Brain Repair: Gatekeeping astrocyte identity
New findings cast doubt on whether suppressing the RNA-binding protein PTBP1 can force astrocytes to become dopaminergic neurons.
- Centre for Developmental Neurobiology, King's College London, United Kingdom
- The Francis Crick Institute, United Kingdom
- University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University, Germany
As a cell acquires its final identity, it usually closes the door on the other cellular fates it could have adopted. Valiant guardian mechanisms ensure that this gate remains shut, even as a plethora of signals threaten to crack it open once more. These processes are particularly crucial for cells from highly related lineages – such as astrocytes and neurons, two types of brain cells that derive from the same progenitor cells.
In the past 15 years, work has shown that astrocytes, which belong to a class of non-neuronal cells that support and fine-tune the activity of nerve cells, can be converted into neurons if they are forced to express neurogenic transcription factors (Götz and Bocchi, 2021). In some brain regions such as the mouse striatum, injury can even re-activate a neurogenic programme which is otherwise suppressed (Magnusson et al., 2014). This raises the intriguing possibility that specific mechanisms help to safeguard the identity of astrocytes; these processes could also be harnessed to awaken neurogenic potential in astrocytes and help repair neural damage.
A top-selling candidate for gatekeeping the astrocyte-to-neuron conversion is the RNA-binding PTBP1 which, in vitro, inhibits neuronal fate by ensuring that a master repressor of neuronal genes remains active (Makeyev et al., 2007). The discovery of these regulatory interactions suggested that simply downregulating PTBP1 could release the brake on a neurogenic programme in non-neuronal cells (Xue et al., 2013; Figure 1A). In fact, two recent bodies of work suggest that when PTBP1 is knocked down, mouse astrocytes can turn into dopaminergic neurons with remarkable efficiency (Qian et al., 2020, Zhou et al., 2020). This class of nerve cells degenerates in Parkinson’s disease, and both studies reported a drastic amelioration of motor deficits in a mouse model of this condition, with enormous implications for new brain therapies. Now, in eLife, Mingtao Li and colleagues at Sun Yat-sen University – including Weizhao Chen as first author – report results that question these findings (Chen et al., 2022).
Figure 1
Deactivating PTBP1 in astrocytes fails to convert the cells into neurons.
(A) The hypothesis tested by Chen et al. is that the protein PTBP1 stops astrocytes (pale pink) from becoming neurons (grey). (B) Adeno-associated viruses (green) can deliver the genetic information necessary to deactivate PTBP1 in astrocytes which have been genetically tagged (red). This potentially allows the cells to be converted into dopaminergic neurons which still carry the tag (red) reflecting that they have originated from astrocytes, as well as the viral label (green). (C) Chen et al. used a mouse model in which astrocyte origin could be traced to investigate whether knocking down PTBP1 using adeno-associated viruses may lead to the cells becoming dopaminergic neurons (DA carrying the red tag); this turned out not to be the case (red cross). Instead, dopaminergic neurons carrying the viral signal (green-only cells) were identified, which did not originate from astrocytes. (D) Similar experiments were conducted in a mouse model of Parkinson’s disease. In this instance, a toxin was introduced to kill endogenous dopaminergic neurons and render resting astrocytes reactive; in this injury-triggered state, astrocytes exhibit features associated with stem cells. Deactivating PTBP1 in reactive astrocytes again failed to turn them into neurons, and the mice still exhibited motor deficits.
The team focused on whether the seemingly converted dopaminergic cells truly derived from astrocytes, using a transgenic mouse line that faithfully reports the origin of astrocytes. PTBP1 was successfully knocked down in astrocytes by using adeno-associated viruses, viral vectors that contain the information necessary to suppress the protein only in astrocytes (Figure 1B).
Dopaminergic neurons carrying the viral label were identified, but to the team’s surprise, none of these were positive for the genetic tag that marked astrocyte origin (Figure 1C). This data strongly suggests that these neurons have not emerged from converted astrocytes, but that instead the viral vectors had lost their original specificity. This adds to recent, baffling observations, which highlighted that adeno-associated viruses designed to activate the expression of neuronal conversion factors only in astrocytes, fail to attain the required specificity (Wang et al., 2021).
