Sleep-controlling neurons are sensitive and vulnerable to multiple forms of α-synuclein: implications for the early appearance of sleeping disorders in α-synucleinopathies

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1582968/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Sleep-controlling neurons are sensitive and vulnerable to multiple forms of α-synuclein: implications for the early appearance of sleeping disorders in α-synucleinopathies

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1582968/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

You are reading this latest preprint version

Parkinson’s disease, Multiple System Atrophy, and Lewy Body Dementia are incurable diseases called α-synucleinopathies as they are mechanistically linked to the protein, α-synuclein (α-syn). α-syn exists in different structural forms which have been linked to clinical disease distinctions. However, sleeping disorders (SDs) are common in the prodromal phase of all three α-synucleinopathies, which suggests that sleep-controlling neurons are affected by multiple forms of α-syn. To determine whether a structure-independent neuronal impact of α-syn exists, we compared and contrasted the cellular effect of three different α-syn forms on neurotransmitter-defined cells of two sleep-controlling nuclei located in the brainstem: the Laterodorsal Tegmental nucleus and the Pedunculopontine Tegmental nucleus. We utilized size exclusion chromatography, fluorescence spectroscopy, circular dichroism spectroscopy and transmission electron microscopy to precisely characterize timepoints in the α-syn aggregation process with three different dominating forms of this protein (monomeric, oligomeric and fibril) and we conducted an in-depth investigation of the underlying neuronal mechanism behind cellular effects of the different forms of the protein using electrophysiology, multiple-cell calcium imaging, single-cell calcium imaging and live-location tracking with fluorescently-tagged α-syn. Interestingly, α-syn altered membrane currents, enhanced firing, increased intracellular calcium and facilitated cell death in a structure-independent manner in sleep-controlling nuclei, and postsynaptic actions involved a G-protein-mediated mechanism. These data are novel as the sleep-controlling nuclei are the first brain regions reported to be affected by α-syn in a structure-independent manner. These regions may represent highly important targets for future neuroprotective therapy to modify or delay disease progression in α-synucleinopathies.

neurodegenerative disease

α-synuclein

α-synucleinopathies

Sleep Disorders

Laterodorsal Tegmental nucleus

Pedunculopontine Tegmental nucleus

The neurodegenerative disorders named α-synucleinopathies are a group of incurable diseases, including Parkinson's disease (PD), Lewy Body Dementia, and Multiple System Atrophy. Characterized by specific, well-defined clinical symptoms, all three diseases exhibit a prodromal interval, that is, an initial period during which symptoms or signs putatively related to neurodegeneration are present, but the full clinical symptom profile upon which a diagnosis is based has not yet developed [1–3]. Thus, the prodromal phase provides a theoretical opportunity for implementation of neuroprotective therapy that could prevent further development of PD, Lewy Body Dementia and Multiple System Atrophy [4, 5]. However, detection of this prodromal period is often in hindsight and after the full clinical disease is recognized. The most notable symptoms indicating the prodromal phase of α-synucleinopathies are sleep disorders (SDs)[6, 7]. Although SDs are not particular for α-synucleinopathies, presence of SDs often precede the cardinal symptoms currently used for clinical diagnosis of these diseases by more than one decade[8]. While several multicenter studies have explored the progression from SDs to diagnosed α-synucleinopathies, the mechanistic basis for the early appearance of SDs in this group of diseases is unknown[9, 10]. Elucidation of this basis will, we believe, have a tremendously powerful impact on the development of specific biomarkers and strategies for earlier treatment or prevention of these diseases.

The most common SDs found in prodromal phases of α-synucleinopathies are: Rapid Eye Movement (REM) Sleep Behavior Disorder, which presents with abnormal motor activity during REM sleep when atonia should be prevalent[11–16] and Excessive Daytime Sleepiness which is characterized by low arousal levels during wakefulness[17, 18]. Both SDs involve altered activity of neurons in two brainstem nuclei that play a role in the reticular activating system and REM sleep control: the Laterodorsal Tegmental nucleus (LDT) and the Pedunculopontine Tegmental nucleus (PPT)[19, 20]. Localized at the junction of the midbrain and pons in the brainstem, both of these nuclei are cytologically heterogeneous and are composed of acetylcholine-containing, glutamatergic and GABAergic neurons[20–23] with the cholinergic neurons being the most studied for the role they play in sleep behavior and alert arousal[19, 24]. Interestingly, analyses of postmortem brain of patients with α-synucleinopathies showed extensive degeneration in these two brain nuclei of cholinergic neurons[25–27], which was associated with deposition of aggregated proteins named ‘Lewy bodies’ that are the histological hallmark of the α-synucleinopathies[27–29]. The extensive neuronal loss and presence of Lewy bodies suggest that disease process mechanisms related to α-synucleinopathies affect sleep-controlling nuclei and given the early appearance of SDs, raise the speculation that protein-related neurodegeneration might appear in SD-related nuclei before occurring in other more classically affected motor-controlling neural areas that results in disease-defining symptoms. Thus, following this rationale, our group was the first to investigate the neuronal mechanisms behind the early appearance of SDs in PD. We reported differential cellular effects occurred in the LDT and the PPT in response to α-synucleinopathy-related proteins when compared to effects in the motor-controlling substantia nigra, which suggested mechanistic underpinnings of SDs’ prodromal appearance in PD[30].

Lewy bodies are primarily composed of misfolded aggregates of the protein α-synuclein (α-syn). α-syn, in its native state, is intrinsically disordered in its monomeric form. The physiological function of this protein is not fully understood, but it has been shown to play a role in neurotransmitter vesicle traffic [31]. Prior to Lewy body formation, levels of the monomeric form of α-syn rise and the protein undergoes a series of conformational changes, resulting initially in the formation of intermediate, structured aggregates, known as oligomers and, subsequently, into highly organized and structured amyloid fibrils. In vivo investigations revealed that distinct structures of α-syn display differential seeding capacities, which induce structure-specific pathology and neurotoxic phenotypes, leading to the hypothesis that the different structures of α-syn produce distinct clinicopathological traits within α-synucleinopathies[32–34]. Oligomers are related to the PD phenotype, and fibrils are associated with both PD and MSA phenotypes. Findings from ex vivo and in vitro studies suggest that α-syn induces structure-dependent cellular effects and among the known protein structures, the oligomeric form is toxic to cells[35, 36]. However, a few studies have suggested that the fibril form is more toxic compared to the oligomeric or monomeric forms[37]. While currently there is disagreement in the literature, and debate about whether oligomeric or fibril forms are more toxic to cells, most studies indicate that the monomeric form of α-syn is not toxic. One caveat of these studies is that they were conducted in brain regions which are only affected late in α-synucleinopathies[26], and we have shown previously that different areas of the brain exhibit distinct sensitivity and vulnerability to different forms of the protein[30]. Additionally, it is highly challenging to characterize the different forms of the protein aggregation given the large size range (nm to um scales), and the inherent transient nature of the oligomeric species as it progresses along a pathway (on-pathway) to fibril formulation, and thus, the possibility exists that effects attributed to one form may actually have been exerted by the presence of another form. Finally, only few studies have compared and contrasted neuronal and toxicity effects of different forms of the protein within the same study and under identical experimental conditions.

