indicate neural processing and synaptic plasticity alterations as major determinants in dystonia pathophysiology (Quartarone and Hallett, 2013). A significantly enhanced responsiveness to plasticity protocols has been reported in dystonic patients (Edwards et al., 2006; Weise et al., 2006; Quartarone et al., 2009). Moreover, patterns of impaired motor learning have been described even in clinically unaffected DYT1 mutation carriers (Ghilardi et al., 2003), further supporting the notion that aberrant plasticity represents a unique endophenotype in dystonia.

Of note, an impairment of striatal plasticity has been demonstrated in a number of different DYT1 models, including transgenic mice and rats overexpressing mutant torsinA (Martella et al., 2009; Grundmann et al., 2012), knock-in mice heterozygous for Δgag-torsinA (Dang et al., 2012; Martella et al., 2014; Rittiner et al., 2016), revealing an impressive similarity with studies of synaptic plasticity in human dystonia. Collectively, these observations support the hypothesis that DYT1 dystonia is a complex neurodevelopmental disorder of abnormal neurochemistry, wiring, and physiology (Goodchild et al., 2013; Pappas et al., 2014).

However, these alterations were observed in adult rodents, and to date, a relationship between age and corticostriatal plasticity in dystonia is still lacking. Furthermore, the question as to whether functional and structural plasticity abnormalities occur early in life or later as adaptive changes remains unknown. We report structural and functional abnormalities occurring in a defined postnatal time-window in Tor1a^+/Δgag mice, indicative of a ‘premature’ and abnormal functional and structural plasticity, which is paralleled by a time-dependent increase in both BDNF levels and AMPAR-mediated currents.

Our findings reveal molecular, functional and structural changes in DYT1 striatal spiny projection neurons (SPNs), emphasizing the link between abnormal plasticity and dystonia. Understanding the key stages at which synaptic circuits are affected could suggest new routes to prevent or treat the disorder.

The critical period for symptom onset in DYT1 dystonia matches a time-window of postnatal life when motor memories are shaped by activity-dependent changes in the striatum. Thus, in order to characterize plasticity changes in the early adolescence, Tor1a^+/Δgag mice were recorded from postnatal day P15 to P35, in good agreement with the approximate life phase equivalencies between humans and mice, predicting that ~4 weeks of mouse age correspond to ~14 years in humans (Flurkey et al., 2007).

Electrophysiological characterization of SPNs

Properties of adult Tor1a^+/Δgag SPNs have been extensively characterized (Maltese et al., 2014; Martella et al., 2014). Here, we focused on intrinsic and synaptic properties of juvenile Tor1a^+/Δgag neurons. SPNs recorded at P26 from both Tor1a^+/+ and Tor1a^+/Δgag mice did not display firing activity at rest and exhibited no significant differences in their intrinsic membrane properties (data not shown). Depolarizing and hyperpolarizing current steps caused tonic action potential discharge and strong inward membrane rectification (Figure 1A). Short ISI (25–50 ms) of paired synaptic stimulation induced PPF in both genotypes (Figure 1B; p<0.05). At longer ISI (100–1000 ms), PPF was not observed in juvenile Tor1a^+/+ and Tor1a^+/Δgag mice (Figure 1B; p>0.05). To explore potential differences in neurotransmitter release, we recorded spontaneous glutamate- and GABA-mediated currents in P26 SPNs from both Tor1a^+/+ and Tor1a^+/Δgag mice. Glutamatergic sEPSCs did not differ between genotypes (Figure 1C; p>0.05). However, we found a significant increase in the amplitude, but not in the frequency, of mEPSCs recorded from Tor1a^+/Δgag mice compared to wild types (Figure 1D; p<0.05). Conversely, GABAergic sIPSCs were unchanged in Tor1a^+/Δgag with respect to Tor1a^+/+ littermates (Figure 1E; p>0.05). Also, mIPSCs were similar in both genotypes (Figure 1F; p>0.05).

Figure 1

Download asset Open asset

Figure 1—source data 1

Electrophysiological and synaptic properties of striatal SPNs.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.33331.003

Download elife-33331-fig1-data1-v2.xlsx

Premature expression of corticostriatal synaptic plasticity

We previously demonstrated a marked impairment of bidirectional synaptic plasticity in adult (P60-P75) Tor1a^+/Δgag striatum (Martella et al., 2014). However, it remains unclear whether these patterns of abnormal plasticity are core pathologic features in an early developmental period, or occur later as maladaptive changes. Thus, we performed a detailed characterization of LTD and LTP from P15 to P35 in Tor1a^+/+ and Tor1a^+/Δgag mice. In Tor1a^+/+ SPNs, HFS failed to induce LTD from P15 to P27 (Figure 2A; p>0.05). Conversely, the HFS protocol elicited a robust LTD from P28 to P35 (Figure 2A; 59.63 ± 2.63% of control; p<0.05). Surprisingly, in slices from Tor1a^+/Δgag mice, HFS stimulation failed to cause a synaptic depression, independently from the postnatal day of recording (Figure 2B; p>0.05).

Figure 2

Download asset Open asset

Figure 2—source data 1

Altered developmental profile of corticostriatal long-term synaptic plasticity expression in Tor1a^+/Δgag mice.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.33331.005

Download elife-33331-fig2-data1-v2.xlsx

The LTP induction protocol failed to elicit a potentiation in Tor1a^+/+ mice from P15 to P23 (Partridge et al., 2000) (Figure 2C; p>0.05), whereas a stable LTP occurred from P24 to P35 (Figure 2C; 148.80 ± 15.39% of control; p<0.05). Unexpectedly, in Tor1a^+/Δgag SPNs LTP could be evoked as early as P15, revealing a premature onset, and showed a tendency to increase, compared to wild types (Figure 2D; Tor1a^+/Δgag P15-23, 174.68 ± 22.59% of control; P24-35, 172.35 ± 11.06% of control; p<0.05).

The pattern of torsinA expression is common to all striatal DARPP-32-labeled neurons (Martella et al., 2009). To unmask potential differences between direct- and indirect-pathway SPNs, recording electrodes were filled with biocytin. Enkephalin staining revealed that neither ENK-positive nor ENK-negative SPNs exhibited LTD, ruling out a possible segregation to a specific population of SPNs (Figure 2E).

Collectively, these data demonstrate that LTD appeared at P28 in wild-type mice, whereas it could not be elicited during the entire postnatal period of observation in Tor1a^+/Δgag mice (Figure 2E). Moreover, while in Tor1a^+/+ mice LTP could not be evoked before P24, in SPNs from Tor1a^+/Δgag LTP appeared prematurely at P15 (Figure 2F).

Increased AMPA receptor function and abundance at corticostriatal synapses during development

Changes in synaptic strength during learning and memory processes implicate an accurate regulation of AMPARs and NMDARs expression at postsynaptic membranes (Bassani et al., 2013; Czöndör and Thoumine, 2013). Thus, we performed an electrophysiological and biochemical characterization of AMPARs and NMDARs of SPNs in both Tor1a^+/+ and Tor1a^+/Δgag mice.