Chen et al. then checked whether the manipulation could be successful if done on a type of astrocyte that may be more prone to changing its identity. These ‘reactive’ astrocytes emerge in damaged tissues, where they start to display traits present in neural stem cells (Sirko et al., 2013). A toxin was used to kill dopaminergic neurons as PTBP1 was suppressed in reactive astrocytes, yet even this scenario failed to turn the cells into neurons (Figure 1D). Conducting this manipulation in a mouse model of Parkinson’s disease also did not lead to improvements in the animals’ motor deficits. How this negative finding can be reconciled with earlier studies showing that these symptoms were corrected upon PTBP1 deactivation will require further clarification.
Taken together, the work by Chen et al. strongly argues against PTBP1 being the sole gatekeeper between astrocyte and neuronal fates, while also stressing the importance of rigorous genetic lineage tracing when conducting in vivo reprogramming. Still, given the powerful control that PTBP1 exerts on the molecular switch that represses neuronal genes, it would be premature to fully move away from studying the impact of this protein on astrocyte identity and function.
References
-
Neuronal replacement: Concepts, achievements, and call for cautionCurrent Opinion in Neurobiology 69:185–192.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2021.03.014
Article and author information
Author details
Benedikt Berninger
Publication history
Copyright
© 2022, Cooper and Berninger
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
-
- 837
- views
-
- 169
- downloads
-
- 5
- 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)
Brain Repair: Gatekeeping astrocyte identity
eLife 11:e80232.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.80232
Further reading
-
- Neuroscience
Unipolar brush cells (UBCs) are excitatory interneurons in the cerebellar cortex that receive mossy fiber (MF) inputs and excite granule cells. The UBC population responds to brief burst activation of MFs with a continuum of temporal transformations, but it is not known how UBCs transform the diverse range of MF input patterns that occur in vivo. Here, we use cell-attached recordings from UBCs in acute cerebellar slices to examine responses to MF firing patterns that are based on in vivo recordings. We find that MFs evoke a continuum of responses in the UBC population, mediated by three different types of glutamate receptors that each convey a specialized component. AMPARs transmit timing information for single stimuli at up to 5 spikes/s, and for very brief bursts. A combination of mGluR2/3s (inhibitory) and mGluR1s (excitatory) mediates a continuum of delayed, and broadened responses to longer bursts, and to sustained high frequency activation. Variability in the mGluR2/3 component controls the time course of the onset of firing, and variability in the mGluR1 component controls the duration of prolonged firing. We conclude that the combination of glutamate receptor types allows each UBC to simultaneously convey different aspects of MF firing. These findings establish that UBCs are highly flexible circuit elements that provide diverse temporal transformations that are well suited to contribute to specialized processing in different regions of the cerebellar cortex.
-
- Neuroscience
The specific role that prolactin plays in lactational infertility, as distinct from other suckling or metabolic cues, remains unresolved. Here, deletion of the prolactin receptor (Prlr) from forebrain neurons or arcuate kisspeptin neurons resulted in failure to maintain normal lactation-induced suppression of estrous cycles. Kisspeptin immunoreactivity and pulsatile LH secretion were increased in these mice, even in the presence of ongoing suckling stimulation and lactation. GCaMP fibre photometry of arcuate kisspeptin neurons revealed that the normal episodic activity of these neurons is rapidly suppressed in pregnancy and this was maintained throughout early lactation. Deletion of Prlr from arcuate kisspeptin neurons resulted in early reactivation of episodic activity of kisspeptin neurons prior to a premature return of reproductive cycles in early lactation. These observations show dynamic variation in arcuate kisspeptin neuronal activity associated with the hormonal changes of pregnancy and lactation, and provide direct evidence that prolactin action on arcuate kisspeptin neurons is necessary for suppressing fertility during lactation in mice.