Thus, to further investigate whether α-syn exerts structure-dependent effects on neurons, and to screen for potentially shared neuronal mechanisms of SDs in the prodromal phase of different α-synucleinopathies, we have compared and contrasted the cellular effects in brain slices of three different forms of α-syn on neurotransmitter-defined cells in two sleep-controlling nuclei: the LDT and the PPT. To this end, we adopted a range of precise methodologies to identify each of the protein forms. Specifically, the monomeric state in its pure form was isolated from size exclusion chromatography (SEC). The fibrillation process was initiated and intermediate samples with oligomers were extracted from the early elongation phase based on Thioflavin T (ThT) fluorescence spectroscopy and prior knowledge of the volume fraction of the different species[38]. The final fibril form was extracted after significant maturation and confirmed by circular dichroism (CD) spectroscopy, and transmission electron microscope (TEM). For our investigations of α-syn-induced effects, we used mouse brain slices and employed electrophysiology, multiple-cell calcium imaging, single-cell calcium imaging, and live particle tracking of protein interactions with neural structures utilizing fluorescently tagged α-syn. We found that all three forms (monomeric, oligomeric, and fibril) of α-syn exerted neuronal and functional effects and induced intracellular calcium rises without any substantive differences between these actions. In addition, we have monitored cell survival by using neurotoxicity assays, and confirmed and extended earlier findings that α-syn heightens cell death. Finally, we show that α-syn in monomeric form attached to the surface of the membrane and activated a G-protein coupled receptor (GPCR)-mediated mechanism to induce membrane responses and alterations in intracellular calcium levels.

To our knowledge, this study provides the first report in native mammalian brain tissue of the cellular and toxic effects of three different, pre characterized forms of α-syn. We show that effects were largely protein structure independent. Additionally, we provide novel insights into a new mechanism triggered by α-syn that induces excitation of the neuronal membrane and alters intracellular calcium. As our data suggest neuronal dysfunction in sleep-controlling neurons induced by even simple forms of α-syn, our findings indicate one single mechanistic explanation for the early appearance of SDs in α-synucleinopathies and raise the possibility that these cells represent an important target for neuroprotective therapy to modify or delay the disease process.

Cellular effects of monomeric, oligomeric and fibril forms of human α-syn were examined on neurons of the LDT and PPT in mouse brain slices. Preparation of the different forms of the peptide, and the brain slices are presented below, as well as the experimental design.

Preparation of the different forms of α-syn

Monomeric α-syn: Human α-syn was recombinantly expressed and purified as previously described [39] with few modifications. In brief, α-syn was cloned into E. Coli BL21DE3 cells using a pET-11a vector construct. Harvested cells were lysed by osmotic shock, and non-heat-stable proteins were removed by boiling and centrifugation. α-syn was isolated by ion-exchange chromatography, and the monomer was isolated by size exclusion chromatography (SEC). Monomer fractions from SEC were pooled, aliquoted in 10 µL portions with PBS buffer and stored at -80 ^oC until use. Fibrillation assay for fibril and oligomeric α-syn samples: α-syn in PBS buffer (0.3–2.2 mg/mL) was fibrillated in a microplate reader (FLUOstar Omega. BMG Labtech) at 37^oC with 3 mm sterile glass beads and orbital shaking (700 rpm for 280 s in each 360 s cycle). Samples were aliquoted (150 µL) in a NUNC 96-well optical polymer-based, clear-bottom black plate (Thermo Fisher scientific 265301) and sealed with clear polyolefin tape (Thermo Fisher scientific 232702). Thioflavin T (ThT; 20 µM) was added to one sample, keeping additional parallel non-ThT containing samples for the electrophysiology experiments. ThT emission was recorded at 480 ± 5 nm upon excitation at 450 ± 5 nm. Fibril samples were produced at 1.88 mg/mL and collected after 7 days, to ensure full fibril maturation (Fig. 1). Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM) was used to characterize fibrils. To this end, 10 µL diluted α-syn fibril sample was incubated for 1 min on a carbon coated Cu grid (FCF, 400 MESH) before the excess sample solution was removed. The grid was washed with 10 µL water, subsequently stained with 10 µL of 2% (w/v) uranyl acetate, and finally, excess staining was removed in two washing cycles with water. The grid was dried, and micrographs were subsequently collected on a CM100 TWIN microscope (Fig. 19A2) at the Core Facility for Integrated Microscopy (CFIM), University of Copenhagen. Samples of fibril α-syn (750–1000 µL) were kept at room temperature and used within a maximum of 2 weeks.

Based on initial concentration scans, intermediate samples were extracted after initiation of the fibrillation, approximately when the ThT value reached 10% of the final fluorescent value (16 h at 0.3 mg/mL), which was the point at which the sample contained a significant fraction of oligomeric species as previously described[38]. However, it should be noted that the intermediate sample is not an isolated form, as this oligomeric species as it is on-pathway to fibril form is only transiently present in an evolving mixture. Oligomeric α-syn (750–1000 µL) were kept at room temperature and used within a maximum of 12h following extraction (Fig. 1).

LDT and PPT Brain Slices

Animals: All protocols for preparation of animal tissue used in this study were approved by the European Communities Council Directive (86/609/EEC). Brain slices containing the LDT or the PPT were made from male (13 to 30 days old) Naval Medical Research Institute mice (Harlan Mice Laboratories, Denmark) and were used for electrophysiological recordings, calcium imaging studies and neurotoxicity assays. The animals were housed under controlled temperature (22–23°C) and humidity (45–65%) conditions, were kept on a 12:12h light-dark cycle, and had a standard rodent diet available ad libitum. Brain slice Preparation: On the day of the experiments, mice were anesthetized via inhalation of isoflurane (Baxter A/S, Denmark) and decapitation was conducted immediately after determination of sufficient depth of anesthesia. A block of the brain which contained the LDT and the PPT was rapidly removed (Fig. 2A1) and submerged in ice-cold artificial cerebrospinal fluid (ACSF). The ACSF solution (124 NaCl, 5 KCl, 1.2 Na₂HPO₄•2H₂O, 2.7 CaCl₂•2H₂O, 1.2 MgSO₄ (anhydrous), 10 dextrose, 26 NaHCO₃; in mM) at pH 7.4 and an osmolarity of 298–302 mOsm/kg was saturated with carbogen (95% O₂/5% CO₂). The brain block was sectioned in 250 µm slices on a vibratome (Leica VT1200S, Leica Biosystems, Germany) following calibration with the vibro-check stabalizer (Leica Biosystems) in order to reduce cellular damage from vertical blade deflections. LDT and PPT-containing brain slices (Fig. 2B1) were placed in a chamber containing oxygenated ACSF and incubated at 37 ^oC for 15 min. To allow the tissue to equilibrate after the incubation period, the slices were kept at room temperature, and carbogen was continuously supplied for at least 1 h prior to further procedures.

Compounds applied to Brain Slices:

α-syn samples of α-syn (in monomeric, oligomeric or fibril form) were diluted in ACSF to a final concentration of 100 nM, unless otherwise noted. Bath application of α-syn was conducted for 3–4 mins after a stable baseline had been established for membrane current or, when relevant, for fluorescence sourcing from the calcium indicator. AF647-α-syn: To investigate the association of α-syn with neurons in LDT, which were later immunohistochemically identified, an anti-αSN monoclonal antibody (MJFR1, Abcam) covalently conjugated to Alexa Fluor 647 NHS Ester (Sigma Aldrich) was used. The conjugate was purified according to published protocols [40], aliquoted, and stored at − 20°C until use. Brain slices containing LDT were incubated for 1 h in 2 mL of ACSF containing the conjugated α-syn. After washing once, the slices were fixated with 200 µL of 4% PFA for at least 8 h before further immunohistochemistry procedures. Drugs: Tetrodotoxin (0.5 mM) (TTX; Tocris, Denmark) was used to block Na⁺-voltage-dependent action potentials. Cyclopiazonic acid (10 µM CPA; Sigma) was used to inhibit IP3-mediated, calcium pumps in the sarcoplasmic reticulum, which was prepared in 10 mM stock of DMSO. To block AMPA, kainate and NMDA ionotropic glutamate receptors, the following antagonists were added to the ACSF during the recording: 6,7-dinitroquinoxaline-2,3-dione (DNQX; 15 µM) and (2R)-amino-5-phosphonopentanoate (AP5; 50 µM). To block dopamine receptors, SCH-2339 (Tocris), and 3,5‐Dichloro‐N‐[[(2S)-1‐ethyl‐2‐pyrrolidinyl]methyl]‐2‐hydroxy‐6‐methoxybenzamide (Raclopride, Tocris), selective D1-like and D2‐like receptor antagonists, respectively, were used at a concentration of 10 µM in the ACSF. All the blockers were bath applied for 5–7 min prior to peptide application. Dopamine hydrochloride (30 µM, Tocris) was bath applied for 7 min. To block VOCCs during the electrophysiological experiments, CdCl2 (200 µM) was added to the ACSF.