To investigate the relative abundance of postsynaptic AMPARs and NMDARs, NMDAR/AMPAR current ratios at corticostriatal synapses were evaluated in both juvenile (P26) and adult (P60) Tor1a^+/+ and Tor1a^+/Δgag SPNs (Figure 3A–B). We found that, at P26, the NMDAR/AMPAR ratio was significantly reduced in Tor1a^+/Δgag SPNs compared to wild types (Figure 3A; p<0.05). Conversely, no significant differences were recorded in P60 SPNs of both genotypes (Figure 3B; p>0.05). A reduced NMDAR/AMPAR ratio could reflect an increase in AMPAR function or number, a decrease in NMDARs function, or even a combination of both. To detect possible differences in the composition of postsynaptic glutamate receptors in P26 SPNs, a IV relationship of AMPAR-EPSC was recorded (Figure 3C). Tor1a^+/Δgag SPNs showed a significantly increased current at hyperpolarized voltage ranges (Figure 3C; 2-way ANOVA, p<0.01;HP= −70 mV). The GluA2 subunit reduces AMPAR permeability to Ca²⁺. Therefore, depending on the subunit composition, AMPAR-EPSC may show a linear or an inward-rectifying IV relationship (Cull-Candy et al., 2006). Thus, we measured the rectification index (RI), calculated as the ratio between the AMPAR-EPSC at −70 mV and at +40 mV (Isaac et al., 2007). We observed no significant difference in RI between genotypes (Figure 3C; p>0.05), suggesting that the enhanced AMPAR current involves an increased surface expression of AMPARs, rather than an altered receptor composition. Moreover, the AMPAR-EPSC IV relationship was also recorded in the presence of the selective antagonist of GluA2-lacking AMPARs, NASPM (100 μM). No significant difference in the RI of P26 SPNs was measured in the presence of NASPM (Figure 3D; p>0.05); yet, at hyperpolarized voltage ranges AMPAR-mediated current was still increased in Tor1a^+/Δgag SPNs (Figure 3D; two-way ANOVA, p<0.01 at HP =−70 mV). These results further excluded possible alterations of AMPAR surface composition.

Figure 3

Download asset Open asset

Figure 3—source data 1

Electrophysiological characterization of AMPAR and NMDAR currents at corticostriatal synapses of SPNs in both Tor1a^+/+ and Tor1a^+/Δgag mice.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.33331.007

Download elife-33331-fig3-data1-v2.xlsx

The normalized IV relationship of NMDAR-EPSCs showed the characteristic ‘J-shape’ (Mayer et al., 1984) in SPNs recorded at P26 from both genotypes (Figure 3E). No significant difference was found in the voltage-dependence of NMDARs (p>0.05). By analyzing the kinetics of the response at HP =+ 40 mV, we detected a significantly decreased decay time in Tor1a^+/Δgag mice compared to controls (Figure 3F,G; p<0.05), despite a comparable rise time, suggesting a modification of NMDAR subunit composition (Paoletti et al., 2013). In particular, it is well-established that the decay time of NMDAR currents is correlated to the amount of GluN2-type subunits. GluN2A and GluN2B represent the most abundant NMDAR regulatory subunits expressed in SPNs (Chen and Reiner, 1996; Dunah and Standaert, 2003) and are characterized by a fast and slow decay time, respectively (Sanz-Clemente et al., 2013).

Taking into account all the above-described electrophysiological results, we evaluated the levels of AMPAR and NMDAR subunits into TIF fractions purified from striata of both juvenile (P26) and adult (P60) mice by means of WB analysis. We found a significant increase in the levels of both GluA1 and GluA2 AMPAR subunits in the postsynaptic compartment of P26 Tor1a^+/Δgag mice compared to controls (Figure 4A,B; p<0.05), consistent with the observed reduction of the NMDA/AMPA ratio and the absence of any alteration of the RI (see Figure 3). Interestingly, we also found an increase of phosphorylation at GluA1-Ser845 (Figure 4A,B;, p<0.05), which is known to be correlated with LTP expression and to prevent endocytosis of GluA1-containing AMPARs (Oh et al., 2006; Bassani et al., 2013). Moreover, in agreement with the reduction of the NMDAR decay time, we observed an increase of GluN2A but not GluN2B subunit at postsynaptic sites of P26 Tor1a^+/Δgag mice compared to Tor1a^+/+ (Figure 4C,D; p<0.05). Finally, no modifications of PSD-95, the most abundant scaffolding protein at the excitatory synapse, was observed (Figure 4C,D). Notably, these alterations of AMPAR and NMDAR subunits were not present in SPNs from P60 Tor1a^+/Δgag mice (Figure 4; p>0.05).

Figure 4

Download asset Open asset

Next, we performed a detailed evaluation of dendritic spine density and morphology in Tor1a^+/Δgag SPNs, compared to age-matched Tor1a^+/+ mice. P26 Tor1a^+/Δgag SPNs (Figure 5A–D) exhibited a higher number of mushroom-type spines (Figure 5C; p<0.05) and, consequently, a concomitant overall increase of dendritic spine width compared to Tor1a^+/+ mice (Figure 5B; p<0.05), thus suggesting an advanced stage of spine maturation, in agreement with the observed molecular GluN2A/GluN2B switch (see Figure 4). This event was associated, as expected, to an overall decrease of dendritic spine density (Figure 5A; p<0.05).

Figure 5

Download asset Open asset

Figure 5—source data 1

Analysis of dendritic spines morphology in P26 Tor1a^+/Δgag compared to age-matched Tor1a^+/+ mice.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.33331.010

Download elife-33331-fig5-data1-v2.xls

Figure 5—source data 2

Analysis of dendritic spines morphology in P60 Tor1a^+/Δgag compared to age-matched Tor1a^+/+ mice.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.33331.011

Download elife-33331-fig5-data2-v2.xls

Conversely, P60 Tor1a^+/Δgag mice (Figure 5E–H) showed a normalization of dendritic spine density (Figure 5E; p>0.05) and of spine width (Figure 5F; p>0.05) compared to Tor1a^+/+ mice. Furthermore, with respect to P26, at P60 the number of mushrooms remained unchanged in Tor1a^+/Δgag mice but increased in Tor1a^+/+ (Figure 5G; p<0.05). Yet, at P60 Tor1a^+/Δgag mice showed an increase of thin spines compared to Tor1a^+/+ mice (Figure 5G; p<0.05).

