LKB1 coordinates neurite remodeling to drive synapse layer emergence in the outer retina

  1. Courtney A Burger
  2. Jonathan Alevy
  3. Anna K Casasent
  4. Danye Jiang
  5. Nicholas E Albrecht
  6. Justine H Liang
  7. Arlene A Hirano
  8. Nicholas Brecha
  9. Melanie A Samuel  Is a corresponding author
  1. Baylor College of Medicine, United States
  2. David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, United States

Abstract

Structural changes in pre and postsynaptic neurons that accompany synapse formation often temporally and spatially overlap. Thus, it has been difficult to resolve which processes drive patterned connectivity. To overcome this, we use the laminated outer murine retina. We identify the serine/threonine kinase LKB1 as a key driver of synapse layer emergence. The absence of LKB1 in the retina caused a marked mislocalization and delay in synapse layer formation. In parallel, LKB1 modulated postsynaptic horizontal cell refinement and presynaptic photoreceptor axon growth. Mislocalized horizontal cell processes contacted aberrant cone axons in LKB1 mutants. These defects coincided with altered synapse protein organization, and horizontal cell neurites were misdirected to ectopic synapse protein regions. Together, these data suggest that LKB1 instructs the timing and location of connectivity in the outer retina via coordinate regulation of pre and postsynaptic neuron structure and the localization of synapse-associated proteins.

Data availability

Source data analysis code have been provided from Figures 1-4.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Courtney A Burger

    Department of Neuroscience, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Jonathan Alevy

    Department of Neuroscience, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Anna K Casasent

    Department of Neuroscience, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Danye Jiang

    Department of Neuroscience, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Nicholas E Albrecht

    Department of Neurosciencew, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Justine H Liang

    Department of Neuroscience, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Arlene A Hirano

    Department of Neurobiology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8842-3582
  8. Nicholas Brecha

    Department of Neurobiology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Melanie A Samuel

    Department of Neuroscience, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    For correspondence
    msamuel@bcm.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4804-2491

Funding

National Institute on Aging (1R56AG061808-01)

  • Melanie A Samuel

National Eye Institute (R01 EY030458-01)

  • Melanie A Samuel

Ted Nash Foundation

  • Melanie A Samuel

Brain Reserach Foundation

  • Melanie A Samuel

National Eye Institute (DP2EY027984-02)

  • Melanie A Samuel

National Eye Institute (T32EY007001)

  • Courtney A Burger

National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32GM088129)

  • Nicholas E Albrecht

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

Ethics

Animal experimentation: Experiments were carried out in male and female mice in accordance with the recommendations in the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals of the NIH under protocols approved by the BCM Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (AN6785). Every effort was made to minimize animal suffering.

Copyright

© 2020, Burger 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

  • 1,679
    views
  • 257
    downloads
  • 7
    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. Courtney A Burger
  2. Jonathan Alevy
  3. Anna K Casasent
  4. Danye Jiang
  5. Nicholas E Albrecht
  6. Justine H Liang
  7. Arlene A Hirano
  8. Nicholas Brecha
  9. Melanie A Samuel
(2020)
LKB1 coordinates neurite remodeling to drive synapse layer emergence in the outer retina
eLife 9:e56931.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.56931

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.56931

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Moritz F Wurm, Doruk Yiğit Erigüç
    Research Article

    Recognizing goal-directed actions is a computationally challenging task, requiring not only the visual analysis of body movements, but also analysis of how these movements causally impact, and thereby induce a change in, those objects targeted by an action. We tested the hypothesis that the analysis of body movements and the effects they induce relies on distinct neural representations in superior and anterior inferior parietal lobe (SPL and aIPL). In four fMRI sessions, participants observed videos of actions (e.g. breaking stick, squashing plastic bottle) along with corresponding point-light-display (PLD) stick figures, pantomimes, and abstract animations of agent–object interactions (e.g. dividing or compressing a circle). Cross-decoding between actions and animations revealed that aIPL encodes abstract representations of action effect structures independent of motion and object identity. By contrast, cross-decoding between actions and PLDs revealed that SPL is disproportionally tuned to body movements independent of visible interactions with objects. Lateral occipitotemporal cortex (LOTC) was sensitive to both action effects and body movements. These results demonstrate that parietal cortex and LOTC are tuned to physical action features, such as how body parts move in space relative to each other and how body parts interact with objects to induce a change (e.g. in position or shape/configuration). The high level of abstraction revealed by cross-decoding suggests a general neural code supporting mechanical reasoning about how entities interact with, and have effects on, each other.

    1. Neuroscience
    Gyeong Hee Pyeon, Hyewon Cho ... Yong Sang Jo
    Research Article Updated

    Recent studies suggest that calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) neurons in the parabrachial nucleus (PBN) represent aversive information and signal a general alarm to the forebrain. If CGRP neurons serve as a true general alarm, their activation would modulate both passive nad active defensive behaviors depending on the magnitude and context of the threat. However, most prior research has focused on the role of CGRP neurons in passive freezing responses, with limited exploration of their involvement in active defensive behaviors. To address this, we examined the role of CGRP neurons in active defensive behavior using a predator-like robot programmed to chase mice. Our electrophysiological results revealed that CGRP neurons encode the intensity of aversive stimuli through variations in firing durations and amplitudes. Optogenetic activation of CGRP neurons during robot chasing elevated flight responses in both conditioning and retention tests, presumably by amplifying the perception of the threat as more imminent and dangerous. In contrast, animals with inactivated CGRP neurons exhibited reduced flight responses, even when the robot was programmed to appear highly threatening during conditioning. These findings expand the understanding of CGRP neurons in the PBN as a critical alarm system, capable of dynamically regulating active defensive behaviors by amplifying threat perception, and ensuring adaptive responses to varying levels of danger.