Patch-clamp recordings in LDT and PPT brain slices: Voltage-clamp or current clamp recordings were conducted from neurons in the LDT or PPT. Borosilicate, patch pipette electrodes were fabricated on a horizontal puller (P-97, Sutter Instruments, USA) with a resulting pipette resistance of 6–11 MΩ after filling with an intracellular solution which contained in mM: 144 K-gluconate; 2 KCl; 10 HEPES; 0.2 EGTA; 5 Mg-ATP and 0.3 Na-GTP. Alexa-594 (Thermo Fisher Scientific, USA) was included in the pipette to allow later identification of recorded cells as this dye is photostable following fixation. GTP in the pipette solution was replaced with Guanosine 5′-[β-thio]diphosphate trilithium salt (GDPβS, Sigma-Aldrich) for experiments designed to block G-protein mediated mechanisms. Slices were placed in a chamber on the microscope stage which was constantly perfused with ACSF. Individual neurons within the LDT or the PPT were visualized with a 60x water immersion objective which was coupled to an upright microscope (BX50WI, Olympus; Japan) with an infrared Dodt gradient contrast system (IR-DGC; Luigs & Neumann, Germany) and a CCD camera (CCD-300ETRC; DAGE-MTI, Michigan City, IN). Voltage-clamp recordings were initiated using an EPC9 amplifier (HEKA, Germany) under software control (Patchmaster; HEKA; version 13.0). After membrane breakthrough and a 5–7 min stabilization period, data collection in voltage clamp or current clamp mode commenced with sampling at 10 kHz. In addition to electrophysiological responses being recorded by Patchmaster, voltage and current responses were monitored in gap free mode using AxoScope 10.2 (Molecular Devices, USA) and an Axon miniDigi 1B digitizer (Molecular Devices Corporation, USA) or an Axon Digidata 1440A digitizer (Molecular Devices Corporation). Amplitudes of membrane currents were measured as the difference between baseline and maximum deflection. To determine current-voltage relationships during α-syn-induced inward currents, a voltage step protocol in which the membrane was stepped from − 30 mV to -110 mV in increments of 10 mV (200 ms step duration) was utilized, and input-output curves were generated. MiniAnalysis (Synaptosoft, USA) was used to detect and analyze spontaneous and miniature synaptic events in voltage clamp data (sEPSCs, mEPSCs) in 30 second epochs selected right before application of α-syn and 30 seconds around the peak amplitude of α-syn-induced membrane current. The inter-event intervals and the amplitude of events were averaged and analyzed statistically across a population of cells. Firing frequency was monitored in current clamp mode by depolarization of the neuron sufficient to induce a sustained firing of action potentials (-45 mV) by injection of constant current. A 30 second epoch before, and a 30 second epoch after application of α-syn was selected, and intervals between action potentials were measured and averaged.

Perforated patch configuration for recording LDT neurons

Perforated patch recordings were obtained as previously described[41, 42], with the modification that the perforating agent in the intracellular solution was replaced by 500 nM of α-syn. A pulse of 5 mV, which was 5 ms in duration was applied in order to monitor potential membrane perforation in voltage-clamp recording mode following establishment of high resistance seals (> 1 MΩ) between the patch pipette and the cell membrane. Thereafter, the recording was conducted in cell-attached configuration to monitor the seal resistance for longer than 40 minutes. At the end of each experiment, membrane breakthrough was induced.

Multiple-cell and single-cell calcium imaging: Calcium imaging was conducted by monitoring fluorescence emitted by the fluorescent calcium indicator dye, Fura-2. To monitor fluorescence across multiple cells in the same slice, we conducted ‘bulk’ dye loading of cells in brain slices following previously published protocols using the acetoxymethyl ester form of Fura-2 (Fura-2 AM) which is cell permeant[43]. For single-cell calcium imaging recordings, the EGTA in the intracellular pipette solution was replaced by 25 µM of Fura 2 (Molecular Probes). The patch-clamp configuration was established and following membrane breakthrough, Fura 2 diffused passively into the cell. Fluorescence intensity emitted was monitored by a CCD fluorescent camera (12-bit Sensicam, PCO Imaging, Germany) on the microscope, which was controlled by the imaging software Live Acquisition (TILL Photonics, Germany). The excitation wavelengths of 340 and 380 nm were rapidly switched allowing recordings for ratiometric analysis (340 nm:380 nm). The analysis of calcium imaging data was conducted using Igor Pro 6 (Wavemetrics, USA). Changes in fluorescence with ascendant deflections were interpreted as rises in calcium, and amplitude of the rises were quantified, and converted to a percentage of baseline fluorescence following subtraction of background fluorescence. A fluorescent change in cells below 4% was considered indiscernible from background noise and those data were excluded. The ratiometric measurement in changes in fluorescence are expressed as %DF/F in the figures.

Immunohistochemistry

Immunohistochemistry was used for post hoc identification of the recorded cells within the LDT and PPT as bNOS positive (bNOS+) or bNOS negative (bNOS-), which identifies a LDT or PPT cell as cholinergic or non-cholinergic, respectively. Colocalisation of Alexa-594 and bNOS was used to determine a cholinergic phenotype of the recorded cell. Immunohistochemistry was also used to investigate the association of conjugated α-syn /AF647 with bNOS + cells in LDT. Accordingly, following recordings, brain slices in which cells had been labeled with Alexa-594 or brain slices which had been incubated in the conjugated α-syn /AF567 were submerged in 4% paraformaldehyde for fixation and stored overnight. Slices were then cryoprotected by saturation in a 30% sucrose solution and resectioned on a Leica Cryostat into 40 µM for immunohistochemical processing using the bNOS primary antibody (rabbit anti brain nitric oxide synthase, Sigma) and the fluorescent secondary (Goat, anti-rabbit, Alexa fluor 488 secondary, Molecular probes, USA) following previously reported protocols (Fig. 2A2)[44].

Neurotoxicity assay

Coronal slices containing the LDT were bisected with one half incubated for a period of 7 hours in control solution, and the other half in the monomeric or fibril form of α-syn (500 nM) under identical protocols. Another investigator who was blinded to slice treatment conducted the analysis for identification of live and dead cells. For that, propidium iodide (PI; Sigma-Aldrich) was used to identify dead cells and DAPI was used to mark live cells (Sigma-Aldrich). The total cell count was calculated as PI positive plus DAPI positive cells. The slices were incubated for 3 periods of 5 minutes in a solution which contained 1 µg/ml solution of both PI and DAPI with a pH of 7.4. Data are presented as cell death in α-syn treated hemi-slices as a percentage of control as measured by cell death in the other half of the slice.

Imaging of Immunohistochemistry and Neurotoxicity Assays: To detect fluorescent signals in immunohistochemically-treated slices, an upright Zeiss microscope coupled to a monochrome CCD camera (Axiocam MRM, Zeiss, Germany) controlled by Axioskop 2 software (AxioVision 4.6, Zeiss) and appropriate cube sets (Zeiss 59 fluorescent filter cube sets, wavelengths PI: 472–578 nm; DAPI: 358–463 nm, bNOS+: 380 nm, AF647: 620 nm) were used. To conduct the analysis of images collected, ImageJ (National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD) was used, and a macro within the program was utilized to count the number of DAPI and PI-labeled cells. Selected cells were validated by manual confirmation. The same software was also used to identify bNOS + cells, and to analyze their association with the conjugate α-syn /AF647. For this analysis, within 2 brain slices, all of the bNOS + cells were counted and the relative location of the fluorescent signal emitted by α-syn /AF647 was noted and correlated to the position of the bNOS + cells. Data are presented as a calculation of the total percentage of bNOS + cells associated with α-syn /AF647.

