Non-canonical role for Lpar1-EGFP subplate neurons in early postnatal mouse somatosensory cortex

  1. Filippo Ghezzi
  2. Andre Marques-Smith
  3. Paul G Anastasiades
  4. Daniel Lyngholm
  5. Cristiana Vagnoni
  6. Alexandra Rowett
  7. Gokul Parameswaran
  8. Anna Hoerder-Suabedissen
  9. Yasushi Nakagawa
  10. Zoltan Molnar
  11. Simon J B Butt  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Oxford, United Kingdom
  2. University of Bristol, United Kingdom
  3. Sensae, Germany
  4. University of Minnesota Medical School, United States

Abstract

Subplate neurons (SPNs) are thought to play a role in nascent sensory processing in neocortex. To better understand how heterogeneity within this population relates to emergent function, we investigated the synaptic connectivity of Lpar1-EGFP SPNs through the first postnatal week in whisker somatosensory cortex (S1BF). These SPNs comprise of two morphological subtypes: fusiform SPNs with local axons, and pyramidal SPNs with axons that extend through the marginal zone. The former receive translaminar synaptic input up until the emergence of the whisker barrels; a timepoint coincident with significant cell death. In contrast, pyramidal SPNs receive local input from the subplate at early ages but then – during the later time window, acquire input from overlying cortex. Combined electrical and optogenetic activation of thalamic afferents identified that Lpar1-EGFP SPNs receive sparse thalamic innervation. These data reveal components of the postnatal network that interpret sparse thalamic input to direct the emergent columnar structure of S1BF.

Data availability

All data generated and analysed during this study are available via the University of Oxford open access data repository (https://ora.ox.ac.uk)

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Filippo Ghezzi

    Department of Physiology, Anatomy and Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Andre Marques-Smith

    Department of Physiology, Anatomy and Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6879-2858
  3. Paul G Anastasiades

    Neuroscience, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Daniel Lyngholm

    Sensae, 2100 Copenhagen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3708-0249
  5. Cristiana Vagnoni

    Department of Physiology, Anatomy and Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Alexandra Rowett

    Department of Physiology, Anatomy and Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Gokul Parameswaran

    Department of Physiology, Anatomy and Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Anna Hoerder-Suabedissen

    Department of Physiology, Anatomy and Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Yasushi Nakagawa

    Department of Neuroscience, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4876-5718
  10. Zoltan Molnar

    Department of Physiology, Anatomy and Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-6852-6004
  11. Simon J B Butt

    Physiology, Anatomy & Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    simon.butt@dpag.ox.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-2399-0102

Funding

Wellcome Trust (215199/Z/19/Z)

  • Filippo Ghezzi

Wellcome Trust (086362/Z/08/Z)

  • Andre Marques-Smith

Medical Research Council (MR/K004387/1)

  • Simon J B Butt

Human Frontiers Science Program Organisation (CDA0023/2008-C)

  • Simon J B Butt

Brain and Behavior Research Foundation (19079)

  • Simon J B Butt

Wellcome Trust (089286/Z/09/Z)

  • Simon J B Butt

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

Ethics

Animal experimentation: Animal care and experimental procedures were approved by the University of Oxford local ethical review committee and conducted in accordance with UK Home Office personal and project (70/6767; 30/3052; P861F9BB75) licenses under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) 1986 Act.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Sonia Garel, Ecole Normale Superieure, France

Publication history

  1. Preprint posted: May 13, 2020 (view preprint)
  2. Received: July 7, 2020
  3. Accepted: July 9, 2021
  4. Accepted Manuscript published: July 12, 2021 (version 1)
  5. Accepted Manuscript updated: July 15, 2021 (version 2)
  6. Version of Record published: July 21, 2021 (version 3)

Copyright

© 2021, Ghezzi 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

  • 904
    Page views
  • 100
    Downloads
  • 1
    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. Filippo Ghezzi
  2. Andre Marques-Smith
  3. Paul G Anastasiades
  4. Daniel Lyngholm
  5. Cristiana Vagnoni
  6. Alexandra Rowett
  7. Gokul Parameswaran
  8. Anna Hoerder-Suabedissen
  9. Yasushi Nakagawa
  10. Zoltan Molnar
  11. Simon J B Butt
(2021)
Non-canonical role for Lpar1-EGFP subplate neurons in early postnatal mouse somatosensory cortex
eLife 10:e60810.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.60810

Further reading

    1. Medicine
    2. Neuroscience
    Guido I Guberman et al.
    Research Article

    Background: The heterogeneity of white matter damage and symptoms in concussion has been identified as a major obstacle to therapeutic innovation. In contrast, most diffusion MRI (dMRI) studies on concussion have traditionally relied on group-comparison approaches that average out heterogeneity. To leverage, rather than average out, concussion heterogeneity, we combined dMRI and multivariate statistics to characterize multi-tract multi-symptom relationships.

