Pyramidal Neurons: Looking for the origins of axons

Pyramidal neurons with axons that exit from dendrites rather than the cell body itself are relatively common in non-primates, but rare in monkeys and humans.
  1. Kathleen S Rockland  Is a corresponding author
  1. Department of Anatomy and Neurobiology School of Medicine, Boston University, United States

Pyramidal neurons are easily recognizable because their soma – the part of the neuron that contains the nucleus – has a characteristic triangular shape (hence their name). On closer examination, however, it becomes clear that the size of the soma can vary, as can the size and shape of the ‘arbor’ formed by the dendrites that carry signals to the soma (DeFelipe and Fariñas, 1992). Moreover, it has been reported that the axons of some pyramidal neurons in the mammalian cortex emerge from dendrites rather than from the base of the soma (Triarhou, 2014; Figure 1).

Axons can emerge from different parts of pyramidal neurons.

(A) The neocortex of an infant macaque monkey that has been stained with dyes that label the dendrites and axons (initial segment only) of pyramidal neurons (shown in green). Branching off the base of the soma are several basal dendrites, and a single apical dendrite protrudes from its apex. Most pyramidal neurons contain an axon (indicated by the white arrow) that exits from the base of the soma (B). In some neurons, however, the axon emerges from a dendrite (C), or initially co-joins with a dendrite as it exits from the soma (D). Scale bars represent 100 micrometers for panel A, and 25 micrometers for the other panels.

Image credit: Adapted from Figure 1 in Wahle et al., 2022

These ‘axon carrying dendrites’ are unusual because the signals dendrites receive are usually processed in the soma before they are sent out via the axon to other neurons (Förster, 2014). These kinds of morphological differences are important because they influence how individual neurons and neuronal groups compute information. Researchers are particularly interested in features that only occur in humans and primates, as these may be associated with cognitive behaviors as well as neurological and psychiatric conditions. Now, in eLife, Petra Wahle from Ruhr University Bochum and co-workers in Germany, Austria and Spain report that the proportion of axon carrying dendrites (AcDs) varies between mammalian species and different areas of the brain (Wahle et al., 2022).

Wahle et al. used a range of histological techniques to compare the morphology and structure of pyramidal neurons in postmortem tissue samples extracted from six cortical areas at different stages of the animals’ development (Figure 2). This revealed that the proportion of pyramidal neurons with an AcD was around 10–20% in non-primate mammals (rat, cat and ferret), but much lower (typically a few percent) in macaque monkeys and humans. Moreover, AcDs were rarely found in the upper layers of the neocortex: these layers are thicker in non-human primates and humans, and are associated with complex behaviors and higher cortical functions.

Axon carrying dendrites in different mammalian species.

Neurons with axon carrying dendrites (AcDs) in the rat visual cortex (A1, A2), the cat visual cortex (B1, B2), the ferret visual cortex (C1, C2), the macaque premotor cortex (D1, D2), and the human auditory cortex (E1, E2). Tissue samples were stained using one or two of the following techniques: biocytin (black and white images), immunofluorescence (multi-color images), or the Golgi method (human auditory cortex only). The site where the axons emerge is indicated by a large white arrow, with smaller black arrows highlighting the direction the axon takes through the neocortex. In most pyramidal neurons, the AcD emerges from the base of the soma. It is very rare for the AcD to emerge from the apical dendrite: an example of this is indicated by the asterisk in panel C2. Fewer than ten examples of apical AcDs were identified in the rat, ferret and macaque tissue samples studied, and none were identified in the human tissue samples. Scale bars represent 25 micrometers for all panels.

Image credit: Adapted from Figure 2 in Wahle et al., 2022.

So, what might be the reason for humans and non-human primates having fewer AcDs? It is thought that AcDs enhance the electrical behavior of pyramidal neurons by allowing signals to bypass the soma and flow directly from the dendrite to the axon. This is supported by prior studies showing that AcDs generate stronger and more frequent electrical spikes, and also require a lower threshold to trigger an action potential (Thome et al., 2014; Kole and Brette, 2018). Wahle et al. propose that humans and non-human primates have fewer AcDs because they already have other cellular specializations that can boost the strength of the electrical signal sent through pyramidal neurons.

The careful quantification and systematic survey of pyramidal neurons from different species and brain regions also yielded three other observations. First, Wahle et al. found that inhibitory interneurons do not follow the same trend as pyramidal cells: primates have similar numbers of AcD interneurons as other mammalian species. Second, humans have an unexpectedly high number of AcDs (8.86–13.23%) in the white matter compartment below the cortex, which largely contains bundles of axons intermixed with a population of scattered neurons. Among other features, these neurons are born early in development and have less distinct axon and dendritic regions compared to neurons at the cortical surface (Suárez-Solá et al., 2009). This weakened polarity may be the reason why a higher proportion of neurons in white matter have AcDs.

Third, consistent with previous work on the hippocampus (Benavides-Piccione et al., 2020), Wahle et al. found that humans had more pyramidal neurons with AcDs in this region of the brain than mice – which is the opposite of what happens in other parts of the cortex. Wahle et al. suggest that this could be because the hippocampus of humans and non-human primates requires extra features to carry out its complex memory-related processes. One way to test this could be to expand the histological analysis to other parts of the brain that are also associated with higher order functions, such as the amygdala.