Statistics

Statistical treatment of the data was carried out in Graphpad Prism (version 6.0). The results are presented as mean values ± SEM. The Student’s t-test was used to evaluate differences in numerical data. The Fisher’s exact test or a three-way chi-square test were used to evaluate differences in categorical data. Where relevant, to identify which contingency differed significantly from expected outcomes in the categorial data, a post hoc Fisher’s exact test was employed. For all statistical tests, significance was determined when alpha was below 0.05. Figures were prepared using Igor Pro software (Wavemetrics, USA), and Matlab R2018b.

1 Fibril α-syn induced membrane currents, affected synaptic signaling and altered cellular excitability of neurotransmitter-defined neurons in sleep-controlling brain nuclei

We previously reported that fibril α-synuclein (α-syn_F) induced excitatory membrane responses in LDT and PPT neurons[30], and in accordance with those results, α-syn_F induced excitatory membrane responses in all of the LDT neurons examined (n = 10/10; Fig. 2). The average amplitude of the α-syn_F-induced inward current in LDT neurons was 7.3 ± 0.8 pA (n = 10). Moreover, we saw no statistical differences between the amplitudes of α-syn_F-elicited current in populations of neurotransmitter defined LDT cells (bNOS+/cholinergic: 7.6 ± 1.3 pA, n = 5; bNOS-/non-cholinergic: 8.3 ± 1.8 pA, n = 2; p = 0.8; Unpaired T-test; Fig. 2C1). Similarly, α-syn_F induced excitatory membrane responses in 100% of the recorded PPT neurons. The average amplitude of the α-syn_F –induced inward current in PPT neurons was 9.3 ± 1.9 pA (n = 8/8). We also found no significant differences between the current amplitudes between cholinergic and non-cholinergic PPT neurons (bNOS+: 9.8 ± 3.0 pA, n = 3; bNOS-: 8.5 ± 3.2 pA, n = 2; Fig. 2C2). When the current amplitude elicited by α-syn_F was compared between nuclei from all cells irrespective of phenotype, there wasn’t a significant difference (p = 0.4; Unpaired T-test).

Next, we analyzed whether α-syn_F had effects on synaptic activity in these two nuclei. Relative to baseline, α-syn_F induced a significant increase (8%) in the amplitude of the spontaneous excitatory postsynaptic currents (sEPSCs) in LDT neurons (control: 10.7 ± 2.1 pA; α-syn_F: 11.6 ± 2.1 pA; n = 4; p = 0.04; Paired T-test; Fig. 3), which was comparable to α-syn_F-mediated increases in sEPSC amplitudes in PPT neurons (8% increase from baseline; control: 11.3 ± 3.6 pA; α-syn_F: 12.2 ± 3.7 pA; n = 4; p = 0.02; Paired T-test). No significant changes were induced by α-syn_F in the frequency of sEPSCs within the LDT (control: 11.0 ± 3.8 Hz; α-syn_F: 12.8 ± 5.2 Hz, n = 4, p = 0.3; Paired T-test) or PPT (control: 8.4 ± 3.1 Hz; α-syn_F: 8.2 ± 2.8 Hz, n = 4, p = 0.5; Paired T-test).

The alterations induced by α-syn_F in membrane currents and synaptic activity of neurons in the LDT and PPT could result in modulation of neuronal excitability. Therefore, we examined directly whether this was the case and found that α-syn_F significantly increased the firing frequency of LDT neurons by 37.5% (control: 0.4 ± 0.1 Hz; α-syn_F: 0.55 ± 0.1 Hz; n = 3; p = 0.04; Paired T-test; Fig. 3C), and the firing frequency of PPT neurons was significantly increased by 39.5% (control: 0.43 ± 0.1 Hz; α-syn_F: 0.6 ± 0.1 Hz; n = 3; p = 0.03; Paired T-test).

2 Oligomeric α-syn induced effects on membrane currents, altered synaptic activity and heightened excitability in sleep-controlling nuclei.

The oligomeric form of α-syn (α-syn_O) also induced excitatory currents in the majority of recorded neurons in both the LDT (n = 7/7) and the PPT (n = 4/4). In contrast to what was seen for the fibril form in which there were no differences between the amplitudes elicited in LDT and PPT neurons, the amplitude of the current in PPT neurons induced by α-syn_O was significantly smaller than the amplitude induced by the same form of the protein in LDT neurons (LDT: 6.0 ± 1.5 pA; n = 4; PPT: 3.5 ± 1.2 pA; n = 4; p = 0.04; Unpaired T-test; Fig. 4). While recovery was low, the population of recorded cells included both cholinergic and non-cholinergic neurons, and there did not appear to be a difference between amplitudes across phenotypes within each nuclei (LDT bNOS+: 6.5 ± 4.9 pA, n = 2; bNOS-: 5.5 ± 2.1 pA, n = 2; p = 0.9; Unpaired T-test; PPT bNOS+: 3.7 ± 1.8 pA, n = 2; bNOS-: 5.0 pA, n = 1; data not shown).

Next, we examined whether α-syn_O affected synaptic activity in both nuclei. α-syn_O induced a 11.8% increase from baseline in the amplitude of sEPSCs in the LDT which was significant (control: 8.5 ± 1.1 pA; α-syn_O: 9.5 ± 1.0 pA; n = 3; p = 0.02; Paired T-test), as well as a 8.4% increase from baseline within the PPT that was significant (control: 10.3 ± 5.0 pA; α-syn_O: 11.1 ± 5.0pA; n = 3; p = 0.01; Paired T-test). No significant change in the frequency of sEPSCs was seen in the analyzed neurons within the LDT (control: 13.9 ± 1.7 Hz; α-syn_O: 13.0 ± 1.2 Hz p = 0.08; Paired T-test) or the PPT (control: 5.8 ± 1.8 Hz α-syn_O: 4.4 ± 0.8 Hz; p = 0.6; Paired T-test; Fig. 4).

We also investigated potential effects of α-syn_O on excitability in neurons within these two nuclei. In the LDT, α-syn_O induced an increase of 52% from baseline in the firing frequency which was significant (control: 0.63 ± 0.2 Hz; α-syn_O: 0.96 ± 0.3 Hz; n = 3; p = 0.03; Paired T-test). Similarly, a significant increase in the firing frequency of 50% over baseline was induced in PPT neurons (control: 0.82 ± 0.3 Hz; α-syn_O: 1.2 ± 0.4 Hz; n = 4; p = 0.03; Paired T-test). We found no significant differences between the relative change from baseline in the α-syn_O-induced firing frequency when comparing this effect between the two nuclei (p > 0.9; Unpaired T-test; Fig. 4).

3 Monomeric α-syn induced membrane currents, altered synaptic activity and heightened excitability in both sleep-controlling nuclei

In our previous report[30], we showed that the monomeric form of α-syn (α-syn_M) evoked an excitatory membrane response in all of the neurons examined in the LDT irrespective of phenotype (n = 35/35), which exhibited an average amplitude of 7.0 ± 2.7 pA (n = 35). In agreement with our earlier report[30], in this study, all tested PPT cells exhibited an excitatory membrane response which was also phenotype independent. While a greater average amplitude of current was elicited in PPT neurons (8.9 ± 2.5 pA, n = 9), this did not constitute a significant difference from the amplitude evoked in the LDT (p = 0.32; Unpaired T-test; Fig. 5).

