Abstract

Genome-wide association studies identified the BIN1 locus as a leading modulator of genetic risk in Alzheimer's disease (AD). One limitation in understanding BIN1's contribution to AD is its unknown function in the brain. AD-associated BIN1 variants are generally noncoding and likely change expression. Here, we determined the effects of increasing expression of the major neuronal isoform of human BIN1 in cultured rat hippocampal neurons. Higher BIN1 induced network hyperexcitability on multielectrode arrays, increased frequency of synaptic transmission, and elevated calcium transients, indicating that increasing BIN1 drives greater neuronal activity. In exploring the mechanism of these effects on neuronal physiology, we found that BIN1 interacted with L-type voltage-gated calcium channels (LVGCCs) and that BIN1–LVGCC interactions were modulated by Tau in rat hippocampal neurons and mouse brain. Finally, Tau reduction prevented BIN1-induced network hyperexcitability. These data shed light on BIN1's neuronal function and suggest that it may contribute to Tau-dependent hyperexcitability in AD.

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 Figures 6: high throughput raw electrophysiologic recordings of neuronal activity using Axion Biosciences Maesto are deposited at: https://uab.box.com/s/rdjp74ba7stgb2dfrxgbyj507b94tjhn.Brief Analysis used is described in the methods section, in-depth analysis description is publicly available at: https://www.axionbiosystems.com/products/axis-software.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Yuliya Voskobiynyk

    Neurology, Neurobiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  2. Jonathan R Roth

    Neurology, Neurobiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8978-4507
  3. J Nicholas Cochran

    Neurology, Neurobiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  4. Travis Rush

    Neurology, Neurobiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  5. Nancy VN Carullo

    Neurology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9197-5046
  6. Jacob S Mesina

    Neurology, Neurobiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  7. Mohammad Waqas

    Neurology, Neurobiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  8. Rachael M Vollmer

    Neurology, Neurobiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  9. Jeremy J Day

    Department of Neurobiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-7361-3399
  10. Lori L McMahon

    Cell, Developmental, and Integrative Biology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1104-6584
  11. Erik D Roberson

    Neurology, Neurobiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, United States
    For correspondence
    eroberson@uabmc.edu
    Competing interests
    Erik D Roberson, EDR is an owner of intellectual property relating to Tau.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1810-9763

Funding

National Institutes of Health (RF1AG059405)

  • Erik D Roberson

National Institutes of Health (R01NS075487)

  • Erik D Roberson

National Institutes of Health (R01MH114990)

  • Jeremy J Day

National Institutes of Health (T32NS095775)

  • Yuliya Voskobiynyk

National Institutes of Health (T32NS061788)

  • Jonathan R Roth

Alzheimer's Association

  • Erik D Roberson

Weston Brain Institute

  • Jonathan R Roth
  • Travis Rush
  • Erik D Roberson

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

Ethics

Animal experimentation: This study was performed in strict accordance with the recommendations in the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals of the National Institutes of Health. All of the animals were handled according to approved institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC) protocols (#20450) of the University of Alabama at Birmingham. The protocol was approved by the Committee on the Ethics of Animal Experiments of the University of Alabama at Birmingham.

Copyright

© 2020, Voskobiynyk 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

  • 5,657
    views
  • 615
    downloads
  • 43
    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. Yuliya Voskobiynyk
  2. Jonathan R Roth
  3. J Nicholas Cochran
  4. Travis Rush
  5. Nancy VN Carullo
  6. Jacob S Mesina
  7. Mohammad Waqas
  8. Rachael M Vollmer
  9. Jeremy J Day
  10. Lori L McMahon
  11. Erik D Roberson
(2020)
Alzheimer's disease risk gene BIN1 induces Tau-dependent network hyperexcitability
eLife 9:e57354.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.57354

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.57354

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Philipp S O'Neill, Martín Baccino-Calace ... Igor Delvendahl
    Tools and Resources

    Quantitative information about synaptic transmission is key to our understanding of neural function. Spontaneously occurring synaptic events carry fundamental information about synaptic function and plasticity. However, their stochastic nature and low signal-to-noise ratio present major challenges for the reliable and consistent analysis. Here, we introduce miniML, a supervised deep learning-based method for accurate classification and automated detection of spontaneous synaptic events. Comparative analysis using simulated ground-truth data shows that miniML outperforms existing event analysis methods in terms of both precision and recall. miniML enables precise detection and quantification of synaptic events in electrophysiological recordings. We demonstrate that the deep learning approach generalizes easily to diverse synaptic preparations, different electrophysiological and optical recording techniques, and across animal species. miniML provides not only a comprehensive and robust framework for automated, reliable, and standardized analysis of synaptic events, but also opens new avenues for high-throughput investigations of neural function and dysfunction.

    1. Neuroscience
    Maxine K Loh, Samantha J Hurh ... Mitchell F Roitman
    Research Article

    Mesolimbic dopamine encoding of non-contingent rewards and reward-predictive cues has been well established. Considerable debate remains over how mesolimbic dopamine responds to aversion and in the context of aversive conditioning. Inconsistencies may arise from the use of aversive stimuli that are transduced along different neural paths relative to reward or the conflation of responses to avoidance and aversion. Here, we made intraoral infusions of sucrose and measured how dopamine and behavioral responses varied to the changing valence of sucrose. Pairing intraoral sucrose with malaise via injection of lithium chloride (LiCl) caused the development of a conditioned taste aversion (CTA), which rendered the typically rewarding taste of sucrose aversive upon subsequent re-exposure. Following CTA formation, intraoral sucrose suppressed the activity of ventral tegmental area dopamine neurons (VTADA) and nucleus accumbens (NAc) dopamine release. This pattern of dopamine signaling after CTA is similar to intraoral infusions of innately aversive quinine and contrasts with responses to sucrose when it was novel or not paired with LiCl. Dopamine responses were negatively correlated with behavioral reactivity to intraoral sucrose and predicted home cage sucrose preference. Further, dopamine responses scaled with the strength of the CTA, which was increased by repeated LiCl pairings and weakened through extinction. Thus, the findings demonstrate differential dopamine encoding of the same taste stimulus according to its valence, which is aligned to distinct behavioral responses.