Increased BDNF protein expression in Tor1a^+/Δgag striatum at P26

Neurotrophic factors play a fundamental role in the development of SPNs and synaptic plasticity maturation (Altar et al., 1997; Rauskolb et al., 2010). Particularly, BDNF contributes to the developmental expression of AMPAR subunits at postsynaptic compartments (Jourdi et al., 2003; Jourdi and Kabbaj, 2013). The majority of BDNF, anterogradely transported to the striatum, originates from the cortex, where its expression begins in the first postnatal days (Baydyuk and Xu, 2014). We first performed a WB time-course analysis of BDNF protein level in P15, P26 and adult (P60-P75) striatum. BDNF expression profile showed a similar age-dependent time-course in both genotypes (Figure 6A,B; P15 vs P26: Tor1a^+/+ p<0.05; Tor1a^+/Δgagp<0.01). As indicated by the BDNF/proBDNF ratio, in line with previous evidence (Zermeño et al., 2009), BDNF was highly expressed at P15 in both strains. At P26 the signal decreased, and then reached intermediate values in adults (Figure 6A,B).

Figure 6

Download asset Open asset

Figure 6—source data 1

BDNF protein expression in the striatum of Tor1a^+/+ and Tor1a^+/Δgag mice.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.33331.013

Download elife-33331-fig6-data1-v2.xlsx

Next, we compared striatal proBDNF and BDNF protein levels between genotypes at P26. In line with previous evidence, proBDNF was detected as a double band at ~32 KDa, whereas mature BDNF as a single band at 14 KDa (Hartog et al., 2009; Koshimizu et al., 2009; Mandel et al., 2009; Tropea et al., 2011) (Figure 6C). Both proBDNF and BDNF levels were increased at P26 in Tor1a^+/Δgag striatum (Figure 6C; proBDNF p<0.01, BDNF p<0.05). We therefore examined Bdnf mRNA expression in Tor1a^+/Δgag cortex. Quantitative PCR revealed an increased Bdnf expression in Tor1a^+/Δgag cortex as compared to Tor1a^+/+ (Figure 6D; p<0.05). No significant difference between genotypes was measured in the proBDNF and BDNF striatal protein levels in adult mice (Figure 6E; p>0.05). Collectively, these data indicate an increase of BDNF level in P26 Tor1a^+/Δgag striatum.

BDNF regulates surface AMPA receptor expression and synaptic plasticity

BDNF has been shown to contribute to LTP induction in normal mice (Jia et al., 2010). To test whether the increase in BDNF levels was involved in the abnormal regulation of AMPA currents and in the synaptic plasticity deficits, BDNF signalling was selectively blocked by the tropomyosin-related kinase B (TrkB) receptor competitive antagonist, ANA-12 (Cazorla et al., 2011). A single in vivo administration of ANA-12 (0.5 mg/kg, intraperitoneal, 4 hr before the experiment) failed to rescue synaptic plasticity deficits in young Tor1a^+/Δgag mice (data not shown). However, repetitive treatment with ANA-12 (0.5 mg/kg, intraperitoneal, 12 hr and 4 hr before the experiment; Cazorla et al., 2011; Stragier et al., 2015), completely rescued corticostriatal LTD expression in P28-35 Tor1a^+/Δgag mice (Figure 7A; p<0.05). Additionally, ANA-12 treatment reduced LTP amplitude in P24-35 Tor1a^+/Δgag mice (Figure 7B; p>0.05). In vehicle-treated Tor1a^+/+ and Tor1a^+/Δgag mice, no significant change was observed (data not shown).

Figure 7

Download asset Open asset

Figure 7—source data 1

In vivo ANA-12 treatment rescues synaptic plasticity deficits in juvenile Tor1a^+/Δgag mice.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.33331.015

Download elife-33331-fig7-data1-v2.xlsx

Likewise, in vivo treatment with ANA-12 totally normalized the IV curve of AMPAR-EPSC in P26 Tor1a^+/Δgag mice (Figure 7C; p>0.05). Accordingly, also the RI displayed no significant difference between genotypes (Figure 7C; p>0.05). These findings suggest that increased BDNF levels are involved in the abnormal developmental expression of AMPARs on SPN postsynaptic membranes, leading to synaptic plasticity alterations in juvenile mice.

Finally, to demonstrate that BDNF alterations occur in a defined time-window, we tested the effect of ANA-12 on corticostriatal LTD expression in adult Tor1a^+/Δgag mice. In vivo treatment with ANA-12 (0.5 mg/kg, intraperitoneal, two administrations at 12 hr and 4 hr before the experiment) failed to restore corticostriatal LTD in P60 Tor1a^+/Δgag mice (Figure 7D; p>0.05) confirming that BDNF-dependent alterations are limited to a sensitive period.

The critical period for the onset of symptoms in DYT1 dystonia patients matches an early time-window of activity-dependent plastic changes in the striatum, which shape motor memory and learning processes during childhood and early adolescence.

Our systematic analysis of functional and structural synaptic plasticity in DYT1 dystonia demonstrates: (i) The existence of a critical period when SPNs exhibit premature LTP; (ii) A significant increase of AMPAR levels in the postsynaptic compartment which correlates with the reduction of NMDA/AMPA ratio, the increased amplitudes of postsynaptic currents and the rightward shift in the AMPA I-V curve observed in juvenile Tor1a^+/Δgag mice; (iii) A BDNF time-dependent increase in expression profile, which parallels the alterations described; (iv) abnormal plasticity is associated with profound changes of dendritic spine density and morphology in juvenile Tor1a^+/Δgag; (v) A rescue of the synaptic plasticity deficits is obtained by in vivo administration of a TrkB inhibitor.

It is currently unknown why penetrance is only 30% in DYT1 mutation carriers. One possibility is that at circuit level, motor system is already impaired early during development. The existence of a defined period in which neurons are particularly susceptible to experience-driven modifications is well-established, concurrently with structural modifications, and is currently believed to represent a nodal mechanism both in physiological and pathological conditions (Turrigiano and Nelson, 2004; Johnston, 2004; Meredith, 2015; Calabresi et al., 2016).

Our electrophysiological assessment of synaptic plasticity identifies a rather narrow time-window, between P15 and P26 when striatal SPNs exhibit a premature LTP, whereas LTD cannot be evoked. Although it has to be cautiously reminded that these alterations match those described in adult DYT1 striata (Martella et al., 2014), the time-course performed in the present study indicates their abnormal early appearance, in a developmental phase when normal striatal SPNs do not yet exhibit long-lasting synaptic changes. Of interest, the loss of LTD was observed in a similar time frame in a novel model with a rare missense variant in the Tor1a gene (Bhagat et al., 2016).

