A rapid microglial metabolic response controls metabolism and improves memory

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

In this study, Drougard et al. examined the consequences of an acute high fat diet (HFD) on microglia in mice. 3-day HFD influenced the regulation of systemic glucose homeostasis in a microglia-dependent and independent manner, as determined using microglial depletion with PLX5622. 3-day HFD increased microglial membrane potential and the levels of palmitate and stearate in cerebrospinal fluid in vivo. Using confocal imaging, respirometry and stable isotope-assisted tracing in primary microglial cultures, the authors suggest an increase in mitochondrial fission and metabolic remodelling occurs when exposed to palmitate, which increases the release of glutamate, succinate and itaconate that may alter neuronal metabolism. This acute microglial metabolic response following acute HFD is subsequently linked to improved higher cognitive function (learning and memory) in a microglia and DRP1-dependent manner.

Strengths:
Overall, this study is interesting and novel in linking acute high fat diet to changes in microglia and improved learning and memory in mice. The role for microglia and DRP1 in regulating glucose homeostasis and memory in vivo appears to be supported by the data.

Weaknesses:
The authors suggest that utilisation of palmitate by microglia following HFD is the driver of the acute metabolic changes and that the release of microglial-derived lactate, succinate, glutamate and itaconate are causally linked to improvements in learning and memory.
A major weakness is that the authors provide no mechanistic link between beta-oxidation of palmitate (or other fatty acids) in microglia and the observed systemic metabolic and memory phenotypes in vivo. Pharmacological inhibition of CPT1a could be considered or CPT1a-deficient microglia.

Another major weakness is that the authors also suggest that 3-day HFD microglial response (increase membrane potential) is likely driven by palmitate-induced increases in itaconate feedforward inhibition of complex II/SDH. Whilst this is an interesting hypothesis, the in vitro metabolic characterisation is not entirely convincing. The authors suggest that acute palmitate appears to rapidly compromise or saturate complex II activity. Succinate is a membrane impermeable dicarboxylate. It can enter cells via MCT transporters at acidic pH. It is not clear that I) Succinate is taken up into microglia, II) If the succinate used was pH neutral sodium succinate or succinic acid, and III) If the observed changes are due to succinate oxidation, changes in pH or activation of the succinate receptor SUCNR1 on microglia. In the absence of these succinate treatments, there are no alterations in mitochondrial respiration or membrane potential following palmitate treatment, which does not support this hypothesis. Intracellular itaconate measurements and quantification are lacking and IRG1 expression is not assessed. There also appears to be more labelled itaconate in neuronal cultures from control (BSA) microglia conditioned media, which is not discussed. What is the total level of itaconate in neurons from these conditioned media experiments? No evidence is provided that the in vivo response is dependent on IRG1, the mitochondrial enzyme responsible for itaconate synthesis, or itaconate. To causally link IRG1/itaconate, IRG1-deficient mice could be used in future work.

While microglial DRP1 is causally implicated the role of palmitate is not convincing. Mitochondrial morphology changes are subtle including TOMM20 and DRP1 staining and co-localization - additional supporting data should be provided. Electron microscopy of mitochondrial structure would provide more detailed insight to morphology changes. Western blot of fission-associated proteins Drp1, phospho-Drp1 (S616), MFF and MiD49/51. Higher magnification and quality confocal imaging of DRP1/TOMM20. Drp1 recruitment to mitochondrial membranes can be assessed using subcellular fractionation. No characterisation of primary microglia from DRP1-knockout mice is performed with palmitate treatment. Authors demonstrate an increase in both stearate and palmitate in CSF following 3-day HFD. Only palmitate was tested in the regulation of microglial responses, but it may be more informative to test stearate and palmitate combined.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

The study "A rapid microglial metabolic response controls metabolism and improves memory" by Drougard et al. provides evidence that short-term HFD has a beneficial effect on spatial and learning memory through microglial metabolic reprogramming. The manuscript is well-written and the statistics were properly performed with all the data. However, there are concerns regarding the interpretation of the data, particularly the gap between the in vivo observations and the in vitro mechanistic studies.

In the PLX-5622 microglial depletion study, it is unclear what happened to the body weight, food intake, and day-night behavior of these mice compared to the vehicle control mice. It is important to address the innate immunity-dependent physiology affected by a long period of microglial depletion in the brain (also macrophages in the periphery). Furthermore, it would be beneficial to validate the images presented in Fig.1F by providing iba1 staining in chow diet-fed mice with or without PLX-5622 for 7-10 days. Additionally, high-quality images, with equal DAPI staining and comparable anatomical level, should be provided in both chow diet-fed mice and HFD-fed mice with or without PLX-5622 in the same region of hypothalamus or hippocampus. These are critical evidences for this project, and it is suggested that the authors provide more data on the general physiology of these mice, at least regarding body weight and food intake.

It is also unclear whether the microglia shown in Fig.3A were isolated from mice 4 weeks after Tamoxifen injection. It is suggested that the authors provide more evidence, such as additional images or primary microglia culture, to demonstrate that the mitochondria had more fusion upon drp1 KO. It is recommended to use mito-tracker green/red to stain live microglia and provide good resolution images.

