Author Response:
The following is the authors’ response to the original reviews.
Public Reviews:
Reviewer #1 (Public review):
(1) The sample size for the ex vivo electrophysiology is small. Given the difficulty and complexity of the preparation, this is understandable. However, a larger sample size would have strengthened the authors' conclusions.
We appreciate that the sample size is small, but this was limited by the technical difficulty and relatively low yield with this preparation. From a total of 16 experiments, we were able to obtain successful recordings in 6 cases, and these provided the characterisation of the 11 cells reported in Figure 4. We believe that this is sufficient to “strongly suggest” that the cells with dense Trpm8 input correspond to cold-selective cells. We have toned down the statements in the abstract (line 23) and the Results section (line 246).
(2) The authors used tdTomato expression to identify brain targets innervated by these coldselective lamina I projection neurons. Since tdTomato is a soluble fluorescent protein that fills the entire cell, using synaptophysin reporters (e.g., synaptophysin-GFP) would have been more convincing in revealing the synaptic targets of these projection neurons.
As the Reviewer says, tdTomato labelling fills the entire cell. However, examination at high magnification reveals numerous varicosities along the labelled axons, presumably corresponding to synaptic boutons. We now illustrate this in Figure 6–figure supplement 2F.
In addition, we have provided further evidence that these varicosities correspond to (glutamatergic) synaptic boutons by immunostaining sections through the LPB for the postsynaptic density protein Homer1, and showing Homer1 puncta apposed to varicosities (Figure 6–figure supplement 2 G,H). This new information now appears in the Results section (lines 374-380).
(3) The summary cartoon shown in Figure 7 can be misleading because this study did not determine whether these cold - selective lamina I projection neurons have collateral branches to multiple brain targets or if there are anatomical subtypes that may project exclusively to specific targets. For example, a recent study (Ding et al., Neuron, 2025) demonstrated that there are PBN-projecting spinal neurons that do not project to other rostral brain areas. Furthermore, based on the authors' bulk labeling experiments, the three main brain targets are NTS, PBNrel, and cPAG. The VPL projection is very sparse and almost negligible.
We agree that branches to different brain nuclei may originate from specific subsets of ALS3 neurons and this is now stated in the figure legend. It is true that there are projections to other brain regions (including NTS). These are not included in the diagram, because their circuitry in relation to cold-sensing is less well understood. Although the projection to VPL from lumbar cord is sparse, this is likely to be explained by the very low proportion of lamina I projection neurons with axons that reach the thalamus. Our retrograde tracing data (e.g. Figure 6-figure supplement 4) had already revealed many cells in the C7 segment that were densely coated with Trpm8 afferents and retrogradely labelled from the lateral thalamus. We have carried out additional experiments in which AAV1.CreON.td Tomato was injected into the cervical enlargement of Calb1Cre mice.This resulted in much denser labelling in the VPL and PoT thalamic nuclei, supporting the suggestion that cold-selective lamina I neurons in the cervical enlargement project to these nuclei. This is now described in lines 381-387 and illustrated in Figure 6–figure supplement 3.
Reviewer #2 (Public review):
(1) In the characterization of recorded neurons in close contact or in the absence of this contact with TRPM8 afferents, the number of recorded neurons is relatively low. In addition, the strength of thermal stimuli is not very well controlled, preventing a more precise characterization of the connectivity.
We fully accept that the sample size is small (please see response to Reviewer 1 above). We also accept that the thermal stimulation was not that well controlled. Unfortunately, commercially available probes for controlling skin temperature are too large to apply to the skin in this preparation. For this reason, we have used application of hot and cold saline, as in our previous studies with this preparation.
(2) The authors could provide some sense of the effort needed to record from the 6 coldactivated neurons described. How many preparations were needed, etc?
We now state that 6 out of 16 experiments resulted in successful recordings for this part of the study (lines 858-861).
Reviewer #3 (Public review):
(1) While anatomical evidence for direct synaptic connectivity between Trpm8+ afferents and lamina I projection neurons is compelling, a physiological demonstration of strict monosynaptic transmission is not shown. The conclusion that these inputs are exclusively monosynaptic should be toned down. Similarly, the statement that "Lamina I ALS neurons that are surrounded by Trpm8 afferents are cold-selective" should also be toned down as only a few neurons have been tested and it cannot be excluded that other neurons with similar characteristics may be polymodal.
