Remodeling of lumbar motor circuitry remote to a thoracic spinal cord injury promotes locomotor recovery

  1. Ying Wang
  2. Wei Wu
  3. Xiangbing Wu
  4. Yan Sun
  5. Yi P Zhang
  6. Ling-Xiao Deng
  7. Melissa Jane Walker
  8. Wenrui Qu
  9. Chen Chen
  10. Nai-Kui Liu
  11. Qi Han
  12. Heqiao Dai
  13. Lisa BE Shields
  14. Christopher B Shields
  15. Dale R Sengelaub
  16. Kathryn J Jones
  17. George M Smith
  18. Xiao-Ming Xu  Is a corresponding author
  1. Indiana University School of Medicine, United States
  2. Norton Healthcare, United States
  3. Indiana University, United States
  4. Temple University, United States

Abstract

Retrogradely-transported neurotrophin signaling plays an important role in regulating neural circuit specificity. Here we investigated whether targeted delivery of neurotrophin-3 (NT-3) to lumbar motoneurons (MNs) caudal to a thoracic (T10) contusive spinal cord injury (SCI) could modulate dendritic patterning and synapse formation of the lumbar MNs. In vitro, Adeno-associated virus serotype 2 overexpressing NT-3 (AAV-NT-3) induced NT-3 expression and neurite outgrowth in cultured spinal cord neurons. In vivo, targeted delivery of AAV-NT-3 into transiently demyelinated adult mouse sciatic nerves led to the retrograde transportation of NT-3 to the lumbar MNs, significantly attenuating SCI-induced lumbar MN dendritic atrophy. NT-3 enhanced sprouting and synaptic formation of descending serotonergic, dopaminergic, and propriospinal axons on lumbar MNs, parallel to improved behavioral recovery. Thus, retrogradely transported NT-3 stimulated remodeling of lumbar neural circuitry and synaptic connectivity remote to a thoracic SCI, supporting a role for retrograde transport of NT-3 as a potential therapeutic strategy for SCI.

Data availability

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Ying Wang

    Spinal Cord and Brain Injury Research Group, Stark Neurosciences Research Institute, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Wei Wu

    Spinal Cord and Brain Injury Research Group, Stark Neurosciences Research Institute, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Xiangbing Wu

    Spinal Cord and Brain Injury Research Group, Stark Neurosciences Research Institute, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Yan Sun

    Spinal Cord and Brain Injury Research Group, Stark Neurosciences Research Institute, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Yi P Zhang

    Norton Neuroscience Institute, Norton Healthcare, Louisville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Ling-Xiao Deng

    Spinal Cord and Brain Injury Research Group, Stark Neurosciences Research Institute, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Melissa Jane Walker

    Spinal Cord and Brain Injury Research Group, Stark Neurosciences Research Institute, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Wenrui Qu

    Spinal Cord and Brain Injury Research Group, Stark Neurosciences Research Institute, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Chen Chen

    Spinal Cord and Brain Injury Research Group, Stark Neurosciences Research Institute, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Nai-Kui Liu

    Spinal Cord and Brain Injury Research Group, Stark Neurosciences Research Institute, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Qi Han

    Spinal Cord and Brain Injury Research Group, Stark Neurosciences Research Institute, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Heqiao Dai

    Spinal Cord and Brain Injury Research Group, Stark Neurosciences Research Institute, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Lisa BE Shields

    Norton Neuroscience Institute, Norton Healthcare, Louisville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1526-4063
  14. Christopher B Shields

    Norton Neuroscience Institute, Norton Healthcare, Louisville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Dale R Sengelaub

    Program in Neuroscience, Indiana University, Bloomington, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Kathryn J Jones

    Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  17. George M Smith

    Shriners Hospitals Pediatric Research Center, School of Medicine, Temple University, Philadelphia, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  18. Xiao-Ming Xu

    Spinal Cord and Brain Injury Research Group, Stark Neurosciences Research Institute, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, United States
    For correspondence
    xu26@iupui.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-7229-0081

Funding

National Institutes of Health (R01 NS103481)

  • Xiao-Ming Xu

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (I01 RX002356-01)

  • Xiao-Ming Xu

Craig H. Neilsen Foundation (296749)

  • Xiao-Ming Xu

Indiana State Department of Health (19919)

  • Xiao-Ming Xu

National Institutes of Health (R01 NS100531)

  • Xiao-Ming Xu

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (I01 BX003705-01A1)

  • Xiao-Ming Xu

Science Fund Project of Natural Science Foundation of China (81870977)

  • Ying Wang

National Institutes of Health (NS059622)

  • Xiao-Ming Xu

U.S. Department of Defense (CDMRP W81XWH-12-1-0562)

  • Xiao-Ming Xu

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

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All surgical interventions, treatments, and postoperative animal care were performed following the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (National Research Council) and the Guidelines set forth by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of the Indiana University School of Medicine.