    Methods: Using cross-sectional data from 306 previously-concussed children aged 9-10 from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study, we built connectomes weighted by classical and emerging diffusion measures. These measures were combined into two informative indices, the first representing microstructural complexity, the second representing axonal density. We deployed pattern-learning algorithms to jointly decompose these connectivity features and 19 symptom measures.

    Results: Early multi-tract multi-symptom pairs explained the most covariance and represented broad symptom categories, such as a general problems pair, or a pair representing all cognitive symptoms, and implicated more distributed networks of white matter tracts. Further pairs represented more specific symptom combinations, such as a pair representing attention problems exclusively, and were associated with more localized white matter abnormalities. Symptom representation was not systematically related to tract representation across pairs. Sleep problems were implicated across most pairs, but were related to different connections across these pairs. Expression of multi-tract features was not driven by sociodemographic and injury-related variables, as well as by clinical subgroups defined by the presence of ADHD. Analyses performed on a replication dataset showed consistent results.

    Conclusions: Using a double-multivariate approach, we identified clinically-informative, cross-demographic multi-tract multi-symptom relationships. These results suggest that rather than clear one-to-one symptom-connectivity disturbances, concussions may be characterized by subtypes of symptom/connectivity relationships. The symptom/connectivity relationships identified in multi-tract multi-symptom pairs were not apparent in single-tract/single-symptom analyses. Future studies aiming to better understand connectivity/symptom relationships should take into account multi-tract multi-symptom heterogeneity.

    Funding: financial support for this work from a Vanier Canada Graduate Scholarship from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (GIG), an Ontario Graduate Scholarship (SS), a Restracomp Research Fellowship provided by the Hospital for Sick Children (SS), an Institutional Research Chair in Neuroinformatics (MD), as well as a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council CREATE grant (MD).

    1. Neuroscience
    Lior Matityahu et al.
    Research Article

    Striatal spiny projection neurons (SPNs) transform convergent excitatory corticostriatal inputs into an inhibitory signal that shapes basal ganglia output. This process is fine-tuned by striatal GABAergic interneurons (GINs), which receive overlapping cortical inputs and mediate rapid corticostriatal feedforward inhibition of SPNs. Adding another level of control, cholinergic interneurons (CINs), which are also vigorously activated by corticostriatal excitation, can disynaptically inhibit SPNs by activating α4β2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs) on various GINs. Measurements of this disynaptic inhibitory pathway, however, indicate that it is too slow to compete with direct GIN-mediated feed-forward inhibition. Moreover, functional nAChRs are also present on populations of GINs that respond only weakly to phasic activation of CINs, such as parvalbumin-positive fast-spiking interneurons (PV-FSIs), making the overall role of nAChRs in shaping striatal synaptic integration unclear. Using acute striatal slices from mice we show that upon synchronous optogenetic activation of corticostriatal projections blockade of α4β2 nAChRs shortened SPN spike latencies and increased postsynaptic depolarizations. The nAChR-dependent inhibition was mediated by downstream GABA release, and data suggest that the GABA source was not limited to GINs that respond strongly to phasic CIN activation. In particular, the observed decrease in spike latency caused by nAChR blockade was associated with a diminished frequency of spontaneous inhibitory postsynaptic currents in SPNs, a parallel hyperpolarization of PV-FSIs, and was occluded by pharmacologically preventing cortical activation of PV-FSIs. Taken together, we describe a role for tonic (as opposed to phasic) activation of nAChRs in striatal function. We conclude that tonic activation of nAChRs by CINs maintains a GABAergic brake on cortically-driven striatal output by 'priming' feedforward inhibition, a process that may shape SPN spike timing, striatal processing and synaptic plasticity.