Next, we determined effects of α-syn_M on sEPSCs and found that this form of the protein induced a significant increase of 18.7% over baseline in the amplitude of the sEPSCs in LDT neurons (control: 8.0 ± 0.8 pA; α-syn_M: 9.5 ± 0.9 pA; n = 6; p = 0.01; Paired T-test; Fig. 5). A significant sEPSCs amplitude increase of 16% was noted in PPT cells (control: 5.1 ± 0.5 pA; α-syn_M: 6.0 ± 0.5 pA; n = 4; p = 0.008; Paired T-test). In contrast to what was seen for the other forms of the protein, α-syn_M also induced a significant increase in the frequency of sEPSCs in the LDT (23.3%) (control: 6.0 ± 1.8pA; α-syn_M: 7.4 ± 2.2 pA; n = 6; p = 0.04; Paired T-test), which was not an effect we observed in the PPT (control: 5.0 ± 1.8 pA; α-syn_M: 4.5 ± 1.2 pA; n = 4 ; p = 0.2; Paired T-test; Fig. 5).

When we investigated excitability changes induced by α-syn_M, we found an increase of 15% in the firing frequency of LDT neurons, which was a significant change (control: 0.31 ± 0.03 Hz; α-syn_M: 0.36 ± 0.01 Hz; n = 4; p = 0.03; Paired T-test). In contrast, while the firing rate was relatively higher following α-syn_M, the increase was not significant in the examined PPT neurons (control: 1.2 ± 0.8 Hz; α-syn: 1.7 ± 1.3 Hz; n = 3; p = 0.35; Paired T-test; Fig. 5).

4 α-syn alters intracellular calcium in sleep-controlling nuclei

The neuronal effect induced by α-syn in its different structural conformations could impact intracellular calcium levels differentially, which could then substantially impact neuronal functioning. To investigate whether calcium is altered by α-syn in a structurally dependent manner, we applied α-syn_F, and α-syn_O, or α-syn_M and assessed changes in intracellular calcium levels using a fluorescent calcium indicator.

4.1 Fibril α-syn: Similar to findings in our previous study[30], α-syn_F elicited changes in intracellular calcium dynamics in the LDT and PPT neurons that were comparable for the two nuclei (Fig. 6). Within the LDT, 97% and in PPT, 93% of the cells responded to α-syn_F with changes in fluorescence indicative of changes in calcium (LDT: n = 60/62, PPT: n = 56/60; Fig. 6C). Responses elicited were categorized into two types: an increase or a decrease in fluorescence corresponding to increases or decreases in intracellular calcium, respectively. In both nuclei, α-syn_F elicited an increase in calcium in the majority of cells (LDT: 71.6%, n = 43/60; PPT: 60.7%, n = 34/56; Fig. 6C). The proportion of cells responding to α-syn_F was not significantly different in LDT and PPT (p = 0.5, Fisher’s exact test), and the proportion of responding cells exhibiting an increase in intracellular calcium did not differ between these two nuclei (p = 0.6; Fisher’s exact test).

4.2 Oligomeric α-syn: α-syn_O induced a change in fluorescence indicative of an alteration in intracellular calcium in 76.0% (n = 35/46) of the cells within the LDT, and in 92.0% of the cells within the PPT (n = 23/25). In both nuclei, the majority of cells responded with an increase in calcium (LDT: 82.8%, n = 29/35; PPT: 86.9%, n = 20/23; Fig. 6C). The proportion of examined cells responding to α-syn_O was not significantly different between the two sleep-related nuclei (p = 0.06; Fisher's exact test), and there were no nucleus-based differences in the proportion of directionality of the response (p = 0.9; Fisher's exact test). Taken together, this suggests that α-syn_O exerts similar effects on intracellular calcium in the LDT and PPT.

4.3 Monomeric α-syn: Similar to the effects of the other two α-syn conformations, α-syn_M exposure lead to alterations in intracellular calcium in the majority of cells in the sleep-controlling nuclei (LDT: 88.0%, n = 94/107; PPT: 83.0%, n = 45/54), which we had also observed in our previous study[30]. In both nuclei, the majority of responding cells exhibited increases in calcium (LDT: 64.3%, n = 60/94; PPT: 65.6%, n = 29/45; Fig. 6). There were no significant differences in the proportion of cells responding, or the proportion of responding cells which exhibited an increase or decrease in fluorescence between nuclei (p = 0.4; Fisher's exact test). Taken together, this suggests that the effects of the protein on intracellular calcium are similar in cells within LDT and PPT.

5 Effects on membrane currents, synaptic events, firing rate, and calcium levels in sleep-controlling nuclei are independent of the structural complexity of α-syn

Table 1

Comparison of the membrane current, EPSCs, firing rate and intracellular calcium changes induced by 3 different forms of -syn in sleep-controlling nuclei.
α
			α-syn_F	α-syn_O	α-syn_M	pvalue
	ΔI_M	-7.3 ± 0.8		-6.0 ± 1.5	-7.0 ± 2.7	0.6
	ΔsEPSCs -Amp	↑ 8.0%		↑ 11.8%	↑ 18.7%	0.4
LDT	ΔsEPSCs – Freq	↑16.3%		6.4%	↑ 23.3%	0.08
	ΔAP – Freq	↑ 37.5%		↑ 52.0%	↑ 15.0%	0.2
	ΔDF/F	97.0%		#76.0%	88.0%	0.004
	Increase in DF/F	71.6%		82.8%	64.3%	0.2
	ΔI_M	-9.3 ± 1.9		-3.5 ± 1.2	-8.9 ± 2.5	0.2
	ΔsEPSCs - Amp	↑ 8.0%		↑ 8.4%	↑ 16.0%	0.5
PPT	ΔsEPSCs – Freq	2.3%		24.0%	10.0%	0.5
	ΔAP – Freq	↑ 39.5%		↑ 50%	↑41.6%	0.3
	ΔDF/F	93.0%		92.0%	83.0%	0.2
	Increase in DF/F	60.7%		86.9%	65.6%	0.1

I_M: membrane current, α-syn: α-synuclein (_M: monomers; _F: fibril, _O: oligomers), Amp: Amplitude, Freq: Frequency, AP: action potential; p value column calculated with either a one-way ANOVA or a Chi-square test. Significance in post hoc testing with the Fisher’s exact test is indicated by #.

5.1 LDT: All 3 conformations of α-syn depolarized the membrane of both cholinergic and non-cholinergic LDT neurons, and no significant differences between the current amplitudes were observed (Table 1). Similarly, there were no differences between the different structures when comparing the α-syn effect of increasing the amplitude of sEPSCs; however, only α-syn_M also enhanced the frequency of sEPSCs within the nucleus. An increase in firing frequency was induced by all 3 forms of α-syn. In the majority of LDT cells examined, the 3 conformations of α-syn induced changes in fluorescence indicative of alterations in intracellular calcium. However, in terms of frequency of response, some variation was found when comparing actions of α-syn_F, α-syn_O, and α-syn_M on alterations in calcium levels. A significantly greater proportion of examined LDT cells responded to α-syn_F when compared to the proportion responding to α-syn_O. However, the proportion of responding cells which exhibited an increase in intracellular calcium was not significantly different for these two protein forms, and the amplitude of the rise was not significantly different between all three proteins forms. When taken together, we conclude that overall alterations of membrane currents, synaptic events, excitability and increases in intracellular calcium were not structure dependent in neurons of the LDT as effects of α-syn_M, α-syn_O, α-syn_F on these parameters did not vary greatly.

5.2 PPT: Similar to actions seen in the LDT, we observed that the 3 conformations of α-syn altered the membrane current in 100% of the PPT neurons tested, and the amplitude of the evoked currents did not vary significantly when comparing α-syn_M, α-syn_O, or α-syn_F (Table 1). The α-syn-elicited increase of the amplitude of the sEPSCs did not vary significantly between the distinct protein structures, and none were found to enhance the frequency of sEPSC within this nucleus. The firing rate of PPT neurons was significantly altered by α-syn_O and α-syn_F. However, there were no significant differences in the proportion of cells responding with changes in intracellular calcium or in the proportion of responding cells exhibiting calcium increases following exposure to the 3 different protein forms.