Moreover, we describe, along with electrophysiological deficits, molecular and structural changes at striatal synapses that appear to be limited to a specific time-window. Striatal LTP either in mature tissue preparation or in the developing striatum is dependent on the activation of NMDAR (Calabresi et al., 1992b; Partridge et al., 2000), whereas LTD depends on AMPAR (Calabresi et al., 1992a). Our electrophysiological and biochemical characterization demonstrates an increase in currents mediated by AMPAR, consistent with the increased amplitude of mEPSCs, and additionally, the NMDAR/AMPAR ratio was significantly reduced in SPNs from DYT1 mice. A major mechanism regulating synaptic strength involves the balance between synaptic insertion and removal of glutamate receptors into the postsynaptic membrane (Gong and De Camilli, 2008). Specifically, loss of homeostatic regulation of excitatory synapses in distinct neuronal subtypes involve postsynaptic changes in accumulation of AMPAR (Lissin et al., 1998; O'Brien et al., 1998). Accordingly, we observed a significant increase of both GluA1 and GluA2 subunits of AMPARs in the postsynaptic compartment of P26 Tor1a^+/Δgag mice compared to controls, suggestive of an increased surface expression of AMPARs. Of interest, the significant increase of the phosphorylation of GluA1-Ser845, a well-established correlate of LTP (Oh et al., 2006; Bassani et al., 2013) is consistent with the abnormal LTP expression measured in DYT1 mice. Moreover, GluA1-Ser845 (Roche et al., 1996) plays a key role in the synaptic delivery of GluA1-containing AMPARs by LTP (Esteban et al., 2003; Bassani et al., 2013) and is involved in surface reinsertion/stabilization of AMPARs (Ehlers, 2000), thus providing a molecular mechanism for the observed increase of AMPARs at postsynaptic membranes in P26 Tor1a^+/Δgag mice compared to controls. Thus, we hypothesize that the loss of LTD may be related to the aberrant composition of striatal AMPARs observed in mutant mice.

The identification of increased AMPAR subunit levels in the postsynaptic compartment offers new opportunities to identify potential regulators of AMPAR turnover. Neurotrophins have been implicated in glutamatergic synapse development and plasticity, suggesting a potential role in postsynaptic proteins distribution (Causing et al., 1997; McAllister et al., 1997; Kong et al., 2001). Previous work elucidated the role of BDNF in the regulation of AMPAR expression and function, including synaptic AMPAR subunit trafficking (Narisawa-Saito et al., 1999; Jourdi and Kabbaj, 2013). Indeed, BDNF treatment acutely controls both AMPAR subunits and their scaffolding proteins trafficking, thereby modifying the strength of synaptic activity (Minichiello et al., 1999; Mauceri et al., 2004). Remarkably, we observed an enhancement of pro-BDNF and BDNF protein level in P26 Tor1a^+/Δgag mice, which appears critical for the onset of abnormal neurophysiological phenotype in DYT1 dystonia. Consistently, we obtained a functional rescue of synaptic plasticity and AMPA-mediated currents with the competitive antagonist of BDNF TrkB receptor ANA-12 (Cazorla et al., 2011).

Activity-dependent synaptic plasticity as well as composition and activity of NMDARs and AMPARs strictly govern modifications of dendritic spine morphology, leading to a long-lasting structural plasticity. Yet, BDNF also plays a major role in spine maturation in several brain regions, including the striatum (Baquet et al., 2004; Rauskolb et al., 2010). Thus, the abnormal increase in BDNF expression fits with the abnormalities in spine morphology we observed. In P26 Tor1a^+/Δgag mice, we measured an increase in mushroom spines, suggestive of a ‘premature’ maturation process accompanied by an overall decrease in the density of dendritic spines. It is well-known that expression patterns of the GluN2 subunits of NMDARs at dendritic spines change during the first postnatal weeks. In particular, GluN2A expression increases from the second postnatal week to become widely expressed and abundant throughout the brain (Bellone and Nicoll, 2007; Gray et al., 2011). Yet, in agreement with the reduction of the NMDAR decay time, we found an increase of postsynaptic GluN2A in P26 Tor1a^+/Δgag mice suggesting a ‘premature’ GluN2A/GluN2B switch, thus indicating the existence of a molecular and morphological early maturation of the excitatory synapse in this DYT1 model. Moreover, the existence of a close coordination between spine size and AMPAR levels at synaptic membranes has been previously reported (Kopec et al., 2007; Malinverno et al., 2010) and spine volume has been positively correlated with the strength of AMPAR-mediated synaptic transmission. Accordingly, in Tor1a^+/Δgag mice we found a significant increase of spine head width, an increase in mushroom spines and a concomitant increase of both GluA1 and GluA2 subunits of AMPARs.

Most of the molecular and structural alterations described in juvenile DYT1 mice were not confirmed at our analyses performed in adult (P60) mice. Indeed, inhibition of BDNF with ANA-12 did not offset the plasticity deficits in adult mice. Additionally, the anticholinergic agent pirenzepine failed to rescue the plasticity deficits in juvenile animals, contrarily to what reported in adults (Dang et al., 2012; Martella et al., 2014), indicating that distinct mechanisms sustain the abnormal patterns of synaptic activity at different developmental ages. Future work is required to address the precise mechanisms governing this switch.

Collectively, we demonstrate that the rise of BDNF, in a restricted time-window, drives AMPA receptor composition changes and, consequently, structural modifications in spine morphology, resulting in the loss of homeostatic regulation of synaptic plasticity early in postnatal life.

Our hypothesis is also consistent with the clinical observation that the beneficial effects of Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) in dystonic patients is more effective in young patients, as compared to patients implanted later in life (Isaias et al., 2008). Additionally, compared to the prompt efficacy observed in Parkinson’s disease patients, weeks are commonly required to obtain symptomatic relief following DBS, and improvements may continue to be manifest over time (Vercueil et al., 2001; Krauss, 2002; Vidailhet and Pollak, 2005). It is plausible that severity of abnormal plasticity is related to disease duration, thus justifying the longer time required to erase aberrant plasticity patterns.

In a therapeutic perspective, these sensitive periods might be considered as temporal windows of opportunity, during which specific molecular steps could be targeted to prevent aberrant plasticity to develop.

1. 1. Altar CA
   2. Cai N
   3. Bliven T
   4. Juhasz M
   5. Conner JM
   6. Acheson AL
   7. Lindsay RM
   8. Wiegand SJ

   (1997) Anterograde transport of brain-derived neurotrophic factor and its role in the brain

   Nature 389:856–860.

   https://doi.org/10.1038/39885

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
2. 1. Baquet ZC
   2. Gorski JA
   3. Jones KR

   (2004) Early striatal dendrite deficits followed by neuron loss with advanced age in the absence of anterograde cortical brain-derived neurotrophic factor

   Journal of Neuroscience 24:4250–4258.

   https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3920-03.2004

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
3. 1. Bassani S
   2. Folci A
   3. Zapata J
   4. Passafaro M

   (2013) AMPAR trafficking in synapse maturation and plasticity

   Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences 70:4411–4430.

   https://doi.org/10.1007/s00018-013-1309-1

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
4. 1. Baydyuk M
   2. Xu B

   (2014) BDNF signaling and survival of striatal neurons

   Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience 8:254.

   https://doi.org/10.3389/fncel.2014.00254

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
5. 1. Bellone C
   2. Nicoll RA

   (2007) Rapid bidirectional switching of synaptic NMDA receptors

   Neuron 55:779–785.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2007.07.035

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
6. 1. Bhagat SL
   2. Qiu S
   3. Caffall ZF
   4. Wan Y
   5. Pan Y
   6. Rodriguiz RM
   7. Wetsel WC
   8. Badea A
   9. Hochgeschwender U
   10. Calakos N

