Flip of a single molecular switch makes an old brain young

The flip of a single molecular switch helps create the mature neuronal connections that allow the brain to bridge the gap between adolescent impressionability and adult stability. Now Yale School of Medicine researchers have reversed the process, recreating a youthful brain that facilitated both learning and healing in the adult mouse.

Scientists have long known that the young and old brains are very different. Adolescent brains are more malleable or plastic, which allows them to learn languages more quickly than adults and speeds recovery from brain injuries. The comparative rigidity of the adult brain results in part from the function of a single gene that slows the rapid change in synaptic connections between neurons.

By monitoring the synapses in living mice over weeks and months, Yale researchers have identified the key genetic switch for brain maturation a study released March 6 in the journal Neuron. The Nogo Receptor 1 gene is required to suppress high levels of plasticity in the adolescent brain and create the relatively quiescent levels of plasticity in adulthood.  In mice without this gene, juvenile levels of brain plasticity persist throughout adulthood. When researchers blocked the function of this gene in old mice, they reset the old brain to adolescent levels of plasticity.

“These are the molecules the brain needs for the transition from adolescence to adulthood,” said Dr. Stephen Strittmatter. Vincent Coates Professor of Neurology, Professor of Neurobiology and senior author of the paper. “It suggests we can turn back the clock in the adult brain and recover from trauma the way kids recover.”

Rehabilitation after brain injuries like strokes requires that patients re-learn tasks such as moving a hand. Researchers found that adult mice lacking Nogo Receptor recovered from injury as quickly as adolescent mice and mastered new, complex motor tasks more quickly than adults with the receptor.

“This raises the potential that manipulating Nogo Receptor in humans might accelerate and magnify rehabilitation after brain injuries like strokes,” said Feras Akbik, Yale doctoral student who is first author of the study.

Researchers also showed that Nogo Receptor slows loss of memories.  Mice without Nogo receptor lost stressful memories more quickly, suggesting that manipulating the receptor could help treat post-traumatic stress disorder.

“We know a lot about the early development of the brain,” Strittmatter said, “But we know amazingly little about what happens in the brain during late adolescence.”

Linking insulin to learning: Important insights in research with worms

Recent work by Harvard researchers demonstrates how the signaling pathway of insulin and insulinlike peptides plays a critical role in helping to regulate learning and memory.

The research, led by Yun Zhang, associate professor of organismic and evolutionary biology, is described in a Feb. 6 paper in Neuron.

“People think of insulin and diabetes, but many metabolic syndromes are associated with some types of cognitive defects and behavioral disorders, like depression or dementia,” Zhang said. “That suggests that insulin and insulinlike peptides may play an important role in neural function, but it’s been very difficult to nail down the underlying mechanism, because these peptides do not have to function through synapses that connect different neurons in the brain.”

To get at that mechanism, Zhang and colleagues turned to an organism whose genome and nervous system are well described and highly accessible by genetics: C. elegans.

Using genetic tools, researchers altered the transparent worms by removing their ability to create individual insulinlike compounds. These new “mutant” worms were then tested to see whether they would learn to avoid eating a particular type of bacteria that is known to infect the worms. Tests showed that although some worms did learn to steer clear of the bacteria, others didn’t — suggesting that removing a specific insulinlike compound halted the worms’ ability to learn.

Researchers were surprised to find, however, that it wasn’t just removing the molecules that could make the animals lose the ability to learn — some peptides were found to inhibit learning.

“We hadn’t predicted that we would find both positive and negative regulators from these peptides,” Zhang said. “Why does the animal need this bidirectional regulation of learning? One possibility is that learning depends on context. There are certain things you want to learn — for example, the worms in these experiments wanted to learn that they shouldn’t eat this type of infectious bacteria. That’s a positive regulation of the learning. But if they needed to eat, even if it is a bad food, to survive, they would need a way to suppress this type of learning.”

Even more surprising for Zhang and her colleagues was evidence that the various insulinlike molecules could regulate each other.

“Many animals, including humans, have multiple insulinlike molecules, and it appears that these molecules can act like a network,” she said. “Each of them may play a slightly different role in the nervous system, and they function together to coordinate the signaling related to learning and memory. By changing the way the molecules interact, the brain can fine-tune learning in a host of different ways.”