Regarding the data presented in Fig.5A, it is suggested that the authors profile the metabolomics of the microglial conditioned media (and provide the methods on how this conditioned media was collected) to determine whether there was already abundant lactate in the media. Any glucose-derived metabolites, e.g. lactate, are probably more preferred by neurons as energy substrates than glucose, especially in embryonic neurons (which are ready to use lactate in newborn brain).
Finally, it is important to address whether PLX-5622 affects learning and spatial memory in chow diet-fed animals. Following the findings shown in Fig 5J and 5K, the authors should confirm these by any morphological studies on synapse, e.g. by synaptophysin staining or ultrastructure EM study in the area shown in Fig 5I.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Drougard et al. explore microglial detection of a switch to high-fat diet and a subsequent metabolic response that benefits memory. The findings are both surprising and novel in the context of acute high-fat intake, with convincing evidence of increased CSF palmitate after 3 days of HFD. While the authors demonstrate compelling signs of microglial activation in multiple brain regions and unique metabolite release in tracing studies, they should address the following areas prior to acceptance of this manuscript.

Major Points:
1. It appears that the authors perform key metabolic assays in vitro/ex vivo using primary microglia from either neonatal or adult mice, which should be more clearly delineated especially for the 13C-palmitate tracing. In the case of experiments using primary microglia derived from mixed glial cultures stimulated with M-CSF, this system relies on neonatal mice. This is understandable given the greater potential yield from neonatal mice, but the metabolic state and energetic demands of neonatal and adult microglia differ as their functional roles change across the lifespan. The authors should either show that the metabolic pathways they implicate in neonatal microglia are also representative of adult microglia or perform additional experiments using microglia pooled from adult mice, especially because they link metabolites derived from neonatal microglia (presumably not under the effects of acute HFD) to improved performance in behavioral assays that utilize adult mice.

2. The authors demonstrate that 3 days of HFD increases circulating palmitate by CSF metabolomics and that microglia can readily metabolize palmitate, but the causal link between palmitate metabolism specifically by microglia and improved performance in behavioral paradigms remains unclear. A previous body of research, alluded to by the authors, suggests that astrocyte shuttling of lactate to neurons improves long-term and spatial memory. The authors should account for palmitate that also could be derived from astrocyte secretion into CSF, and the relative contribution compared to microglia-derived palmitate. Specifically, although microglia can metabolize the palmitate in circulation, there is no direct evidence that the palmitate from the HFD is directly shuttled to microglia and not, for example, to astrocytes (which also express CX3CR1). Thus, the Barnes Maze results could be attributed to multiple cell types. Furthermore, the evidence provided in Figure 5J is insufficient to claim a microglia-dependent mechanism without showing data from mice on HFD with and without microglia depletion (analogous to the third and fourth bars in panel K).

3. Given the emphasis on improved cognitive function, there is minimal discussion of the actual behavioral outcomes in both the results and discussion sections. The data that HFD-treated animals outperform controls should be presented in more detail both in the figure and in the text. For example, data from all days/trials of the Barnes Maze should be shown, including the day(s) HFD mice outperform controls. Furthermore, the authors should either cite additional literature or provide experimental evidence supporting the notion that microglia release of TCA-associated substrates into the extracellular milieu after HFD specifically benefits neuronal function cellularly or regionally in the brain, which could translate to improved performance in classical behavioral paradigms. The single reference included is a bit obscure, given the study found that increased lactate enhances fear memory which is a neural circuit not studied in the current manuscript. Are there no additional studies on more relevant metabolites (e.g., itaconate, succinate)?

Minor Points:
1. In Figure 5J the latency to find the hole was noticeably higher (mean around 150s) than the latency in panel K (mean around 100s for controls, and 60s for Drp1MGWT on HFD). This suggests high variability between experiments using this modified version of the Barnes Maze, despite the authors' assertion that a "standard" Barnes Maze was employed and the results were reproducible at multiple institutions. Why do Drp1MGWT mice on control diet find the escape hole significantly faster than WT mice on control diet in panel J? Given the emphasis on cognitive improvement following acute HFD as a novel finding, the authors should explain this discrepancy.

2. The authors highlight in the graphical abstract and again in Figure 4A the formation of lipid droplets following palmitate exposure as evidence of that microglia can process fatty acids. They later suggest that a lack of substantial induction of lipid droplet accumulation suggests that microglia are metabolically wired to release carbon substrates to neighboring cells. Clarification as to the role of lipid droplet formation/accumulation in explaining the results would eliminate any possible confusion.

3. In many bar graphs showing relatively modest effects, it would be helpful to use symbols to also show the distribution of sample and animal replicates (especially behavioral paradigms).

Author Response:

We appreciate the thorough, fair and concise comments and agree with most, if not all, of the interpretations and critiques. We also value the recommendations and guidance for what constitute the most important additional experiments and analyses. Thank you for your hard work and time. Your investment helps improve the impact and clarity of our work and that is very much appreciated. We look forward to submitting a revised version soon.