   (2016) Mouse model of rare TOR1A variant found in sporadic focal dystonia impairs domains affected in DYT1 dystonia patients and animal models

   Neurobiology of Disease 93:137–145.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbd.2016.05.003

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
7. 1. Bressman SB
   2. Sabatti C
   3. Raymond D
   4. de Leon D
   5. Klein C
   6. Kramer PL
   7. Brin MF
   8. Fahn S
   9. Breakefield X
   10. Ozelius LJ
   11. Risch NJ

   (2000) The DYT1 phenotype and guidelines for diagnostic testing

   Neurology 54:1746–1753.

   https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.54.9.1746

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
8. 1. Buchwalow I
   2. Samoilova V
   3. Boecker W
   4. Tiemann M

   (2011) Non-specific binding of antibodies in immunohistochemistry: fallacies and facts

   Scientific Reports 1:28.

   https://doi.org/10.1038/srep00028

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
9. 1. Calabresi P
   2. Maj R
   3. Pisani A
   4. Mercuri NB
   5. Bernardi G

   (1992a)

   Long-term synaptic depression in the striatum: physiological and pharmacological characterization

   The Journal of Neuroscience : The Official Journal of the Society for Neuroscience 12:4224–4233.

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
10. 1. Calabresi P
    2. Pisani A
    3. Mercuri NB
    4. Bernardi G

    (1992b) Long-term potentiation in the striatum is unmasked by removing the voltage-dependent magnesium block of nmda receptor channels

    European Journal of Neuroscience 4:929–935.

    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-9568.1992.tb00119.x

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
11. 1. Calabresi P
    2. Pisani A
    3. Rothwell J
    4. Ghiglieri V
    5. Obeso JA
    6. Picconi B

    (2016) Hyperkinetic disorders and loss of synaptic downscaling

    Nature Neuroscience 19:868–875.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.4306

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
12. 1. Causing CG
    2. Gloster A
    3. Aloyz R
    4. Bamji SX
    5. Chang E
    6. Fawcett J
    7. Kuchel G
    8. Miller FD

    (1997) Synaptic innervation density is regulated by neuron-derived BDNF

    Neuron 18:257–267.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(00)80266-4

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
13. 1. Cazorla M
    2. Arrang JM
    3. Prémont J

    (2011) Pharmacological characterization of six trkB antibodies reveals a novel class of functional agents for the study of the BDNF receptor

    British Journal of Pharmacology 162:947–960.

    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1476-5381.2010.01094.x

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
14. 1. Chen Q
    2. Reiner A

    (1996) Cellular distribution of the NMDA receptor NR2A/2B subunits in the rat striatum

    Brain Research 743:346–352.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-8993(96)01098-0

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
15. 1. Cull-Candy S
    2. Kelly L
    3. Farrant M

    (2006) Regulation of Ca2+-permeable AMPA receptors: synaptic plasticity and beyond

    Current Opinion in Neurobiology 16:288–297.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2006.05.012

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
16. 1. Czöndör K
    2. Thoumine O

    (2013) Biophysical mechanisms regulating AMPA receptor accumulation at synapses

    Brain Research Bulletin 93:57–68.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainresbull.2012.11.001

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
17. 1. Dang MT
    2. Yokoi F
    3. Cheetham CC
    4. Lu J
    5. Vo V
    6. Lovinger DM
    7. Li Y

    (2012) An anticholinergic reverses motor control and corticostriatal LTD deficits in Dyt1 ΔGAG knock-in mice

    Behavioural Brain Research 226:465–472.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2011.10.002

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
18. 1. Dunah AW
    2. Standaert DG

    (2003) Subcellular segregation of distinct heteromeric NMDA glutamate receptors in the striatum

    Journal of Neurochemistry 85:935–943.

    https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1471-4159.2003.01744.x

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
19. 1. Edwards MJ
    2. Huang YZ
    3. Mir P
    4. Rothwell JC
    5. Bhatia KP

    (2006) Abnormalities in motor cortical plasticity differentiate manifesting and nonmanifesting DYT1 carriers

    Movement Disorders 21:2181–2186.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.21160

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
20. 1. Ehlers MD

    (2000) Reinsertion or degradation of AMPA receptors determined by activity-dependent endocytic sorting

    Neuron 28:511–525.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(00)00129-X

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
21. 1. Esteban JA
    2. Shi SH
    3. Wilson C
    4. Nuriya M
    5. Huganir RL
    6. Malinow R

    (2003) PKA phosphorylation of AMPA receptor subunits controls synaptic trafficking underlying plasticity

    Nature Neuroscience 6:136–143.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nn997

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
22. Book

    1. Flurkey K
    2. Currer JM
    3. Harrison DE

    (2007)

    The Mouse in Aging Research

    In: Fox J. G, editors. The Mouse in Biomedical Research (2nd Edition). Burlington: American College Laboratory Animal Medicine (Elsevier). pp. 637–672.

    • Google Scholar
23. 1. Gardoni F
    2. Picconi B
    3. Ghiglieri V
    4. Polli F
    5. Bagetta V
    6. Bernardi G
    7. Cattabeni F
    8. Di Luca M
    9. Calabresi P

    (2006) A critical interaction between NR2B and MAGUK in L-DOPA induced dyskinesia

    Journal of Neuroscience 26:2914–2922.

    https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5326-05.2006

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
24. 1. Ghilardi MF
    2. Carbon M
    3. Silvestri G
    4. Dhawan V
    5. Tagliati M
    6. Bressman S
    7. Ghez C
    8. Eidelberg D

    (2003) Impaired sequence learning in carriers of the DYT1 dystonia mutation

    Annals of Neurology 54:102–109.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.10610

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
25. 1. Gong LW
    2. De Camilli P

    (2008) Regulation of postsynaptic AMPA responses by synaptojanin 1

    PNAS 105:17561–17566.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0809221105

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
26. 1. Goodchild RE
    2. Grundmann K
    3. Pisani A

    (2013) New genetic insights highlight 'old' ideas on motor dysfunction in dystonia

    Trends in Neurosciences 36:717–725.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tins.2013.09.003

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
27. 1. Goodchild RE
    2. Kim CE
    3. Dauer WT

    (2005) Loss of the dystonia-associated protein torsinA selectively disrupts the neuronal nuclear envelope

    Neuron 48:923–932.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2005.11.010

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
28. 1. Gray JA
    2. Shi Y
    3. Usui H
    4. During MJ
    5. Sakimura K
    6. Nicoll RA

    (2011) Distinct modes of AMPA receptor suppression at developing synapses by GluN2A and GluN2B: single-cell NMDA receptor subunit deletion in vivo

    Neuron 71:1085–1101.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2011.08.007

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
29. 1. Grundmann K
    2. Glöckle N
    3. Martella G
    4. Sciamanna G
    5. Hauser TK
    6. Yu L
    7. Castaneda S
    8. Pichler B
    9. Fehrenbacher B
    10. Schaller M
    11. Nuscher B
    12. Haass C
    13. Hettich J
    14. Yue Z
    15. Nguyen HP
    16. Pisani A
    17. Riess O
    18. Ott T

    (2012) Generation of a novel rodent model for DYT1 dystonia

    Neurobiology of Disease 47:61–74.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbd.2012.03.024

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
30. 1. Harris KM
    2. Jensen FE
    3. Tsao B

    (1992)

    Three-dimensional structure of dendritic spines and synapses in rat hippocampus (CA1) at postnatal day 15 and adult ages: implications for the maturation of synaptic physiology and long-term potentiation

    Journal of Neuroscience 12:2685–2705.