When taken together, with the exception that α-syn_M did not induce changes in frequency of firing or EPSCs within the PPT, we conclude that findings in the PPT were similar to those seen in the LDT in that all three forms of α-syn altered membrane currents, synaptic events, excitability and intracellular calcium.

6 Mechanisms of action of α-syn _M on membrane currents, synaptic transmission and calcium responses in sleep-controlling nuclei

6.1 Cell Death

In our earlier work, we were the first to report that α-syn_M has actions on membrane currents in mammalian neurons in ex vivo studies in the LDT and PPT. Further, we were the first to show that these actions, as well as rises in calcium, were associated with cell death, which we postulated were related. In the present study, we confirmed α-syn_M-mediated heightened cell death and extended our findings by showing that α-syn_F also leads to increased cell death by exposing one half of an LDT slice to control solution and the other half to either α-syn_F or α-syn_M and comparing cell death. When exposed to α-syn_F the proportion of cell death was 13 ± 8.1% over control (n = 5) in the LDT and when exposed to α-syn_M, 12 ± 3.6% cell death over control was detected (data not shown). There were no significant differences between the relative degree of cell death induced by α-syn_M and α-syn_F (p = 0.9; Unpaired T-test; data not shown). These results indicate that α-syn induced a toxic effect in a structure-independent manner. Calcium alterations have been shown to be induced by α-syn_M in hippocampal and cortical brain slices, however, these alterations did not result in toxicity in cultured neurons[34], which suggests that different mechanisms may be involved in α-syn_M-mediated effects across different nuclei. Therefore, we continued our investigations with a focus on examination of the mechanisms by which α-syn_M which is the form of α-syn that can alter to other conformations, affects the current of the membrane, synaptic transmission, and intracellular calcium in SD nuclei, and as these investigations were extensive, we focused on the LDT.

6.2 α-syn_M associates with the membrane of LDT neurons

We first ascertained whether α-syn_M was affecting LDT neuronal cell function by association with structures at the membrane surface or with internal structures suggestive of subcellular effect subsequent to internalization. Therefore, we used a recently developed and reported α-syn monoclonal antibody conjugated to Alexa Fluor 647 (α-syn/AF647) that allowed live-cell, particle tracking[40]. Using fluorescent imaging, we monitored the kinetics of movement and associations of the peptide within the slice once it entered the bath (Fig. 7). Baseline fluorescence was obtained by recording fluorescent intensity for 30s before bath perfusion of α-syn/AF647. We observed that within 1–2 min of entering the bath, α-syn/AF647 was located opposed to the membrane of cells. We verified that it remained stationary at the membrane during the subsequent 20 mins of recording (n = 3), suggesting that α-syn/AF647 was associated with structures at the surface of the membrane (Fig. 7A).

As α-syn/AF647 can be immobilized in brain slices by exposure to a crosslinking agent (paraformaldehyde) and retain its fluorescent properties, we performed immunohistochemistry on slices in which α-syn/AF647 had been fixated in order to identify bNOS + neurons and examine the relationship of α-syn/AF647 to neuronal phenotypes within the LDT. We observed that α-syn/AF647 was located at the surface of the membrane in 68% of the bNOS + cells (n = 23/28) and was not apparent near the remaining 32% of the bNOS + neurons (Fig. 7B). While it was not possible to visualize non-bNOS + cells, these data provide support for our hypothesis that the membrane of cholinergic sleep-controlling neurons within LDT is one target for α-syn_M actions.

6.3 Membrane perforations are not induced by α-syn_M

The live-cell imaging and fixed tissue fluorescence indicated an association with the membrane and raised the possibility that α-syn_M could be creating pores which could allow the passage of ions, including calcium across the cell membrane. This mechanism had been suggested previously when it was noted that the presence of 500 nM of α-syn_O in the pipette induced ruptures of the neuronal membrane following 20 min of exposure in primary cultures of rat hippocampal and dopaminergic neurons from the substantia nigra (SN)[42, 45, 46]. To examine this possibility, we conducted perforated patch recordings following well-established protocols[41] to detect the appearance of pores based on large changes in membrane resistance (Fig. 7C). In a control solution, a stable seal was formed between the membrane and maintained for over 40 min (resistance of the seal at 0min: 1.7 GOhms; at 40 min: 1.5 GOhms). In a separate population of cells, we added α-syn_M (500 nM) to the patch pipette solution and monitored whether changes in the seal resistance appeared, putatively due to membrane perforations. Results seen in control conditions were very similar to those obtained when α-syn_M was present in the pipette solution. A stable seal was obtained for over 40 min (resistance of the seal in 0 min: 1.5 ± 0.4 GOhms; 40min: 1.2 ± 0.2 G GOhms; p = 0.1; n = 3) suggesting no ruptures of the membrane under the pipette. Therefore, induction of inward current by α-syn_M does not appear reliant on pore formation in the membrane of native mouse LDT neurons.

6.4 α-syn_M induced depolarization of the membrane due to direct actions on LDT postsynaptic neurons

To further investigate where α-syn_M exerts effects on the LDT, we evaluated the actions of α-syn_M on membrane currents during action potential blockade via inhibition of voltage-dependent Na⁺ channels with TTX. Following determination that α-syn_M responses could be repeated within cells (p = 0.6; n = 3; Paired T-test), we found that following an initial application of α-syn_M that induced inward currents, inward currents were still seen upon a second application in presence of TTX (0.5 µM). There were no differences in the frequency of responses (control: 100%, TTX: 100%, n = 4) nor in the amplitude of the inward current when action potentials were blocked (control: 6.3 ± 1.7 pA; α-syn_M: 6.0 ± 1.7 pA; n = 3; p = 0.9; Paired T-test; Fig. 8A). Examination of current-voltage curves revealed a reversal potential of approximately − 55 mV (-55.3 ± 1.9 mV, n = 3; data not shown). These data indicate that the α-syn_M-induced change in membrane current involves a mixed cation current and does not require action potential generation in the slice, suggesting that effects are due to actions within the synapse, either at the presynaptic terminals or in the postsynaptic neuron.

6.5 α-syn _M induced depolarization is not dependent on IP3-mediated intracellular calcium stores or Voltage-Operated Calcium Channels (VOCCs)

Intracellular calcium stores: In cell culture models, α-syn_o has been shown to activate SERCA pumps leading to alterations in intracellular calcium signaling[47]. In order to test a role for SERCA pumps, we blocked IP3-mediated intracellular calcium stores with CPA (10 µM). In the presence of CPA, α-syn_M elicited membrane currents in 100% of the cells which were tested (n = 5). In protocols in which the amplitude elicited by a first application of α-syn_M was compared in the same cells to that induced by a second application in presence of CPA, the average amplitude of the elicited inward currents did not significantly differ (control: 7.0 ± 1.1 pA; CPA: 6.6 ± 0.8 pA; n = 3; p = 0.5; Paired T-test).

VOCCs: The α-syn_M-induced membrane current could be carried, at least in part, by calcium, and since α-syn_M has been shown to activate VOCCs[48], we tested the role of VOCCs in this action by addition of Cd^+ 2 (200µM), a non-specific blocker of VOCCs[49] to the external solution. When compared to control, the frequency of responses was not altered when the blocker was present (100% of cells tested; n = 8). Further, in repeated protocols in which first and second applications were applied to the same cells, the amplitude of inward current induced by the second application of α-syn_M in Cd^+ 2 solution was not significantly reduced from that obtained from the first application but was instead significantly greater (control: 9.0 ± 0.5 pA; Cd^+ 2: 11.6 ± 0.3 pA, p = 0.04; Paired T-test, n = 4). Therefore, we conclude that α-syn_M mediated inward currents were independent of the activation of SERCA pump-mediated calcium stores and VOCCs (Fig. 8B). When taken together with our TTX and current-voltage curves, we suggest that inward current responses induced by α-syn_M are not largely dependent on release from the presynaptic terminal, and involve a mixed cation conductance at the postsynaptic membrane.

