Analysis of the immune response to sciatic nerve injury identifies efferocytosis as a key mechanism of nerve debridement

  1. Ashley L Kalinski
  2. Choya Yoon
  3. Lucas D Huffman
  4. Patrick C Duncker
  5. Rafi Kohen
  6. Ryan Passino
  7. Hannah Hafner
  8. Craig Johnson
  9. Riki Kawaguchi
  10. Kevin S Carbajal
  11. Juan Sebastian Jara
  12. Edmund R Hollis II
  13. Daniel H Geschwind
  14. Benjamin M Segal
  15. Roman Giger  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Michigan Medical School, United States
  2. University of California, Los Angeles, United States
  3. Burke Neurological Institute, United States
  4. The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, United States
  5. University of Michigan School of Medicine, United States

Abstract

Sciatic nerve crush injury triggers sterile inflammation within the distal nerve and axotomized dorsal root ganglia (DRGs). Granulocytes and pro-inflammatory Ly6Chigh monocytes infiltrate the nerve first, and rapidly give way to Ly6Cnegative inflammation-resolving macrophages. In axotomized DRGs, few hematogenous leukocytes are detected and resident macrophages acquire a ramified morphology. Single-cell RNA-sequencing of injured sciatic nerve identifies five macrophage subpopulations, repair Schwann cells, and mesenchymal precursor cells. Macrophages at the nerve crush site are molecularly distinct from macrophages associated with Wallerian degeneration. In the injured nerve, macrophages 'eat' apoptotic leukocytes, a process called efferocytosis, and thereby promote an anti-inflammatory milieu. Myeloid cells in the injured nerve, but not axotomized DRGs, strongly express receptors for the cytokine GM-CSF. In GM-CSF deficient (Csf2-/-) mice, inflammation resolution is delayed and conditioning-lesion induced regeneration of DRG neuron central axons is abolished. Thus, carefully orchestrated inflammation resolution in the nerve is required for conditioning-lesion induced neurorepair.

Data availability

The bulk RNA-seq and scRNA-seq data is available online in the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database (GSE153762).

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Ashley L Kalinski

    Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7611-0810
  2. Choya Yoon

    Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Lucas D Huffman

    Department of Cell and Developmental Biology; Neuroscience Graduate Program, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Patrick C Duncker

    Department of Neurology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Rafi Kohen

    Department of Cell and Developmental Biology; Neuroscience Graduate Program, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Ryan Passino

    Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Hannah Hafner

    Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Craig Johnson

    Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Riki Kawaguchi

    Program in Neurogenetics, Department of Neurology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Kevin S Carbajal

    Department of Neurology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Juan Sebastian Jara

    Research, Burke Neurological Institute, White Plains, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Edmund R Hollis II

    Research, Burke Neurological Institute, White Plains, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4535-4668
  13. Daniel H Geschwind

    Department of Neurology, 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:" 0000-0003-2896-3450
  14. Benjamin M Segal

    Department of Neurology; The Neurological Institute, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Roman Giger

    Cellular & Developmental Biology, University of Michigan School of Medicine, Ann Arbor, United States
    For correspondence
    rgiger@med.umich.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-2926-3336

Funding

New York State Department of Health (C33267GG)

  • Edmund R Hollis II
  • Roman Giger

National Eye Institute (R01EY029159)

  • Benjamin M Segal
  • Roman Giger

National Eye Institute (R01EY028350)

  • Benjamin M Segal
  • Roman Giger

National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (T32 NS07222)

  • Ashley L Kalinski

National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32-GM113900)

  • Lucas D Huffman

Wings for Life (fellowship)

  • Choya Yoon

Dr Miriam and Sheldon G. Adelson Medical Research Foundation (Program)

  • Riki Kawaguchi
  • Daniel H Geschwind
  • Roman Giger

Stanley D. and Joan H. Ross Chair in Neuromodulation fund

  • Benjamin M Segal

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Brandon K Harvey, NIDA/NIH, United States

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All animal research was approved by the University of Michigan School of Medicine and conducted under the IACUC approved protocol PRO00007948