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
31. 1. Hartog TE
    2. Dittrich F
    3. Pieneman AW
    4. Jansen RF
    5. Frankl-Vilches C
    6. Lessmann V
    7. Lilliehook C
    8. Goldman SA
    9. Gahr M

    (2009) Brain-derived neurotrophic factor signaling in the HVC is required for testosterone-induced song of female canaries

    Journal of Neuroscience 29:15511–15519.

    https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2564-09.2009

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
32. 1. Hensch TK

    (2004) Critical period regulation

    Annual Review of Neuroscience 27:549–579.

    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.neuro.27.070203.144327

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
33. 1. Isaac JT
    2. Ashby MC
    3. McBain CJ

    (2007) The role of the GluR2 subunit in AMPA receptor function and synaptic plasticity

    Neuron 54:859–871.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2007.06.001

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
34. 1. Isaias IU
    2. Alterman RL
    3. Tagliati M

    (2008) Outcome predictors of pallidal stimulation in patients with primary dystonia: the role of disease duration

    Brain 131:1895–1902.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awn120

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
35. 1. Jia Y
    2. Gall CM
    3. Lynch G

    (2010) Presynaptic BDNF promotes postsynaptic long-term potentiation in the dorsal striatum

    Journal of Neuroscience 30:14440–14445.

    https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3310-10.2010

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
36. 1. Johnston MV

    (2004) Clinical disorders of brain plasticity

    Brain and Development 26:73–80.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0387-7604(03)00102-5

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
37. 1. Jourdi H
    2. Iwakura Y
    3. Narisawa-Saito M
    4. Ibaraki K
    5. Xiong H
    6. Watanabe M
    7. Hayashi Y
    8. Takei N
    9. Nawa H

    (2003) Brain-derived neurotrophic factor signal enhances and maintains the expression of AMPA receptor-associated PDZ proteins in developing cortical neurons

    Developmental Biology 263:216–230.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ydbio.2003.07.008

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
38. 1. Jourdi H
    2. Kabbaj M

    (2013) Acute BDNF treatment upregulates GluR1-SAP97 and GluR2-GRIP1 interactions: implications for sustained AMPA receptor expression

    PLoS One 8:e57124.

    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0057124

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
39. 1. Kim BG
    2. Dai HN
    3. McAtee M
    4. Vicini S
    5. Bregman BS

    (2007) Labeling of dendritic spines with the carbocyanine dye DiI for confocal microscopic imaging in lightly fixed cortical slices

    Journal of Neuroscience Methods 162:237–243.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2007.01.016

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
40. 1. Kong H
    2. Boulter J
    3. Weber JL
    4. Lai C
    5. Chao MV

    (2001)

    An evolutionarily conserved transmembrane protein that is a novel downstream target of neurotrophin and ephrin receptors

    Journal of Neuroscience 21:176–185.

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
41. 1. Kopec CD
    2. Real E
    3. Kessels HW
    4. Malinow R

    (2007) GluR1 links structural and functional plasticity at excitatory synapses

    Journal of Neuroscience 27:13706–13718.

    https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3503-07.2007

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
42. 1. Koshimizu H
    2. Kiyosue K
    3. Hara T
    4. Hazama S
    5. Suzuki S
    6. Uegaki K
    7. Nagappan G
    8. Zaitsev E
    9. Hirokawa T
    10. Tatsu Y
    11. Ogura A
    12. Lu B
    13. Kojima M

    (2009) Multiple functions of precursor BDNF to CNS neurons: negative regulation of neurite growth, spine formation and cell survival

    Molecular Brain 2:27.

    https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-6606-2-27

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
43. 1. Krauss JK

    (2002) Deep brain stimulation for dystonia in adults. Overview and developments

    Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery 78:168–182.

    https://doi.org/10.1159/000068963

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
44. 1. Ledoux MS
    2. Dauer WT
    3. Warner TT

    (2013) Emerging common molecular pathways for primary dystonia

    Movement Disorders 28:968–981.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.25547

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
45. 1. Lissin DV
    2. Gomperts SN
    3. Carroll RC
    4. Christine CW
    5. Kalman D
    6. Kitamura M
    7. Hardy S
    8. Nicoll RA
    9. Malenka RC
    10. von Zastrow M

    (1998) Activity differentially regulates the surface expression of synaptic AMPA and NMDA glutamate receptors

    PNAS 95:7097–7102.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.95.12.7097

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
46. 1. Livak KJ
    2. Schmittgen TD

    (2001) Analysis of relative gene expression data using real-time quantitative PCR and the 2(-Delta Delta C(T)) Method

    Methods 25:402–408.

    https://doi.org/10.1006/meth.2001.1262

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
47. 1. Malinverno M
    2. Carta M
    3. Epis R
    4. Marcello E
    5. Verpelli C
    6. Cattabeni F
    7. Sala C
    8. Mulle C
    9. Di Luca M
    10. Gardoni F

    (2010) Synaptic localization and activity of ADAM10 regulate excitatory synapses through N-cadherin cleavage

    Journal of Neuroscience 30:16343–16355.

    https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1984-10.2010

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
48. 1. Maltese M
    2. Martella G
    3. Madeo G
    4. Fagiolo I
    5. Tassone A
    6. Ponterio G
    7. Sciamanna G
    8. Burbaud P
    9. Conn PJ
    10. Bonsi P
    11. Pisani A

    (2014) Anticholinergic drugs rescue synaptic plasticity in DYT1 dystonia: role of M1 muscarinic receptors

    Movement Disorders 29:1655–1665.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.26009

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
49. 1. Mandel AL
    2. Ozdener H
    3. Utermohlen V

    (2009) Identification of pro- and mature brain-derived neurotrophic factor in human saliva

    Archives of Oral Biology 54:689–695.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archoralbio.2009.04.005

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
50. 1. Martella G
    2. Maltese M
    3. Nisticò R
    4. Schirinzi T
    5. Madeo G
    6. Sciamanna G
    7. Ponterio G
    8. Tassone A
    9. Mandolesi G
    10. Vanni V
    11. Pignatelli M
    12. Bonsi P
    13. Pisani A

    (2014) Regional specificity of synaptic plasticity deficits in a knock-in mouse model of DYT1 dystonia

