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.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Moses V Chao, New York University Langone Medical Center, United States

Publication history

  1. Received: June 25, 2019
  2. Accepted: July 25, 2019
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: August 20, 2019 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: August 29, 2019 (version 2)

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

  • 2,021
    Page views
  • 291
    Downloads
  • 17
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.

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

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Kelly M Martyniuk et al.
    Research Article Updated

    In the striatum, acetylcholine (ACh) neuron activity is modulated co-incident with dopamine (DA) release in response to unpredicted rewards and reward-predicting cues and both neuromodulators are thought to regulate each other. While this co-regulation has been studied using stimulation studies, the existence of this mutual regulation in vivo during natural behavior is still largely unexplored. One long-standing controversy has been whether striatal DA is responsible for the induction of the cholinergic pause or whether DA D2 receptors (D2Rs) modulate a pause that is induced by other mechanisms. Here, we used genetically encoded sensors in combination with pharmacological and genetic inactivation of D2Rs from cholinergic interneurons (CINs) to simultaneously measure ACh and DA levels after CIN D2R inactivation in mice. We found that CIN D2Rs are not necessary for the initiation of cue-induced decrease in ACh levels. Rather, they prolong the duration of the decrease and inhibit ACh rebound levels. Notably, the change in cue-evoked ACh levels is not associated with altered cue-evoked DA release. Moreover, D2R inactivation strongly decreased the temporal correlation between DA and ACh signals not only at cue presentation but also during the intertrial interval pointing to a general mechanism by which D2Rs coordinate both signals. At the behavioral level D2R antagonism increased the latency to lever press, which was not observed in CIN-selective D2R knock out mice. Press latency correlated with the cue-evoked decrease in ACh levels and artificial inhibition of CINs revealed that longer inhibition shortens the latency to press compared to shorter inhibition. This supports a role of the ACh signal and it’s regulation by D2Rs in the motivation to initiate actions.

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Lauritz Kennedy et al.
    Research Article

    Neonatal cerebral hypoxia-ischemia (HI) is the leading cause of death and disability in newborns with the only current treatment being hypothermia. An increased understanding of the pathways that facilitate tissue repair after HI may aid the development of better treatments. Here, we study the role of lactate receptor HCAR1 in tissue repair after neonatal HI in mice. We show that HCAR1 knockout mice have reduced tissue regeneration compared with wildtype mice. Furthermore, proliferation of neural progenitor cells and glial cells, as well as microglial activation was impaired. Transcriptome analysis showed a strong transcriptional response to HI in the subventricular zone of wildtype mice involving about 7300 genes. In contrast, the HCAR1 knockout mice showed a modest response, involving about 750 genes. Notably, fundamental processes in tissue repair such as cell cycle and innate immunity were dysregulated in HCAR1 knockout. Our data suggest that HCAR1 is a key transcriptional regulator of pathways that promote tissue regeneration after HI.