Version history

  1. Received: June 19, 2020
  2. Accepted: December 1, 2020
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: December 2, 2020 (version 1)
  4. Accepted Manuscript updated: December 7, 2020 (version 2)
  5. Version of Record published: December 14, 2020 (version 3)

Copyright

© 2020, Kalinski 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

  • 7,896
    views
  • 941
    downloads
  • 85
    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. Ashley L Kalinski
  2. Choya Yoon
  3. Lucas D Huffman
  4. Patrick C Duncker
  5. Rafi Kohen
  6. Ryan Passino
  7. Hannah Hafner
  8. Craig Johnson
  9. Riki Kawaguchi
  10. Kevin S Carbajal
  11. Juan Sebastian Jara
  12. Edmund R Hollis II
  13. Daniel H Geschwind
  14. Benjamin M Segal
  15. Roman Giger
(2020)
Analysis of the immune response to sciatic nerve injury identifies efferocytosis as a key mechanism of nerve debridement
eLife 9:e60223.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.60223

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.60223

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Maximilian Nagel, Marco Niestroj ... Marc Spehr
    Research Article

    In most mammals, conspecific chemosensory communication relies on semiochemical release within complex bodily secretions and subsequent stimulus detection by the vomeronasal organ (VNO). Urine, a rich source of ethologically relevant chemosignals, conveys detailed information about sex, social hierarchy, health, and reproductive state, which becomes accessible to a conspecific via vomeronasal sampling. So far, however, numerous aspects of social chemosignaling along the vomeronasal pathway remain unclear. Moreover, since virtually all research on vomeronasal physiology is based on secretions derived from inbred laboratory mice, it remains uncertain whether such stimuli provide a true representation of potentially more relevant cues found in the wild. Here, we combine a robust low-noise VNO activity assay with comparative molecular profiling of sex- and strain-specific mouse urine samples from two inbred laboratory strains as well as from wild mice. With comprehensive molecular portraits of these secretions, VNO activity analysis now enables us to (i) assess whether and, if so, how much sex/strain-selective ‘raw’ chemical information in urine is accessible via vomeronasal sampling; (ii) identify which chemicals exhibit sufficient discriminatory power to signal an animal’s sex, strain, or both; (iii) determine the extent to which wild mouse secretions are unique; and (iv) analyze whether vomeronasal response profiles differ between strains. We report both sex- and, in particular, strain-selective VNO representations of chemical information. Within the urinary ‘secretome’, both volatile compounds and proteins exhibit sufficient discriminative power to provide sex- and strain-specific molecular fingerprints. While total protein amount is substantially enriched in male urine, females secrete a larger variety at overall comparatively low concentrations. Surprisingly, the molecular spectrum of wild mouse urine does not dramatically exceed that of inbred strains. Finally, vomeronasal response profiles differ between C57BL/6 and BALB/c animals, with particularly disparate representations of female semiochemicals.

    1. Neuroscience
    Kenta Abe, Yuki Kambe ... Tatsuo Sato
    Research Article

    Midbrain dopamine neurons impact neural processing in the prefrontal cortex (PFC) through mesocortical projections. However, the signals conveyed by dopamine projections to the PFC remain unclear, particularly at the single-axon level. Here, we investigated dopaminergic axonal activity in the medial PFC (mPFC) during reward and aversive processing. By optimizing microprism-mediated two-photon calcium imaging of dopamine axon terminals, we found diverse activity in dopamine axons responsive to both reward and aversive stimuli. Some axons exhibited a preference for reward, while others favored aversive stimuli, and there was a strong bias for the latter at the population level. Long-term longitudinal imaging revealed that the preference was maintained in reward- and aversive-preferring axons throughout classical conditioning in which rewarding and aversive stimuli were paired with preceding auditory cues. However, as mice learned to discriminate reward or aversive cues, a cue activity preference gradually developed only in aversive-preferring axons. We inferred the trial-by-trial cue discrimination based on machine learning using anticipatory licking or facial expressions, and found that successful discrimination was accompanied by sharper selectivity for the aversive cue in aversive-preferring axons. Our findings indicate that a group of mesocortical dopamine axons encodes aversive-related signals, which are modulated by both classical conditioning across days and trial-by-trial discrimination within a day.