In a broader context, the work by Wahle et al. adds to an already long list of pyramidal neurons that are morphologically distinct (DeFelipe and Fariñas, 1992). This includes inverted pyramidal neurons where apical dendrites (which usually emerge from the top of the soma) orientate down towards the white matter rather than up towards the surface of the brain (Banovac et al., 2021). An anatomical study in rabbits showed that the axons of inverted neurons can exit from multiple places (the base or side of the cell body, or off the downward-facing dendrite), and can project to a variety of cortical structures (Mendizabal-Zubiaga et al., 2007). This mixed population of standard and inverted pyramidal neurons has also been found in the brains of non-primate mammals and the hippocampus of non-human primates, suggesting that they may lead to different axonal outputs.

Another possibility is that differences in morphology may result from mis-steps during development. Notably, inverted pyramidal neurons are abundant in the cortex of mutant reeler mice, which have disorganized cortical layers owing to disruptions in neuronal migration during development (Landrieu and Goffinet, 1981; Förster, 2014).

Organization of the cytoskeleton (the scaffold of proteins that maintains the cell’s structure) may also play a role in these morphological differences, particularly the location of the initial segment of the axon, which varies across vertebrates and invertebrates (Prokop, 2020). Species variations are becoming increasingly easy to investigate due to the advent of super-resolution microscopy (Xu et al., 2013), and AcDs offer an interesting assay for examining ultrastructural specializations in normal and abnormal brains.

The findings of Wahle et al. highlight how the morphology of pyramidal neurons, and potentially other cells in the brain, does not always follow a uniform pattern and can vary between species. The study also offers several new avenues of research. For instance, the mechanisms involved in the formation and function of AcDs remain to be explored. Furthermore, it is still unclear why in the samples studied by Wahle et al. it is more common for dendrites at the base of the pyramidal soma to have AcDs than the apical dendrite (Figure 2C). In addition, other mechanisms – such as gene expression and metabolism – might play a role in this unusual axon location. AcDs could be an effective assay to identify neurons with distinct roles in the brain (Höfflin et al., 2017).

Answering these questions will require expanding the histological approach used by Wahle et al. to other areas of the brain, especially regions outside the cortex, and examining more species and stages of development. In addition, computer simulations could be used to model the consequences of having different proportions of AcDs. This could provide new insights into how and why cognitive behavior differs so much between species, particularly humans and non-human primates.

References

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Kathleen S Rockland

    Kathleen S Rockland is in the Department of Anatomy and Neurobiology, School of Medicine, Boston University, Boston, United States

    For correspondence
    krock@bu.edu
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-6650-8785

Publication history

  1. Version of Record published: June 1, 2022 (version 1)

Copyright

© 2022, Rockland

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 1,004
    Page views
  • 186
    Downloads
  • 0
    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. Kathleen S Rockland
(2022)
Pyramidal Neurons: Looking for the origins of axons
eLife 11:e79839.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.79839

Further reading

    1. Evolutionary Biology
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Susanne Tilk, Svyatoslav Tkachenko ... Christopher D McFarland
    Research Article Updated

    Cancer genomes exhibit surprisingly weak signatures of negative selection (Martincorena et al., 2017; Weghorn, 2017). This may be because selective pressures are relaxed or because genome-wide linkage prevents deleterious mutations from being removed (Hill-Robertson interference; Hill and Robertson, 1966). By stratifying tumors by their genome-wide mutational burden, we observe negative selection (dN/dS ~ 0.56) in low mutational burden tumors, while remaining cancers exhibit dN/dS ratios ~1. This suggests that most tumors do not remove deleterious passengers. To buffer against deleterious passengers, tumors upregulate heat shock pathways as their mutational burden increases. Finally, evolutionary modeling finds that Hill-Robertson interference alone can reproduce patterns of attenuated selection and estimates the total fitness cost of passengers to be 46% per cell on average. Collectively, our findings suggest that the lack of observed negative selection in most tumors is not due to relaxed selective pressures, but rather the inability of selection to remove deleterious mutations in the presence of genome-wide linkage.

    1. Evolutionary Biology
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Anna M Langmüller, Jackson Champer ... Philipp W Messer
    Research Article

    CRISPR/Cas9 provides a highly efficient and flexible genome editing technology with numerous potential applications ranging from gene therapy to population control. Some proposed applications involve the integration of CRISPR/Cas9 endonucleases into an organism's genome, which raises questions about potentially harmful effects to the transgenic individuals. One example for which this is particularly relevant are CRISPR-based gene drives conceived for the genetic alteration of entire populations. The performance of such drives can strongly depend on fitness costs experienced by drive carriers, yet relatively little is known about the magnitude and causes of these costs. Here, we assess the fitness effects of genomic CRISPR/Cas9 expression in Drosophila melanogaster cage populations by tracking allele frequencies of four different transgenic constructs that allow us to disentangle 'direct' fitness costs due to the integration, expression, and target-site activity of Cas9, from fitness costs due to potential off-target cleavage. Using a maximum likelihood framework, we find that a model with no direct fitness costs but moderate costs due to off-target effects fits our cage data best. Consistent with this, we do not observe fitness costs for a construct with Cas9HF1, a high-fidelity version of Cas9. We further demonstrate that using Cas9HF1 instead of standard Cas9 in a homing drive achieves similar drive conversion efficiency. These results suggest that gene drives should be designed with high-fidelity endonucleases and may have implications for other applications that involve genomic integration of CRISPR endonucleases.