We have now carried out optogenetic experiments by expressing channelrhodopsin in Trpm8 afferents and retrogradely labelling ALS neurons with tdTomato. This has allowed us to directly demonstrate monosynaptic input. This is described in the Results section (lines 180-202) and the Methods section has been updated. As noted above, we have toned down the statement about lamina I neurons surrounded by Trpm8 afferents being coldselective (line 246).
Recommendations for the authors:
Reviewer #1 (Recommendations for the authors):
(1) The patch innervation of Trpm8+ sensory neurons in lamina I of the spinal cord dorsal horn is interesting. Do they occupy specific areas within lamina I along the mediolateral axis, or are their placements random? Quantifying the distribution of these terminals in lamina I might be worthwhile.
Although we have not studied the mediolateral distribution systematically, it appears that the locations of the patches in the mediolateral axis is random, and they could be seen in medial, central and lateral parts of lamina I (as shown in Figure 2). We have added a comment to this effect in the Results section (lines 114-116). Quantifying Trpm8 terminals would be very labour-intensive, and we do not feel that this would be of great benefit.
(2) Quantification for the percentage of Trpm8+ boutons contacting Phox2a+ neurons that are vGlut3+
The main purpose of this part of the study was to provide a possible explanation for the finding by Li et al (2015) that some lamina I cells were associated with Vglut3-
immunoreactive boutons. We found that the percentages of Trpm8+ boutons that contained Vglut3 varied considerably from cell to cell, and this is now stated in the text (lines 133134). However, knowing exact proportions was not an important aspect of the study, we have therefore not carried out a detailed analysis.
(3) Quantification for the percentage of PBN projections neurons densely innervated by Trpm8+ axons that are calb1+.
As requested, we have carried out immunohistochemistry to determine the proportion of lamina I ALS neurons with dense Trpm8 input that are calbindin-immunoreactive. We examined 31 neurons from 3 different mice and found that all but 4 (i.e. 87%) were immunoreactive. This is now described (lines 287-293) and illustrated (Figure 5–figure supplement 1). We have now put the electrophysiological characterisation that was in this figure into a separate supplement (Figure 5–figure supplement 2).
(4) It might be helpful to confirm the brain projection targets of Cal1b+ lamina 1 projection neurons using AAV1-CreON-Synaptophysin-GFP (or other fluorescent proteins) injections
Please see our response to Public review Reviewer 1 comment 2 above. We have provided further evidence that the brain regions that received input from the Calb1+ cells contain axonal boutons (lines 374-380 and Figure 6–figure supplement 2F-H).
(5) Figure 6 - Figure Supplements 3 and 4 are duplicated
We apologise for this duplication, which was made in error in the version originally submitted to eLife. This has now been corrected.
Reviewer #2 (Recommendations for the authors):
(1) As mentioned, in the characterization of recorded neurons in close contact or in the absence of this contact with TRPM8 afferents, the number of recorded neurons is relatively low, some recorded in current clamp, a few in voltage clamp. This prevents any solid statistical evaluation of the findings
Please see response to response to the first point made by Reviewer 1 in the Public reviews. As stated above, we have toned down the statement about the relationship between cells with dense Trpm8 input and cold-selective cells (line 246).
(2) In addition, the strength of thermal stimuli is not very well controlled, preventing a more precise characterization of the synaptic connection between afferents and ALS projection neurons.
Please see our response to the Public review comment made by this Reviewer.
(3) Line 35. In the description of the anterolateral system and the effects of lesions, the species(s) should be specified since rodents and humans have a different anatomical distribution of spinal tracts.
We now state that while ALS axons ascend in the anterolateral quadrant in humans, they are located in the dorsolateral white matter in rodents (lines 40-42)
(4) To describe the semi-intact preparation used for recording and stimulation from the periphery, the authors cite a study by Julien Allard (reference 25). However, that study describes an in vivo preparation. I believe there is an error in the citation.
