Glycolytic preconditioning in astrocytes mitigates trauma-induced neurodegeneration

  1. Rene Solano Fonseca
  2. Patrick Metang
  3. Nathan Egge
  4. Yingjian Liu
  5. Kielen R Zuurbier
  6. Karthigayini Sivaprakasam
  7. Shawn Shirazi
  8. Ashleigh Chuah
  9. Sonja LB Arneaud
  10. Genevieve Konopka
  11. Dong Qian
  12. Peter M Douglas  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, United States
  2. University of Texas at Dallas, United States
  3. University of California Berkeley, United States

Abstract

Concussion is associated with a myriad of deleterious immediate and long-term consequences. Yet the molecular mechanisms and genetic targets promoting the selective vulnerability of different neural subtypes to dysfunction and degeneration remain unclear. Translating experimental models of blunt force trauma in C. elegans to concussion in mice, we identify a conserved neuroprotective mechanism in which reduction of mitochondrial electron flux through complex IV suppresses trauma-induced degeneration of the highly vulnerable dopaminergic neurons. Reducing cytochrome C oxidase function elevates mitochondrial-derived reactive oxygen species, which signal through the cytosolic hypoxia inducing transcription factor, Hif1a, to promote hyperphosphorylation and inactivation of the pyruvate dehydrogenase, PDHE1α. This critical enzyme initiates the Warburg shunt, which drives energetic reallocation from mitochondrial respiration to astrocyte-mediated glycolysis in a neuroprotective manner. These studies demonstrate a conserved process in which glycolytic preconditioning suppresses Parkinson-like hypersensitivity of dopaminergic neurons to trauma-induced degeneration via redox signaling and the Warburg effect.

Data availability

All datasets are submitted to GEO and will be made available to the public upon publication of the article.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Rene Solano Fonseca

    Department of Molecular Biology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  2. Patrick Metang

    Department of Molecular Biology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  3. Nathan Egge

    Department of Molecular Biology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  4. Yingjian Liu

    Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Texas at Dallas, Dallas, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  5. Kielen R Zuurbier

    Department of Molecular Biology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  6. Karthigayini Sivaprakasam

    Department of Neuroscience, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  7. Shawn Shirazi

    Department of Integrative Biology, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  8. Ashleigh Chuah

    Department of Molecular Biology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  9. Sonja LB Arneaud

    Department of Molecular Biology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1123-3876
  10. Genevieve Konopka

    Department of Neuroscience, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States
    Competing interests
    Genevieve Konopka, Reviewing Editor, eLife.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3363-7302
  11. Dong Qian

    Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Texas at Dallas, Dallas, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  12. Peter M Douglas

    Department of Molecular Biology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States
    For correspondence
    peter.douglas@utsouthwestern.edu
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0734-1049

Funding

Welch Foundation (I-2061-20210327)

  • Peter M Douglas

National Institutes of Health (R01AG061338)

  • Peter M Douglas

Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (RR150089)

  • Peter M Douglas

Clayton Foundation for Research

  • Peter M Douglas

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

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All mouse studies were approved by the UT Southwestern Medical Center Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) protocols (#2016-101750) and performed in accordance with institutional and federal guidelines.

Copyright

© 2021, Solano Fonseca 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

  • 1,795
    views
  • 276
    downloads
  • 16
    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. Rene Solano Fonseca
  2. Patrick Metang
  3. Nathan Egge
  4. Yingjian Liu
  5. Kielen R Zuurbier
  6. Karthigayini Sivaprakasam
  7. Shawn Shirazi
  8. Ashleigh Chuah
  9. Sonja LB Arneaud
  10. Genevieve Konopka
  11. Dong Qian
  12. Peter M Douglas
(2021)
Glycolytic preconditioning in astrocytes mitigates trauma-induced neurodegeneration
eLife 10:e69438.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.69438

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.69438

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    Jingjing Li, Xinyue Wang ... Vincent Archambault
    Research Article

    In animals, mitosis involves the breakdown of the nucleus. The reassembly of a nucleus after mitosis requires the reformation of the nuclear envelope around a single mass of chromosomes. This process requires Ankle2 (also known as LEM4 in humans) which interacts with PP2A and promotes the function of the Barrier-to-Autointegration Factor (BAF). Upon dephosphorylation, BAF dimers cross-bridge chromosomes and bind lamins and transmembrane proteins of the reassembling nuclear envelope. How Ankle2 functions in mitosis is incompletely understood. Using a combination of approaches in Drosophila, along with structural modeling, we provide several lines of evidence that suggest that Ankle2 is a regulatory subunit of PP2A, explaining how it promotes BAF dephosphorylation. In addition, we discovered that Ankle2 interacts with the endoplasmic reticulum protein Vap33, which is required for Ankle2 localization at the reassembling nuclear envelope during telophase. We identified the interaction sites of PP2A and Vap33 on Ankle2. Through genetic rescue experiments, we show that the Ankle2/PP2A interaction is essential for the function of Ankle2 in nuclear reassembly and that the Ankle2/Vap33 interaction also promotes this process. Our study sheds light on the molecular mechanisms of post-mitotic nuclear reassembly and suggests that the endoplasmic reticulum is not merely a source of membranes in the process, but also provides localized enzymatic activity.

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    Bhumil Patel, Maryke Grobler ... Needhi Bhalla
    Research Article

    Meiotic crossover recombination is essential for both accurate chromosome segregation and the generation of new haplotypes for natural selection to act upon. This requirement is known as crossover assurance and is one example of crossover control. While the conserved role of the ATPase, PCH-2, during meiotic prophase has been enigmatic, a universal phenotype when pch-2 or its orthologs are mutated is a change in the number and distribution of meiotic crossovers. Here, we show that PCH-2 controls the number and distribution of crossovers by antagonizing their formation. This antagonism produces different effects at different stages of meiotic prophase: early in meiotic prophase, PCH-2 prevents double-strand breaks from becoming crossover-eligible intermediates, limiting crossover formation at sites of initial double-strand break formation and homolog interactions. Later in meiotic prophase, PCH-2 winnows the number of crossover-eligible intermediates, contributing to the designation of crossovers and ultimately, crossover assurance. We also demonstrate that PCH-2 accomplishes this regulation through the meiotic HORMAD, HIM-3. Our data strongly support a model in which PCH-2’s conserved role is to remodel meiotic HORMADs throughout meiotic prophase to destabilize crossover-eligible precursors and coordinate meiotic recombination with synapsis, ensuring the progressive implementation of meiotic recombination and explaining its function in the pachytene checkpoint and crossover control.