6.6 Glutamate and Dopamine Receptor Involvement To investigate whether a membrane-bound receptor is involved in α-syn_M-induced inward currents, we next examined the effects of selective antagonists of receptor targets of α-syn previously reported in the literature.

Glutamate Receptor Mediated Transmission: As α-syn_M induced an increase of the amplitude of sEPSCs, this could be mediated by postsynaptic AMPA receptors. This supposition is supported by studies showing that α-syn_O modulates AMPA/NMDA receptor activation[50]. Therefore, we decided to examine the involvement of glutamatergic receptors in the α-syn_M-induced inward current. DNQX (15µM) and AP5 (50µM), antagonists of AMPA and NMDA receptors, respectively, were added to the external solution simultaneously. Under these conditions, α-syn_M induced inward currents in 100% of the neurons tested (n = 5). Moreover, in experiments in which it was possible to compare first and second applications, the amplitude of the currents elicited by α-syn_M during glutamate receptor antagonism did not differ significantly from the first application when the antagonists were absent (Control: 10.0 ± 4.0 pA; DNQX and AP5: 10.3 ± 14.8 pA; n = 3; p = 0.9; Paired T-test; Fig. 8B), suggesting that the α-syn_M-induced effect was not reliant on ionotropic glutamatergic signaling via AMPA or NMDA receptors.

Dopamine Receptor-mediated transmission: α-syn has been shown to enhance dopamine (DA)-mediated transmission by modulation of DA type 2 receptors (DR2)[51]. To test the hypothesis that α-syn_M-induced membrane current involved actions at dopamine receptors, we preincubated the slices with a cocktail of the DR2-like and DR1-like receptor antagonists, RAC and SCH-23390, respectively. In the presence of the DR1 and DR2 receptor antagonists, α-syn_M elicited membrane currents in 100% (n = 8) of the neurons tested. Further, in first and second application matched protocols, the average amplitude when the receptor antagonists were present did not differ significantly from the amplitude seen in the first application (amplitude control: 6.6 ± 1.1 pA; SCH23390 + RAC: 7.2 ± 1.0 pA; n = 7; p = 0.5; Paired T-test). Based on these data, we conclude that the current induced by α-syn_M was not dependent on activation of DR1-like or DR2-like receptors.

6.7 GPCR-mediated transmission

After exclusion of the most common α-syn_M membrane targets which have been presented in literature from other laboratories, we decided to examine whether a GPCR was involved in the mediation of the α-syn_M membrane effect. Therefore, we replaced GTP in the intracellular solution with GDPβS (250 µM), a membrane impermeable, nonspecific inhibitor of GPCR signaling. To ensure that this manipulation was effective in blocking GPCR-involved signaling, we monitored the effect of DA on the membrane, as all reported actions of DA at DA receptors are mediated by G-proteins[52]. In the presence of TTX, DA (30 µM) induced an outward current in a population of LDT neurons (n = 3; Fig. 8C). When GDPβS (250 µM) was included in the pipette, DA failed to induce any noticeable effect on the membrane current of LDT neurons (n = 3). Next, we examined the effects of α-syn_M on LDT neurons in presence of GDPβS, and we observed that α-syn_M (100 nM) failed to induce an inward current in 76% of the LDT neurons, which was a significant difference from control conditions (n = 10/13, p = 0.0001; Fisher’s exact test; Fig. 8C). The three cells which did respond with a change in membrane current in presence of GDPβS exhibited an amplitude of 4.8 ± 2.2 pA which was significantly less than in control conditions (n = 3; p = 0.02; Unpaired T-test). To further demonstrate that blockade of the responses was present, we reapplied α-syn_M to a subset of the same neurons, and α-syn_M still failed to induce a membrane response (n = 5/5). When combined, these results demonstrate that α-syn_M induced neuronal responses in the membrane of LDT neurons, which involved activation of GPCRs. While we were able to eliminate a role of many of the GPCRs shown in other studies to mediate actions of α-syn_M (as above), we were not able to identify the specific GPCR involved in α-syn_M-mediated inward currents in LDT neurons.

6.8 α-syn _M enhance the amplitude and frequency of glutamate release from presynaptic excitatory synapses outside the terminal

Since α-syn_M increases the amplitude and frequency of sEPSCs in the postsynaptic neuron within the LDT, α-syn_M could be exerting an effect on presynaptic, excitatory synapses. Therefore, we investigated whether the changes in sEPSC frequency were dependent on action potential generation. When we applied α-syn_M in the presence of TTX, the frequency of miniature EPSCs (mEPSCs) following exposure to α-syn_M was not significantly different from baseline (control: 3.8 ± 1.3 Hz; α-syn_M: 3.5 ± 1.3 Hz; n = 5; p = 0.3; Paired T-test; data not shown). Further, α-syn_M did not significantly alter the amplitude of mEPSCs (control: 4.5 ± 0.7 pA; α-syn_M:4.6 ± 0.4 pA; n = 5; p = 0.8; Paired T-test; data not shown). These data suggest that α-syn_M has actions outside the terminal on excitatory, presynaptic inputs directed to the postsynaptic neuron leading to action potential-dependent alterations in glutamate release from presynaptic terminals. As these glutamatergic terminals could source from glutamate-containing cells in the LDT, these data support the conclusion that the population of bNOS- cells in which we observed α-syn_M-mediated membrane effects included local glutamate-containing LDT neurons. However, glutamatergic input also sources from projections directed to the LDT, therefore, the population of glutamate cells affected by α-syn_M remains to be determined.

7.0 α-syn_M induces calcium responses directly in postsynaptic neurons which involve G-protein mediated signaling

α-syn_M altered intracellular calcium levels. To further characterize the mechanism underlying α-syn_M effects on intracellular calcium, we evaluated whether effects of α-syn_M on calcium levels remained after blocking the generation of voltage-operated, Na⁺-dependent action potentials. To enable direct comparison, we wished to examine this in the same individual cells. Therefore, as a first step, we had to verify that the effects of α-syn_M on calcium were repeatable. We found that there were no significant differences between the probability of responses between a first and second application of α-syn_M to the same cells (p = 0.9). However, the amplitude of the change in fluorescence indicative of alteration in calcium (DF/F) elicited by the second application of α-syn_M was significantly reduced by 18% from that seen with first applications (1st app DF/F: 11.0 ± 1.0%; 2nd app DF/F: 9.0 ± 1.0%; n = 33; p = 0.0001). Therefore, we corrected for this reduction when a comparison was made for TTX absent vs TTX present, as well as for CPA absent vs CPA present conditions in the same cells.

The proportion of cells responding, as well as the proportion exhibiting an increase in DF/F, did not differ when TTX was present (Control: n = 23/23, TTX: n = 22/23, p = 0.9; Fisher’s exact test; Fig. 9). Further, the average amplitude of the increase did not significantly differ between TTX present or TTX absent conditions when a correction for the expected decrement was included (DF/F; Control: 9.0 ± 1.0%, TTX: 8.0 ± 1.0%; n = 22, p = 0.2; Paired T-test; Fig. 9). These data indicate that α-syn_M-elicited intracellular calcium rises do not require action potential generation, and further, that effects on calcium dynamics are likely due to actions at the synapse.

We investigated the source of calcium by inhibiting the SERCA pump-mediated calcium stores via inclusion of CPA in the external solution. The proportion of responding cells indicating intracellular calcium rises was not significantly different from that observed under CPA-absent conditions (DF/F increase: Control: n = 22/23, CPA: n = 23/23, p = 0.99; Fisher's exact test). The mean DF/F increase amplitude to α-syn_M in the presence of CPA was significantly higher than baseline (DF/F; Control: 7.0 ± 1.0%, CPA: 21.0 ± 1.0%; n = 22, p = 0.0001; Paired T-test; Fig. 9). When taken together, we conclude that rises in calcium induced by α-syn_M do not rely on intracellular IP3-mediated calcium stores.