We thank the Reviewer for pointing this out – it has now been corrected.
(5) Line 726. Dorsal horn recordings were performed at 25 ºC. What is the temperature of the skin? How would this low temperature affect the excitability of cold afferents and their axons? Perhaps a comment about this issue would be appropriate.
The skin temperature in this preparation is the same as that of the spinal cord (25 °C). At this temperature, Trpm8 afferents would be active, but are likely to have adapted during the course of the experiment. Since this temperature is below 37 °C, it is likely that the conduction velocity of these afferents will be slower than in the in vivo situation. We have added a comment to this effect (lines 818-821).
(6) Line 401. The authors could not detect Trpv1-immunoreactivity in the central terminals of Trpm8Flp;RCE:FRT mice. Could they detect Trpv1 immunoreactivity in any central terminal? Do they have positive evidence that their immunostaining worked?
Trpv1 was readily detected in central terminals with the Trpv1 antibody. An example showing lack of detectable Trpv1-immunoreactivity in GFP-labelled (Trpm8-expressing) afferents is now shown in Figure 2–figure supplement 1K-M.
(7) Line 437. What is the expected anterograde transport time for YFP from the lumbar cord to the brainstem? Are 2-3 weeks not sufficient based on the literature? I noticed the authors are using longer survival times after intraspinal injections
In preliminary experiments for a previous study Substance P-expressing excitatory interneurons in the mouse superficial dorsal horn provide a propriospinal input to the lateral spinal nucleus | Brain Structure and Function we had found that a 2 week survival time after injection of AAV1.CreON.GFP into the lumbar spinal cord of Tac1Cre mice was not sufficient to label axons in the brain, although at 4 weeks we saw brain labelling. We have also found that extending survival times from 4 to 6 weeks gives greatly improved labelling, especially in the thalamus.
(8) Figure 5A. Many of the labelled cells appear to have the somas in the white matter, which makes little sense. It seems the reference section to plot the cells is not optimal
The placement of cells is accurate. Many spinal projection neurons are present outside the main region of grey matter (i.e. laminae I-X). These cells are found in 2 main regions – the lateral spinal nucleus (LSN) and the lateral reticulated part of lamina V. These two regions are intermediate between grey and white matter – i.e. they contain scattered cell bodies amongst a dense collection of axons. For this reason they appear outside the grey/white border as it is conventionally shown on diagrams of this type. This has been reported in numerous studies, e.g. see Figure 2 in The cells of origin of the spinothalamic tract of the rat: a quantitative reexamination - PubMed.
(9) Recent transcriptomic studies suggest the presence of more than one subpopulation of Trpm8-expressing DRG or trigeminal neurons. It is unclear to what extent the Trpm8-Flp line is capturing this diversity.
We are aware that there are at least 3 transcriptomic subsets of Trpm8-expressing primary sensory neurons. However, we are not aware of any suitable molecular markers that would allow us to discriminate between them, and therefore address this point.
(10) Could the patchy distribution of Trpm8 afferents in lamina I reflect incomplete recombination; the empty spaces could be occupied by unmarked afferents?
In theory it could, but this seems unlikely. The Trpm8Flp line (crossed with RCE:FRT) captures ~83% of Trpm8-positive cell bodies, and it seems very unlikely that the remaining 17% of Trpm8-expressing afferents would fill the spaces between GFP bundles that we see in lamina I. This is now stated in the Results section (lines 116-120).
Reviewer #3 (Recommendations for the authors):
(1) It would be a nice addition to the validation of the Trpm8-Flp line to specify what ages (if multiple) have been analysed and whether there are any differences. In addition, is labelling different at different levels of the spinal cord, and is there any labeling in supraspinal regions?
The tissue used for this part of the study was obtained from mice aged 5-9 weeks and this is now stated (lines 78-79). We did not observe any differences with age, but we did not look at this in detail. Labelling was similar at different levels of the spinal cord, and this is stated (lines 108-109). We have added a brief account of the distribution of GFP labelling in the brain (lines 140-144).
