Peer review process
Not revised: This Reviewed Preprint includes the authors’ original preprint (without revision), an eLife assessment, and public reviews.
Read more about eLife’s peer review process.Editors
- Reviewing EditorMichelle AntoineNational Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, Bethesda, United States of America
- Senior EditorSacha NelsonBrandeis University, Waltham, United States of America
Reviewer #1 (Public Review):
Summary
In this manuscript, Hagihara et al. characterized the relationship between the changes in lactate and pH and the behavioral phenotypes in different animal models of neuropsychiatric disorders at a large-scale level. The authors have previously reported that increased lactate levels and decreased pH are commonly observed in the brains of five genetic mouse models of schizophrenia (SZ), bipolar disorder (BD), and autism spectrum disorder (ASD). In this study, they expanded the detection range to 109 strains or conditions of animal models, covering neuropsychiatric disorders and neurodegenerative disorders. Through statistical analysis of the first 65 strains/conditions of animal models which were set as exploratory cohort, the authors found that most strains showed decreased pH and increased lactate levels in the brains. There was a significant negative correlation between pH and lactate levels both at the strain/condition level and the individual animal level. Besides, only working memory was negatively correlated with brain lactate levels. These results were successfully duplicated by studying the confirmative cohort, including 44 strains/conditions of animal models. In all strains/conditions, the lactate levels were not correlated with age, sex, or storage duration of brain samples.
Strengths
1. The manuscript is well-written and structured. In particular, the discussion is really nice, covering many potential mechanisms for the altered lactate levels in these disease models.
2. Tremendous efforts were made to recruit a huge number of various animal models, giving the conclusions sufficient power.
Weaknesses
1. The biggest concern of this study is the limited novelty. The point of "altered pH and/or lactate levels in the brains from human and rodent animals of neuropsychiatric disorders" has been reported by the same lab and other groups in many previous papers.
2. This study is mostly descriptive, lacking functional investigations. Although a larger cohort of animal models were studied which makes the conclusion more solid, limited conceptual advance is contributed to the relevant field, as we are still not clear about what the altered levels of pH and lactate mean for the pathogenesis of neuropsychiatric disorders.
3. The experiment procedure is also a concern. The brains from animal models were acutely collected without cardiac perfusion in this study, which suggests that resident blood may contaminate the brain samples. The lactate is enriched in the blood, making it a potential confounded factor to affect the lactate levels as well as pH in the brain samples.
4. The lactate and pH levels may also be affected by other confounded factors, such as circadian period, and locomotor activity before the mice were sacrificed. This should also be discussed in the paper.
5. Another concern is the animal models. Although previous studies have demonstrated that dysfunctions of these genes could cause related phenotypes for certain disorders, many of them are not acknowledged by the field as reliable disease models. Besides, gene deficiency could also cause many known or unknown unrelated phenotypes, which may contribute to the altered levels of lactate and pH, too. In this circumstance, the conclusion "pH and lactate levels are transdiagnostic endophenotype of neuropsychiatric disorders" is somewhat overstated.
6. The negative correlationship between pH and lactate is rather convincing. However, how much the contribution of lactate to pH is not tested. In addition, regarding pH and lactate, which factor contributes most to the pathogenesis of neuropsychiatric disorders is also unclear. These questions may need to be addressed in the future study.
7. The authorship is open to question. Most authors listed in this paper may only provide mice strains or brain samples. Maybe it is better just to acknowledge them in the acknowledgments section.
8. The last concern is about the significance of this study. Although the majority of strains showed increased lactate, some still showed decreased lactate levels in the brains. These results suggested that lactate or pH is an endophenotype for neuropsychiatric disorders, but it is hard to serve as a good diagnostic index as the change is not unidirectional in different disorders. In other words, the relationship between lactate level and neuropsychiatric disorders is not exclusive.
Reviewer #2 (Public Review):
Hagihara et al. conducted a study investigating the correlation between decreased brain pH, increased brain lactate, and poor working memory. They found altered brain pH and lactate levels in animal models of neuropsychiatric and neurodegenerative disorders. Their study suggests that poor working memory performance may predict higher brain lactate levels.
However, the study has some significant limitations. One major concern is that the authors examined whole-brain pH and lactate levels, which might not fully represent the complexity of disease states. Different brain regions and cell types may have distinct protein and metabolite profiles, leading to diverse disease outcomes. For instance, certain brain regions like the hippocampus and nucleus accumbens exhibit opposite protein/signaling pathways in neuropsychiatric disease models.
Moreover, the memory tests used in the study are specific to certain brain regions, but the authors did not measure lactate levels in those regions. Without making lactate measurements in brain-regions and cell types involved in these diseases, any conclusions regarding the role of lactate in CNS diseases is premature.
Additionally, evidence suggests that exogenous treatment with lactate has positive effects, such as antidepressant effects in multiple disease models (Carrard et al., 2018, Carrard et al., 2021, Karnib et al., 2019, Shaif et al., 2018). It also promotes learning, memory formation, neurogenesis, and synaptic plasticity (Suzuki et al., 2011, Yang et al., 2014, Weitian et al., 2015, Dong et al., 2017, El Hayek et al. 2019, Wang et al., 2019, Lu et al., 2019, Lev-Vachnish et a.l, 2019, Descalzi G et al., 2019, Herrera-López et al., 2020, Ikeda et al., 2021, Zhou et al., 2021,Roumes et al., 2021, Frame et al., 2023, Akter et al., 2023).
In conclusion, the relevance of total brain pH and lactate levels as indicators of the observed correlations is controversial, and evidence points towards lactate having more positive rather than negative effects. It is important that the authors perform studies looking at brain-region-specific concentrations of lactate and that they modulate lactate levels (decrease) in animal models of disease to validate their conclusions. it is also important to consider the above-mentioned studies before concluding that "altered brain pH and lactate levels are rather involved in the underlying pathophysiology of some patients with neuropsychiatric disorders" and that "lactate can serve as a potential therapeutic target for neuropsychiatric disorders".