Copyright

© 2018, Wang 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

  • 2,566
    views
  • 486
    downloads
  • 49
    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. Ying Wang
  2. Wei Wu
  3. Xiangbing Wu
  4. Yan Sun
  5. Yi P Zhang
  6. Ling-Xiao Deng
  7. Melissa Jane Walker
  8. Wenrui Qu
  9. Chen Chen
  10. Nai-Kui Liu
  11. Qi Han
  12. Heqiao Dai
  13. Lisa BE Shields
  14. Christopher B Shields
  15. Dale R Sengelaub
  16. Kathryn J Jones
  17. George M Smith
  18. Xiao-Ming Xu
(2018)
Remodeling of lumbar motor circuitry remote to a thoracic spinal cord injury promotes locomotor recovery
eLife 7:e39016.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.39016

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.39016

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Giordano de Guglielmo, Lieselot Carrette ... Olivier George
    Research Article

    Addiction is commonly characterized by escalation of drug intake, compulsive drug seeking, and continued use despite harmful consequences. However, the factors contributing to the transition from moderate drug use to these problematic patterns remain unclear, particularly regarding the role of sex. Many preclinical studies have been limited by small sample sizes, low genetic diversity, and restricted drug access, making it challenging to model significant levels of intoxication or dependence and translate findings to humans. To address these limitations, we characterized addiction-like behaviors in a large sample of >500 outbred heterogeneous stock (HS) rats using an extended cocaine self-administration paradigm (6 hr/daily). We analyzed individual differences in escalation of intake, progressive ratio (PR) responding, continued use despite adverse consequences (contingent foot shocks), and irritability-like behavior during withdrawal. Principal component analysis showed that escalation of intake, progressive ratio responding, and continued use despite adverse consequences loaded onto a single factor that was distinct from irritability-like behaviors. Categorizing rats into resilient, mild, moderate, and severe addiction-like phenotypes showed that females exhibited higher addiction-like behaviors, with a lower proportion of resilient individuals compared to males. These findings suggest that, in genetically diverse rats with extended drug access, escalation of intake, continued use despite adverse consequences, and PR responding are highly correlated measures of a shared underlying construct. Furthermore, our results highlight sex differences in resilience to addiction-like behaviors.

    1. Neuroscience
    Tingting Li, Wenwen Shi ... Yong Q Zhang
    Research Article

    Traumatic brain injury (TBI) caused by external mechanical forces is a major health burden worldwide, but the underlying mechanism in glia remains largely unclear. We report herein that Drosophila adults exhibit a defective blood–brain barrier, elevated innate immune responses, and astrocyte swelling upon consecutive strikes with a high-impact trauma device. RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) analysis of these astrocytes revealed upregulated expression of genes encoding PDGF and VEGF receptor-related (Pvr, a receptor tyrosine kinase), adaptor protein complex 1 (AP-1, a transcription factor complex of the c-Jun N-terminal kinase pathway) composed of Jun-related antigen (Jra) and kayak (kay), and matrix metalloproteinase 1 (Mmp1) following TBI. Interestingly, Pvr is both required and sufficient for AP-1 and Mmp1 upregulation, while knockdown of AP-1 expression in the background of Pvr overexpression in astrocytes rescued Mmp1 upregulation upon TBI, indicating that Pvr acts as the upstream receptor for the downstream AP-1–Mmp1 transduction. Moreover, dynamin-associated endocytosis was found to be an important regulatory step in downregulating Pvr signaling. Our results identify a new Pvr–AP-1–Mmp1 signaling pathway in astrocytes in response to TBI, providing potential targets for developing new therapeutic strategies for TBI.