Blueprint for an artificial brain

Scientists have long been dreaming about building a computer that would work like a brain. This is because a brain is far more energy-saving than a computer, it can learn by itself, and it doesn’t need any programming. Privatdozent [senior lecturer] Dr. Andy Thomas from Bielefeld University’s Faculty of Physics is experimenting with memristors – electronic microcomponents that imitate natural nerves. Thomas and his colleagues proved that they could do this a year ago. They constructed a memristor that is capable of learning. Andy Thomas is now using his memristors as key components in a blueprint for an artificial brain. He will be presenting his results at the beginning of March in the print edition of the prestigious Journal of Physics published by the Institute of Physics in London.

Memristors are made of fine nanolayers and can be used to connect electric circuits. For several years now, the memristor has been considered to be the electronic equivalent of the synapse. Synapses are, so to speak, the bridges across which nerve cells (neurons) contact each other. Their connections increase in strength the more often they are used. Usually, one nerve cell is connected to other nerve cells across thousands of synapses.

Like synapses, memristors learn from earlier impulses. In their case, these are electrical impulses that (as yet) do not come from nerve cells but from the electric circuits to which they are connected. The amount of current a memristor allows to pass depends on how strong the current was that flowed through it in the past and how long it was exposed to it.

Andy Thomas explains that because of their similarity to synapses, memristors are particularly suitable for building an artificial brain – a new generation of computers. ‘They allow us to construct extremely energy-efficient and robust processors that are able to learn by themselves.’ Based on his own experiments and research findings from biology and physics, his article is the first to summarize which principles taken from nature need to be transferred to technological systems if such a neuromorphic (nerve like) computer is to function. Such principles are that memristors, just like synapses, have to ‘note’ earlier impulses, and that neurons react to an impulse only when it passes a certain threshold.

Thanks to these properties, synapses can be used to reconstruct the brain process responsible for learning, says Andy Thomas.

Study Refutes Accepted Model of Memory Formation

A study by Johns Hopkins researchers has shown that a widely accepted model of long-term memory formation — that it hinges on a single enzyme in the brain — is flawed. The new study, published in the Jan. 2 issue of Nature, found that mice lacking the enzyme that purportedly builds memory were in fact still able to form long-term memories as well as normal mice could.

“The prevailing theory is that when you learn something, you strengthen connections between your brain cells called synapses,” explains Richard Huganir, Ph.D., a professor and director of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine’s Solomon H. Snyder Department of Neuroscience. “The question is, how exactly does this strengthening happen?”

A research group at SUNY Downstate, led by Todd Sacktor, Ph.D., has suggested that key to the process is an enzyme they discovered, known as PKM-zeta. In 2006, Sacktor’s group made waves when it created a molecule that seemed to block the action of PKM-zeta — and only PKM-zeta. When the molecule, dubbed ZIP, was given to mice, it erased existing long-term memories. The molecule caught the attention of reporters and bloggers, who mused on the social and ethical implications of memory erasure.

But for researchers, ZIP was exciting primarily as a means for studying PKM-zeta. “Since 2006, many papers have been published on PKM-zeta and ZIP, but no one knew what PKM-zeta was acting on,” says Lenora Volk, Ph.D., a member of Huganir’s team. “We thought that learning the enzyme’s target could tell us a lot about how memories are stored and maintained.”

For the current study, Volk and fellow team member Julia Bachman made mice that lacked working PKM-zeta, so-called genetic “knockouts.” The goal was to compare the synapses of the modified mice with those of normal mice, and find clues about how the enzyme works.

But, says Volk, “what we got was not at all what we expected. We thought the strengthening capacity of the synapses would be impaired, but it wasn’t.” The brains of the mice without PKM-zeta were indistinguishable from those of other mice, she says. Additionally, the synapses of the PKM-zeta-less mice responded to the memory-erasing ZIP molecule just as the synapses of normal mice do.

The team then considered whether, in the absence of PKM-zeta, the mouse brains had honed a substitute synapse-building pathway, much in the way that a blind person learns to glean more information from her other senses. So the researchers made mice whose PKM-zeta genes functioned normally until they were given a drug that would suddenly shut the gene down. This allowed them to study PKM-zeta-less adult mice that had had no opportunity to develop a way around the loss of the gene. Still, the synapses of the so-called conditional knockout mice responded to stimuli just as synapses in normal mice did.

What this means, the researchers say, is that PKM-zeta is not the key long-term memory molecule previous studies had suggested, although it may have some role in memory. “We don’t know what this ZIP peptide is really acting on,” says Volk. “Finding out what its target is will be quite important, because then we can begin to understand at the molecular level how synapses strengthen and how memories form in response to stimuli.”

Definitive proof for receptor’s role in synapse development

Jackson Laboratory researchers led by Associate Professor Zhong-wei Zhang, Ph.D., have provided direct evidence that a specific neurotransmitter receptor is vital to the process of pruning synapses in the brains of newborn mammals.