(2) Line 169. It is not clear how ALS neurons are labeled. It is explained in the material and methods (I believe it is AAV9.mCherry into the LPB or CVLM). Although I could not find a mention of a tdTomato AAV, maybe I missed it. In any case, it would be great to have the experimental strategy briefly explained in the text. For the same reason, I would recommend moving Figure 4 Supplement 1A and 1B schematics to the main figure, very helpful for understanding the experiment.
We thank the Reviewer for this suggestion. We now explain in the Results section how the ALS neurons were labelled (lines 209-212), and as the Reviewer recommends we have put the schematic diagrams from Figure 4–figure supplement 1 into the main Figure. As noted in the text, the tdTomato labelling resulted from injection of an AAV coding for Cre into mice that contained the Ai9 allele. We have also updated the descriptions of brain injections in the Methods section to cover the new experiments (optogenetics, and calbindin immunohistochemistry).
(3) Line 184. "Figure 4" would be good to specify the panels; I believe it should be 4A-C. Same for line 194, 4D-F?
We apologise that this was omitted from the original version – we have now specified the panels.
(4) Line 179. It would be great to specifiy in the text and figures the temperature used for hot and warm water. In addition, would the responses be different using different temperatures? Can you test ramps? These would go a great way to compare with responses shown in vivo by Ran and colleagues.
We now specify the hot and cold saline temperatures used to stimulate the skin in the semiintact preparation in the legend for Figure 4 and in the Results section (lines 222-223). As noted above, it is difficult to use more accurate thermal stimuli in this preparation. Please see response to Reviewer 2 public comment 1.
(5) Figure 4-Figure supplement 1F. It looks like these are very slow responses (1 sec?) for monosynaptic connectivity.
In this figure (now part 1D) the action potential frequency was determined from counts of APs in 1 sec bins, and this is now stated in the legend. This might have given the impression of slow responses.
(6) Line 203. I would tone down the statement, as only 6 cells "that were clearly associated with numerous GFP-labelled afferents" have been tested. Thus, it cannot be excluded that other cells with similar anatomical characteristics may also respond to other stimuli
As requested, we have toned down this statement (line 246).
(7) Line 230. Here AAV11.CreON.td Tomato is used, in previous retrograde experiments, AAV9 has been used (Figure 4), why the switch to 11? Is the tropism the same? Is it possible that because you are using a different serotype, you are targeting different neurons?
We have found that although AAV9 coding for fluorescent proteins is very good for retrograde labelling, AAV9 coding for Cre-dependent constructs (e.g. AAV.CreON.tdTomato) gives very poor recombination in spinal projection neurons, for reasons that we do not understand. We recently became aware of the AAV11 serotype, which was recommended as being suitable for retrograde transport AAV11 enables efficient retrograde targeting of projection neurons and enhances astrocyte-directed transduction | Nature Communications. We have found that this works very well for labelling ALS cells throughout the spinal cord when using Cre-dependent constructs. We have added a reference to this paper at this point in the text. We are not able to say whether tropism is the same or different, but in each case many ALS neurons (including many of those in lamina I) are captured.
(8) Line 234. Is there any positional organization for the "tdTomato-labelled cells densely innervated byTrpm8 afferents", do they preferentially cluster in some position of lamina I?
These cells are found throughout the mediolateral extent of the dorsal horn, and this is now stated (lines 279-280).
(9) Line 237. The actual number of cells/mm would be informative.
This would be difficult to estimate, as the sections were cut in the horizontal plane, which means that lamina I can appear on a variable number of sections.
(10) Line 249. From the figures, the action potentials of the Calb+ neurons seem to have a delayed onset (at the end of cold saline treatment, Figure 5, Supplement 1l) compared to lamina I ALS neurons recorded in Figure 4, Supplement 1f. If real, it is an interesting difference in the time-course of response that could indicate different coding properties e.g., response to cooling (general neurons) vs. response to absolute temperature (calb + neurons).
As for Fig 4-figure supplement 4 (see response to point #5 above), action potential frequency was determined from APs counted in 1 sec bins, and this is now stated in the legend.
(11) Figure 7. In the model, the disynaptic pathway should also be shown
We have added a comment to the legend stating that there may also be indirect (“polysynaptic”) input from Trpm8 afferents to ALS3 neurons.