    Neurobiology of Disease 65:124–132.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbd.2014.01.016

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
51. 1. Martella G
    2. Tassone A
    3. Sciamanna G
    4. Platania P
    5. Cuomo D
    6. Viscomi MT
    7. Bonsi P
    8. Cacci E
    9. Biagioni S
    10. Usiello A
    11. Bernardi G
    12. Sharma N
    13. Standaert DG
    14. Pisani A

    (2009) Impairment of bidirectional synaptic plasticity in the striatum of a mouse model of DYT1 dystonia: role of endogenous acetylcholine

    Brain 132:2336–2349.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awp194

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
52. 1. Mauceri D
    2. Cattabeni F
    3. Di Luca M
    4. Gardoni F

    (2004) Calcium/calmodulin-dependent protein kinase II phosphorylation drives synapse-associated protein 97 into spines

    Journal of Biological Chemistry 279:23813–23821.

    https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M402796200

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
53. 1. Mayer ML
    2. Westbrook GL
    3. Guthrie PB

    (1984) Voltage-dependent block by Mg2+ of NMDA responses in spinal cord neurones

    Nature 309:261–263.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/309261a0

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
54. 1. McAllister AK
    2. Katz LC
    3. Lo DC
    4. Dc L

    (1997) Opposing roles for endogenous BDNF and NT-3 in regulating cortical dendritic growth

    Neuron 18:767–778.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(00)80316-5

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
55. 1. Meredith RM

    (2015) Sensitive and critical periods during neurotypical and aberrant neurodevelopment: a framework for neurodevelopmental disorders

    Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews 50:180–188.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2014.12.001

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
56. 1. Minichiello L
    2. Korte M
    3. Wolfer D
    4. Kühn R
    5. Unsicker K
    6. Cestari V
    7. Rossi-Arnaud C
    8. Lipp HP
    9. Bonhoeffer T
    10. Klein R

    (1999) Essential role for TrkB receptors in hippocampus-mediated learning

    Neuron 24:401–414.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(00)80853-3

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
57. 1. Narisawa-Saito M
    2. Carnahan J
    3. Araki K
    4. Yamaguchi T
    5. Nawa H

    (1999) Brain-derived neurotrophic factor regulates the expression of AMPA receptor proteins in neocortical neurons

    Neuroscience 88:1009–1014.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0306-4522(98)00496-5

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
58. 1. O'Brien RJ
    2. Kamboj S
    3. Ehlers MD
    4. Rosen KR
    5. Fischbach GD
    6. Huganir RL

    (1998) Activity-dependent modulation of synaptic AMPA receptor accumulation

    Neuron 21:1067–1078.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(00)80624-8

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
59. 1. Oh MC
    2. Derkach VA
    3. Guire ES
    4. Soderling TR

    (2006) Extrasynaptic membrane trafficking regulated by GluR1 serine 845 phosphorylation primes AMPA receptors for long-term potentiation

    The Journal of Biological Chemistry 281:752–758.

    https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M509677200

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
60. 1. Ozelius LJ
    2. Hewett JW
    3. Page CE
    4. Bressman SB
    5. Kramer PL
    6. Shalish C
    7. de Leon D
    8. Brin MF
    9. Raymond D
    10. Corey DP
    11. Fahn S
    12. Risch NJ
    13. Buckler AJ
    14. Gusella JF
    15. Breakefield XO

    (1997) The early-onset torsion dystonia gene (DYT1) encodes an ATP-binding protein

    Nature Genetics 17:40–48.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/ng0997-40

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
61. 1. Paillé V
    2. Picconi B
    3. Bagetta V
    4. Ghiglieri V
    5. Sgobio C
    6. Di Filippo M
    7. Viscomi MT
    8. Giampà C
    9. Fusco FR
    10. Gardoni F
    11. Bernardi G
    12. Greengard P
    13. Di Luca M
    14. Calabresi P

    (2010) Distinct levels of dopamine denervation differentially alter striatal synaptic plasticity and NMDA receptor subunit composition

    Journal of Neuroscience 30:14182–14193.

    https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2149-10.2010

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
62. 1. Paoletti P
    2. Bellone C
    3. Zhou Q

    (2013) NMDA receptor subunit diversity: impact on receptor properties, synaptic plasticity and disease

    Nature Reviews Neuroscience 14:383–400.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3504

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
63. 1. Pappas SS
    2. Leventhal DK
    3. Albin RL
    4. Dauer WT

    (2014) Mouse models of neurodevelopmental disease of the basal ganglia and associated circuits

    Current Topics in Developmental Biology 109:97–169.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-397920-9.00001-9

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
64. 1. Partridge JG
    2. Tang KC
    3. Lovinger DM

    (2000) Regional and postnatal heterogeneity of activity-dependent long-term changes in synaptic efficacy in the dorsal striatum

    Journal of Neurophysiology 84:1422–1429.

    https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.2000.84.3.1422

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
65. 1. Ponterio G
    2. Tassone A
    3. Sciamanna G
    4. Vanni V
    5. Meringolo M
    6. Santoro M
    7. Mercuri NB
    8. Bonsi P
    9. Pisani A

    (2018) Enhanced mu opioid receptor-dependent opioidergic modulation of striatal cholinergic transmission in DYT1 dystonia

    Movement Disorders 33:310–320.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.27212

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
66. 1. Quartarone A
    2. Hallett M

    (2013) Emerging concepts in the physiological basis of dystonia

    Movement Disorders 28:958–967.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.25532

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
67. 1. Quartarone A
    2. Rizzo V
    3. Terranova C
    4. Morgante F
    5. Schneider S
    6. Ibrahim N
    7. Girlanda P
    8. Bhatia KP
    9. Rothwell JC

    (2009) Abnormal sensorimotor plasticity in organic but not in psychogenic dystonia

    Brain 132:2871–2877.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awp213

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
68. 1. Rauskolb S
    2. Zagrebelsky M
    3. Dreznjak A
    4. Deogracias R
    5. Matsumoto T
    6. Wiese S
    7. Erne B
    8. Sendtner M
    9. Schaeren-Wiemers N
    10. Korte M
    11. Barde YA

    (2010) Global deprivation of brain-derived neurotrophic factor in the CNS reveals an area-specific requirement for dendritic growth

    Journal of Neuroscience 30:1739–1749.

    https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5100-09.2010

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
69. 1. Rittiner JE
    2. Caffall ZF
    3. Hernández-Martinez R
    4. Sanderson SM
    5. Pearson JL
    6. Tsukayama KK
    7. Liu AY
    8. Xiao C
    9. Tracy S
    10. Shipman MK
    11. Hickey P
    12. Johnson J
    13. Scott B
    14. Stacy M
    15. Saunders-Pullman R
    16. Bressman S
    17. Simonyan K
    18. Sharma N
    19. Ozelius LJ
    20. Cirulli ET
    21. Calakos N

    (2016) Functional genomic analyses of mendelian and sporadic disease identify impaired eif2α signaling as a generalizable mechanism for dystonia

