Subcellular proteomics of dopamine neurons in the mouse brain

  1. Benjamin D Hobson
  2. Se Joon Choi
  3. Eugene V Mosharov
  4. Rajesh K Soni
  5. David Sulzer  Is a corresponding author
  6. Peter Sims  Is a corresponding author
  1. Columbia University Medical Center, United States

Abstract

Dopaminergic neurons modulate neural circuits and behaviors via dopamine release from expansive, long range axonal projections. The elaborate cytoarchitecture of these neurons is embedded within complex brain tissue, making it difficult to access the neuronal proteome using conventional methods. Here, we demonstrate APEX2 proximity labeling within genetically targeted neurons in the mouse brain, enabling subcellular proteomics with cell type-specificity. By combining APEX2 biotinylation with mass spectrometry, we mapped the somatodendritic and axonal proteomes of midbrain dopaminergic neurons. Our dataset reveals the proteomic architecture underlying proteostasis, axonal metabolism, and neurotransmission in these neurons. We identify numerous proteins encoded by dopamine neuron-enriched genes in striatal dopaminergic axons, including ion channels with previously undescribed axonal localization. These proteomic datasets provide a resource for neuronal cell biology, and this approach can be readily adapted for study of other neural cell types.

Data availability

The mass spectrometry proteomics data have been deposited to the ProteomeXchange Consortium via the PRIDE (Perez-Riverol et al., 2019) partner repository with the dataset identifier PXD026229. Raw label-free quantification intensity values for proteomics data can be found in Figure 2 - source data 2. The scRNA-seq data analyzed are publicly available as GSE116470 (Saunders et al., 2018). High confidence DA neuron profiles used in this study are reported in Figure 5 - source data 3.

The following data sets were generated
The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Benjamin D Hobson

    Depart of Systems Biology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-2745-5318
  2. Se Joon Choi

    New York State Psychiatric Institute, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Eugene V Mosharov

    New York State Psychiatric Institute, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Rajesh K Soni

    Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4556-4358
  5. David Sulzer

    Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, United States
    For correspondence
    ds43@cumc.columbia.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7632-0439
  6. Peter Sims

    Department of Systems Biology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, United States
    For correspondence
    pas2182@columbia.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3921-4837

Funding

National Institutes of Health (F30DA047775)

  • Benjamin D Hobson

National Institutes of Health (R01NS095435)

  • David Sulzer

National Institutes of Health (R01DA007418)

  • David Sulzer

National Institutes of Health (R01MH122470)

  • David Sulzer

Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research (ASAP-000375)

  • David Sulzer
  • Peter Sims

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 experiments were conducted according to NIH guidelines and approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees of Columbia University and the New York State Psychiatric Institute. Protocol numbers are NYSPI #1584 (Columbia University AABI2605) and NYSPI #1551 (Columbia University AABD8564).

Copyright

© 2022, Hobson 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

  • 8,680
    views
  • 1,211
    downloads
  • 36
    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. Benjamin D Hobson
  2. Se Joon Choi
  3. Eugene V Mosharov
  4. Rajesh K Soni
  5. David Sulzer
  6. Peter Sims
(2022)
Subcellular proteomics of dopamine neurons in the mouse brain
eLife 11:e70921.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.70921

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.70921

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Ana Maria Ichim, Harald Barzan ... Raul Cristian Muresan
    Review Article

    Gamma oscillations in brain activity (30–150 Hz) have been studied for over 80 years. Although in the past three decades significant progress has been made to try to understand their functional role, a definitive answer regarding their causal implication in perception, cognition, and behavior still lies ahead of us. Here, we first review the basic neural mechanisms that give rise to gamma oscillations and then focus on two main pillars of exploration. The first pillar examines the major theories regarding their functional role in information processing in the brain, also highlighting critical viewpoints. The second pillar reviews a novel research direction that proposes a therapeutic role for gamma oscillations, namely the gamma entrainment using sensory stimulation (GENUS). We extensively discuss both the positive findings and the issues regarding reproducibility of GENUS. Going beyond the functional and therapeutic role of gamma, we propose a third pillar of exploration, where gamma, generated endogenously by cortical circuits, is essential for maintenance of healthy circuit function. We propose that four classes of interneurons, namely those expressing parvalbumin (PV), vasointestinal peptide (VIP), somatostatin (SST), and nitric oxide synthase (NOS) take advantage of endogenous gamma to perform active vasomotor control that maintains homeostasis in the neuronal tissue. According to this hypothesis, which we call GAMER (GAmma MEdiated ciRcuit maintenance), gamma oscillations act as a ‘servicing’ rhythm that enables efficient translation of neural activity into vascular responses that are essential for optimal neurometabolic processes. GAMER is an extension of GENUS, where endogenous rather than entrained gamma plays a fundamental role. Finally, we propose several critical experiments to test the GAMER hypothesis.

    1. Neuroscience
    John P Grogan, Matthias Raemaekers ... Sanjay G Manohar
    Research Article

    Motivation depends on dopamine, but might be modulated by acetylcholine which influences dopamine release in the striatum, and amplifies motivation in animal studies. A corresponding effect in humans would be important clinically, since anticholinergic drugs are frequently used in Parkinson’s disease, a condition that can also disrupt motivation. Reward and dopamine make us more ready to respond, as indexed by reaction times (RT), and move faster, sometimes termed vigour. These effects may be controlled by preparatory processes that can be tracked using electroencephalography (EEG). We measured vigour in a placebo-controlled, double-blinded study of trihexyphenidyl (THP), a muscarinic antagonist, with an incentivised eye movement task and EEG. Participants responded faster and with greater vigour when incentives were high, but THP blunted these motivational effects, suggesting that muscarinic receptors facilitate invigoration by reward. Preparatory EEG build-up (contingent negative variation [CNV]) was strengthened by high incentives and by muscarinic blockade, although THP reduced the incentive effect. The amplitude of preparatory activity predicted both vigour and RT, although over distinct scalp regions; frontal activity predicted vigour, whereas a larger, earlier, central component predicted RT. The incentivisation of RT was partly mediated by the CNV, though vigour was not. Moreover, the CNV mediated the drug’s effect on dampening incentives, suggesting that muscarinic receptors underlie the motivational influence on this preparatory activity. Taken together, these findings show that a muscarinic blocker impairs motivated action in healthy people, and that medial frontal preparatory neural activity mediates this for RT.