Faulty pruning at this early developmental stage is implicated in autism-spectrum disorders and schizophrenia. The definitive evidence for N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor (NMDAR) in pruning has eluded researchers until now, but in research published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Zhang’s lab had serendipitous help in the form of a mouse model containing brain cells lacking NMDAR side-by-side with cells containing the receptor.

Soon after birth, mammals’ brains undergo significant development and change. Initially, large numbers of synapses form between neurons. Then, in response to stimuli, the synaptic connections are refined—some synapses are strengthened and others eliminated, or pruned.

In most synapses, glutamate serves as the neurotransmitter, and NMDAR, a major type of post-synaptic glutamate receptor, was previously known to play an important role in neural circuit development. Previous research has implicated the importance of NMDARs in pruning, but it remained unclear whether they played a direct or indirect role.

Zhang and colleagues focused on the thalamus, a brain region where synapse pruning and strengthening can be monitored and quantified with relative ease. They got unexpected help when they realized the mouse model they were using had thalamus cells lacking NMDARs right next to cells with normal NMDAR levels.

The researchers showed that the refinement process was disrupted in the absence of NMDARs. At the same time, neighboring neurons with the receptors proceeded through normal synaptic strengthening and pruning, clearly establishing the necessity of NMDARs in postsynaptic neurons for synaptic refinement.

"Whenever I give a talk or meet colleagues," Zhang says, "the first question that comes up is whether the NMDA receptor is important. It’s good that this is now settled definitively."

There has been extensive research into synaptic strengthening, and most of these studies indicate that the presence of NMDARs may support the recruitment of larger numbers of another kind of glutamate receptor to strengthen the synaptic connections. How NMDARs regulate the pruning process remains largely unknown, however.

Scientists solve birth and migration mysteries of cortex’s powerful inhibitors, ‘chandelier’ cells

The cerebral cortex of the human brain has been called “the crowning achievement of evolution.” Ironically, it is so complex that even our greatest minds and most sophisticated science are only now beginning to understand how it organizes itself in early development, and how its many cell types function together as circuits.

A major step toward this great goal in neuroscience has been taken by a team led by Professor Z. Josh Huang, Ph.D., at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory (CSHL). Today they publish research for the first time revealing the birth timing and embryonic origin of a critical class of inhibitory brain cells called chandelier cells, and tracing the specific paths they take during early development into the cerebral cortex of the mouse brain. 

These temporal and spatial sequences are regarded by Huang as genetically programmed aspects of brain development, accounting for aspects of the brain that are likely identical in every member of a given species, including humans. Exceptions to these stereotypical patterns include irregularities caused by gene mutations or protein malfunctions, both of which are now being identified in people with developmental disorders and neuropsychiatric illnesses.

Chandelier cells were first noticed only 40 years ago, and in the intervening years frustratingly little has been learned about them, beyond the fact that they “hang” individually among great crowds of excitatory cells in the cortex called pyramidal neurons, and that their relatively short branches make contact with these excitatory cells.  Indeed, a single chandelier cell connects, or “synapses,” with as many as 500 pyramidal neurons. Noting this, the great biologist Francis Crick decades ago speculated that chandelier cells exerted some kind of “veto” power over the messages being exchanged by the much more numerous excitatory cells in their vicinity.

Scripps Research Institute Scientists Uncover a New Pathway that Regulates Information Processing in the Brain

Scientists at The Scripps Research Institute (TSRI) have identified a new pathway that appears to play a major role in information processing in the brain. Their research also offers insight into how imbalances in this pathway could contribute to cognitive abnormalities in humans.

The study, published in the November 9, 2012 issue of the journal Cell, focuses on the actions of a protein called HDAC4. The researchers found that HDAC4 is critically involved in regulating genes essential for communication between neurons.

“We found that HDAC4 represses these genes, and its function in a given neuron is controlled by activity of other neurons forming a circuit,” said TSRI Assistant Professor Anton Maximov, senior investigator for the study.

Read more

Multiple Contacts Are Key to Synapse Formation

Multiple synaptic contacts between nerve cells facilitate the creation of a new contact, as neuroscientists from the Bernstein Center Freiburg and the Forschungszentrum Jülich report in the latest issue of the journal PLoS Computational Biology. An integral mechanism of memory foundation is the formation of additional contacts between neurons in the brain. However, until now it was not known what conditions lead to the development of such synapses and how they are stabilized once created. By studying mathematical models, the scientists found a simple explanation for how and when synapses form – or disappear – in the brain.