    Neuron 92:1238–1251.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2016.11.012

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
70. 1. Roche KW
    2. O'Brien RJ
    3. Mammen AL
    4. Bernhardt J
    5. Huganir RL

    (1996) Characterization of multiple phosphorylation sites on the AMPA receptor GluR1 subunit

    Neuron 16:1179–1188.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(00)80144-0

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
71. 1. Sanz-Clemente A
    2. Nicoll RA
    3. Roche KW

    (2013) Diversity in NMDA receptor composition: many regulators, many consequences

    The Neuroscientist 19:62–75.

    https://doi.org/10.1177/1073858411435129

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
72. 1. Schneider CA
    2. Rasband WS
    3. Eliceiri KW

    (2012) NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis

    Nature Methods 9:671–675.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2089

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
73. 1. Sciamanna G
    2. Napolitano F
    3. Pelosi B
    4. Bonsi P
    5. Vitucci D
    6. Nuzzo T
    7. Punzo D
    8. Ghiglieri V
    9. Ponterio G
    10. Pasqualetti M
    11. Pisani A
    12. Usiello A

    (2015) Rhes regulates dopamine D2 receptor transmission in striatal cholinergic interneurons

    Neurobiology of Disease 78:146–161.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbd.2015.03.021

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
74. 1. Sciamanna G
    2. Tassone A
    3. Mandolesi G
    4. Puglisi F
    5. Ponterio G
    6. Martella G
    7. Madeo G
    8. Bernardi G
    9. Standaert DG
    10. Bonsi P
    11. Pisani A

    (2012) Cholinergic dysfunction alters synaptic integration between thalamostriatal and corticostriatal inputs in DYT1 dystonia

    Journal of Neuroscience 32:11991–12004.

    https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0041-12.2012

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
75. 1. Stanic J
    2. Carta M
    3. Eberini I
    4. Pelucchi S
    5. Marcello E
    6. Genazzani AA
    7. Racca C
    8. Mulle C
    9. Di Luca M
    10. Gardoni F

    (2015) Rabphilin 3A retains NMDA receptors at synaptic sites through interaction with GluN2A/PSD-95 complex

    Nature Communications 6:10181.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms10181

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
76. 1. Stragier E
    2. Martin V
    3. Davenas E
    4. Poilbout C
    5. Mongeau R
    6. Corradetti R
    7. Lanfumey L

    (2015) Brain plasticity and cognitive functions after ethanol consumption in C57BL/6J mice

    Translational Psychiatry 5:e696.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/tp.2015.183

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
77. 1. Tropea TF
    2. Kabir ZD
    3. Kaur G
    4. Rajadhyaksha AM
    5. Kosofsky BE

    (2011) Enhanced dopamine D1 and BDNF signaling in the adult dorsal striatum but not nucleus accumbens of prenatal cocaine treated mice

    Frontiers in Psychiatry 2:67.

    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2011.00067

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
78. 1. Turrigiano GG
    2. Nelson SB

    (2004) Homeostatic plasticity in the developing nervous system

    Nature Reviews Neuroscience 5:97–107.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1327

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
79. 1. Vercueil L
    2. Pollak P
    3. Fraix V
    4. Caputo E
    5. Moro E
    6. Benazzouz A
    7. Xie J
    8. Koudsie A
    9. Benabid AL

    (2001) Deep brain stimulation in the treatment of severe dystonia

    Journal of Neurology 248:695–700.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s004150170116

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
80. 1. Vidailhet M
    2. Pollak P

    (2005) Deep brain stimulation for dystonia: make the lame walk

    Annals of Neurology 57:613–614.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.20491

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
81. 1. Weise D
    2. Schramm A
    3. Stefan K
    4. Wolters A
    5. Reiners K
    6. Naumann M
    7. Classen J

    (2006) The two sides of associative plasticity in writer's cramp

    Brain 129:2709–2721.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awl221

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
82. 1. Wichmann T
    2. Delong MR

    (2006) Deep brain stimulation for neurologic and neuropsychiatric disorders

    Neuron 52:197–204.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2006.09.022

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
83. 1. Zermeño V
    2. Espindola S
    3. Mendoza E
    4. Hernández-Echeagaray E

    (2009) Differential expression of neurotrophins in postnatal C57BL/6 mice striatum

    International Journal of Biological Sciences 5:118–127.

    https://doi.org/10.7150/ijbs.5.118

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar

Author details

1. Marta Maltese

   1. Department of Systems Medicine, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy
   2. IRCCS Fondazione Santa Lucia, Rome, Italy

   Contribution

   Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Writing—original draft, Writing—review and editing

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

2. Jennifer Stanic

   Department of Pharmacology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy

   Contribution

   Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing—original draft

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

3. Annalisa Tassone

   1. Department of Systems Medicine, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy
   2. IRCCS Fondazione Santa Lucia, Rome, Italy

   Contribution

   Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

4. Giuseppe Sciamanna

   1. Department of Systems Medicine, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy
   2. IRCCS Fondazione Santa Lucia, Rome, Italy

   Contribution

   Data curation, Supervision, Investigation, Writing—review and editing

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

5. Giulia Ponterio

   1. Department of Systems Medicine, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy
   2. IRCCS Fondazione Santa Lucia, Rome, Italy

   Contribution

   Data curation, Investigation, Methodology

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

6. Valentina Vanni

   1. Department of Systems Medicine, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy
   2. IRCCS Fondazione Santa Lucia, Rome, Italy

   Contribution

   Investigation, Methodology

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

7. Giuseppina Martella

   1. Department of Systems Medicine, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy
   2. IRCCS Fondazione Santa Lucia, Rome, Italy

   Contribution

   Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8927-7107

8. Paola Imbriani

   1. Department of Systems Medicine, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy
   2. IRCCS Fondazione Santa Lucia, Rome, Italy

   Contribution

   Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3373-5073

9. Paola Bonsi

   IRCCS Fondazione Santa Lucia, Rome, Italy

   Contribution

   Conceptualization, Data curation, Writing—original draft, Writing—review and editing

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5940-9028

10. Nicola Biagio Mercuri

    1. Department of Systems Medicine, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy
    2. IRCCS Fondazione Santa Lucia, Rome, Italy

    Contribution

    Conceptualization, Supervision, Writing—review and editing

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

11. Fabrizio Gardoni

    Department of Pharmacology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy

    Contribution

    Conceptualization, Data curation, Writing—original draft, Writing—review and editing

    Contributed equally with

    Antonio Pisani

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

    "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4598-5563

12. Antonio Pisani

    1. Department of Systems Medicine, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy
    2. IRCCS Fondazione Santa Lucia, Rome, Italy

    Contribution

    Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Supervision, Methodology, Writing—original draft, Writing—review and editing

    Contributed equally with

    Fabrizio Gardoni

    For correspondence

    pisani@uniroma2.it

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

    "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8432-594X

• 1,798

  views

• 313

  downloads

• 63

  citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.