RbFox1 up-regulation impairs BDNF-dependent hippocampal LTP by dysregulating TrkB isoform expression levels

  1. Francesco Tomassoni-Ardori
  2. Gianluca Fulgenzi
  3. Jodi Becker
  4. Colleen Barrick
  5. Mary Ellen Palko
  6. Skyler Kuhn
  7. Vishal Koparde
  8. Maggie Cam
  9. Sudhirkumar Yanpallewar
  10. Shalini Oberdoerffer
  11. Lino Tessarollo  Is a corresponding author
  1. National Cancer Institute, United States
  2. National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, United States

Abstract

Brain Derived Neurotrophic Factor (BDNF) is a potent modulator of brain synaptic plasticity. Signaling defects caused by dysregulation of its NTrk2 (TrkB) kinase (TrkB.FL) and truncated receptors (TrkB.T1) have been linked to the pathophysiology of several neurological and neurodegenerative disorders. We found that upregulation of Rbfox1, an RNA binding protein associated with intellectual disability, epilepsy and autism, increases selectively hippocampal TrkB.T1 isoform expression. Physiologically, increased Rbfox1 impairs BDNF-dependent LTP which can be rescued by genetically restoring TrkB.T1 levels. RNA-seq analysis of hippocampi with upregulation of Rbfox1 in conjunction with the specific increase of TrkB.T1 isoform expression also shows that the genes affected by Rbfox1 gain of function are surprisingly different from those influenced by Rbfox1 deletion. These findings not only identify TrkB as a major target of Rbfox1 pathophysiology but also suggest that gain or loss of function of Rbfox1 regulate different genetic landscapes.

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files. Source data files have been provided for Table 1 and 2.

The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Francesco Tomassoni-Ardori

    National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, Frederick, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Gianluca Fulgenzi

    Neural Development Section, Mouse Cancer Genetics Program, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Frederick, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Jodi Becker

    Neural Development Section, Mouse Cancer Genetics Program, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Frederick, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Colleen Barrick

    Neural Development Section, Mouse Cancer Genetics Program, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Frederick, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Mary Ellen Palko

    Neural Development Section, Mouse Cancer Genetics Program, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Frederick, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Skyler Kuhn

    Collaborative Bioinformatics Resource, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Frederick, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Vishal Koparde

    Collaborative Bioinformatics Resource, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Frederick, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Maggie Cam

    Collaborative Bioinformatics Resource, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Frederick, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Sudhirkumar Yanpallewar

    Neural Development Section, Mouse Cancer Genetics Program, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Frederick, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Shalini Oberdoerffer

    Laboratory of Receptor Biology and Gene Expression, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Frederick, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Lino Tessarollo

    Neural Development Section, Mouse Cancer Genetics Program, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Frederick, United States
    For correspondence
    tessarol@mail.nih.gov
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6420-772X

Funding

National Cancer Center (Intramural Research Program)

  • Maggie Cam

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 experimental procedures followed the National Institutes of Health Guidelines for animal care and use, and were approved by the NCI-Frederick Animal Care and Use Committee.

Copyright

This is an open-access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication.

Metrics

  • 2,701
    views
  • 373
    downloads
  • 40
    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. Francesco Tomassoni-Ardori
  2. Gianluca Fulgenzi
  3. Jodi Becker
  4. Colleen Barrick
  5. Mary Ellen Palko
  6. Skyler Kuhn
  7. Vishal Koparde
  8. Maggie Cam
  9. Sudhirkumar Yanpallewar
  10. Shalini Oberdoerffer
  11. Lino Tessarollo
(2019)
RbFox1 up-regulation impairs BDNF-dependent hippocampal LTP by dysregulating TrkB isoform expression levels
eLife 8:e49673.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.49673

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.49673

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Mohsen Alavash
    Insight

    Combining electrophysiological, anatomical and functional brain maps reveals networks of beta neural activity that align with dopamine uptake.

    1. Neuroscience
    Andrew E Worthy, Joanna T Anderson ... Francisco J Alvarez
    Research Article

    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.