Subcellular sequencing of single neurons reveals the dendritic transcriptome of GABAergic interneurons

Abstract

Although mRNAs are localized in the processes of excitatory neurons, it is still unclear whether interneurons also localize a large population of mRNAs. In addition, the variability in the localized mRNA population within and between cell-types is unknown. Here we describe the unbiased transcriptomic characterization of the subcellular compartments of hundreds of single neurons. We separately profiled the dendritic and somatic transcriptomes of individual rat hippocampal neurons and investigated mRNA abundances in the soma and dendrites of single glutamatergic and GABAergic neurons. We found that, like their excitatory counterparts, interneurons contain a rich repertoire of ~4000 mRNAs. We observed more cell type-specific features among somatic transcriptomes than their associated dendritic transcriptomes. Finally, using cell-type specific metabolic labelling of isolated neurites, we demonstrated that the processes of Glutamatergic and, notably, GABAergic neurons were capable of local translation, suggesting mRNA localization and local translation is a general property of neurons.

Data availability

Sequencing data have been deposited in GEO under accession code GSE157204

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Julio D Perez

    Synaptic Plasticity, Max Planck Institute for Brain Research, Frankfurt, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8769-9306
  2. Susanne tom Dieck

    Synaptic Plasticity, Max Planck Institute for Brain Research, Frankfurt, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5884-8640
  3. Beatriz Alvarez-Castelao

    Synaptic Plasticity, Max Planck Institute for Brain Research, Frankfurt, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7505-1855
  4. Georgi Tushev

    Synaptic Plasticity, Max Planck Institute for Brain Research, Frankfurt, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Ivy CW Chan

    Synaptic Plasticity, Max Planck Institute for Brain Research, Frankfurt, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Erin M Schuman

    Synaptic Plasticity, Max Planck Institute for Brain Research, Frankfurt, Germany
    For correspondence
    erin.schuman@brain.mpg.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-7053-1005

Funding

H2020 European Research Council

  • Erin M Schuman

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

Ethics

Animal experimentation: The procedures involving animal treatment and care wereconducted in conformity with the institutional guidelines that are in compliance with thenational and international laws and policies (DIRECTIVE2010/63/EU; German animalwelfare law, FELASA guidelines) and approved by and reported to the local governmentalsupervising authorities (Regierungspräsidium Darmstadt). The animals were euthanizedaccording to annex 2 of {section sign}2 Abs. 2 Tierschutz-Versuchstier-Verordnung.

Copyright

© 2021, Perez 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

  • 7,718
    views
  • 927
    downloads
  • 63
    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. Julio D Perez
  2. Susanne tom Dieck
  3. Beatriz Alvarez-Castelao
  4. Georgi Tushev
  5. Ivy CW Chan
  6. Erin M Schuman
(2021)
Subcellular sequencing of single neurons reveals the dendritic transcriptome of GABAergic interneurons
eLife 10:e63092.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.63092

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.63092

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Zachary Fournier, Leandro M Alonso, Eve Marder
    Research Article

    Circuit function results from both intrinsic conductances of network neurons and the synaptic conductances that connect them. In models of neural circuits, different combinations of maximal conductances can give rise to similar activity. We compared the robustness of a neural circuit to changes in their intrinsic versus synaptic conductances. To address this, we performed a sensitivity analysis on a population of conductance-based models of the pyloric network from the crustacean stomatogastric ganglion (STG). The model network consists of three neurons with nine currents: a sodium current (Na), three potassium currents (Kd, KCa, KA), two calcium currents (CaS and CaT), a hyperpolarization-activated current (H), a non-voltage-gated leak current (leak), and a neuromodulatory current (MI). The model cells are connected by seven synapses of two types, glutamatergic and cholinergic. We produced one hundred models of the pyloric network that displayed similar activities with values of maximal conductances distributed over wide ranges. We evaluated the robustness of each model to changes in their maximal conductances. We found that individual models have different sensitivities to changes in their maximal conductances, both in their intrinsic and synaptic conductances. As expected, the models become less robust as the extent of the changes increases. Despite quantitative differences in their robustness, we found that in all cases, the model networks are more sensitive to the perturbation of their intrinsic conductances than their synaptic conductances.

    1. Neuroscience
    Jacob A Miller
    Insight

    When navigating environments with changing rules, human brain circuits flexibly adapt how and where we retain information to help us achieve our immediate goals.