7.1 α-syn_M induced membrane effect and calcium rise in single-cell via GPCR-mediated mechanism

Since we saw effects of α-syn_M on the membrane current and calcium levels in distinct populations of LDT cells, we wanted to confirm whether these two physiological phenomena occurred in the same cells. To that end, we conducted single-cell calcium imaging by injecting a cell-impermeant form of the calcium indicator dye, Fura 2, via the recording pipette, and concurrently monitored the current of the membrane following application of high concentration of α-syn_M (500 nM). In all cases, we observed that α-syn_M induced an inward current that was greater at this higher concentration than at 100 nM (127.5 ± 12.5pA, n = 6) [30], and the membrane current was accompanied by an increase in fluorescence indicative of rises in intracellular calcium levels in the individual neurons (36.8 ± 10.4%DF/F, n = 6). These findings indicate the likelihood of a common underlying mechanism mediating calcium and membrane responses to α-syn_M. Therefore, we examined the α-syn_M-mediated rise of calcium in presence of GDPβS. Relative to baseline, α-syn_M (500 nM) induced an increase in intracellular calcium which was 50% lower in amplitude than under baseline conditions (18.7 ± 6.4%DF/F, n = 7, p = 0.04, Unpaired T-test; Fig. 9). These results demonstrate that α-syn_M induces intracellular calcium increases within LDT neurons that involve GPCR-mediated signaling. As the rise in calcium was not eliminated, this suggests that additional mechanisms could be involved, or blockade of GPCR-mediated mechanisms was not complete.

To the best of our knowledge, ours is the first study in native mammalian neural tissue to investigate the underlying mechanisms behind cellular and toxic effects of the most common α-syn forms found in pathological conditions (monomers, oligomers and fibrils) in sleep-controlling brain regions. We conducted our examinations by exposing LDT and PPT mouse neurons to peptides that were carefully characterized and structurally identified before experiments using a range of highly precise protein characterization methods (SEC, CD spectroscopy, and ThT). We confirmed and extended our earlier findings that α-syn induced a postsynaptic effect on the membrane current in neurotransmitter-defined cells, altered synaptic activity, led to changes in intracellular calcium, enhanced excitability, and induced cell death in a structure-independent manner in sleep-controlling neurons located in the brainstem. Further, using a traceable α-syn probe, we found that labeled α-syn_M associates with the surface of the neuronal membrane of cholinergic neurons, and does not appear to be internalized. Finally, we provide evidence that an unidentified GPCR is involved in the induction of inward currents and intracellular calcium rises.

Every form of protein that was analyzed, α-syn_F, α-syn_O, α-syn_M induced an excitatory inward current in the membrane of cholinergic and non-cholinergic neurons within LDT and PPT in mouse brain slices. While we could not find anything in literature, other than our previous work, reporting that any of these forms of α-syn induces alterations in membrane currents in native mammalian neurons, other studies conducted in cultured cells have shown that α-syn_M induces a depolarization-evoked calcium rise, that α-syn_O elicits an increase in membrane conductance as well as permeability[42, 53, 54], and that α-syn_F alters membrane pump activity and efficiency of Na⁺ extrusion[55]. Although electrical effects on the membrane were not detailed, all of these reported alterations are likely to induce changes in the membrane current. Additionally, our findings inform other studies showing that α-syn can alter both post- and presynaptic conductances. In hippocampal brain slices and cultured cortical cells, 90 minutes of exposure to α-syn_O enhanced synaptic transmission by increasing the amount of current conducted by AMPA/NMDA postsynaptic receptors[50]. In cultured neurons, 30 minutes exposure to α-syn_m increased calcium influx, which was associated with heightened activity of VOCCs in the presynaptic compartment using calcium imaging targeted to synaptic vesicles[56]. Our EPSC data do support activity of α-syn_m on glutamatergic presynaptic neurons, however, the lack of an α-syn_m -mediated change of mEPSC frequency does not support a direct action on VOCCs in the presynaptic terminal sufficient to enhance glutamate release, but rather, suggests alterations in sEPSC frequency were due to excitatory actions upstream of the terminal, and dependent on action potential generation. Further, we failed to see evidence of an enhancement of synaptic currents through AMPA/NMDA receptors as the amplitude of mEPSCs was unchanged by α-syn_m, suggesting effects on increasing EPSC amplitude were due to actions on the presynaptic cell outside of the terminal. However, as exposure times greatly differed across the studies, this raises the possibility that effects on presynaptic VOCCs and AMPA/NMDA receptor-mediated conductances are sensitive to duration of exposure.

Studies focused on the neuronal mechanism of α-syn effects have shown actions of the protein at both intracellular and extracellular locations. α-syn_M is able to enter into cells without being degraded by cellular proteolytic systems[57, 58] and produce alterations in synaptic transmission and excitability[59]. Alternatively, α-syn_O can act extracellularly, and lead to formation of ‘pore-like structures’ in the membrane similar to cation channels which results in increases in intracellular calcium levels[42, 46, 54] as well as interact with AMPA/NMDA receptors[50], potentiate VOCCs, activate SERCA pumps[47, 56], or affect downstream signaling of dopamine D2 receptors[51]. In our studies using the labeled-probe α-syn, internalization of the peptide was not noted. Using the perforated patch-clamp recording method that allowed us to monitor the resistance of the seal formed under the pipette in the presence of α-syn_M, we did not find evidence of pore formation, as this would have been reflected in large reductions of the membrane seal resistance. Our investigations using blockers of synaptic transmission showed that α-syn induces inward currents likely through a postsynaptic mechanism, and that this membrane excitation was independent of glutamatergic ionotropic receptor activation, VOCC activation, intracellular calcium stores, or enhancement of dopamine receptor signaling. Using a blocker of G-protein coupling, we provide the first evidence that α-syn_M induces excitatory currents in the membrane of LDT neurons that depend on G-protein signaling, which provides a mechanistic insight into a hitherto unknown process triggered by α-syn. While we eliminated a role for the most parsimonious possibilities based on literature, ultimately, we did not identify the specific GPCR mechanism, and this point remains a topic for future studies.

Exposure to α-syn (monomeric and oligomeric) has been shown by others to lead to alteration in intracellular calcium in neurons, and several mechanisms have been implicated. α-syn has been shown to directly interact with calcium pumps [35,47,60-Preprint], VOCCs[56], and to lead to flux of calcium subsequent to formation of pore-like structures in the plasma membrane[42]. Our data support our previous work showing that α-syn induces rises in intracellular calcium in native mammalian neurons, and we extend that work by showing that rises in calcium occurred in a structure-independent manner. We provide evidence that alteration in the calcium rise is induced directly in the postsynaptic cell concomitant with the depolarization of the membrane, and while SERCA pumps were not involved in rises as depletion of this calcium store did not reduce calcium increases, this effect on calcium appeared to be linked to G-protein coupled intracellular mechanisms.

We demonstrated that prolonged exposure to α-syn_M and α-syn_F heightens cell death. We did not examine whether α-syn_O induces cell death, however, other studies have reported that cell death in primary cultured neurons is induced by α-syn_O and this mortality increase was associated with rises in calcium, whereas, α-syn_M, which also leads to rises in calcium did not appear to induce toxic effects in these cultured cells[34, 58]. It has been well established that sustained overexcitability[61, 62] exposes neurons to excitotoxic levels of glutamate which results in a transient increase in cytosolic calcium concentration that is followed by a profound collapse of the mitochondrial membrane potential leading to neuronal death[63–67]. Furthermore, the sustained rise in calcium induced by α-syn could induce toxicity by damaging mitochondria, triggering lysosomal leakage, disrupting microtubules, increasing levels of ROS leading to the trigger for apoptotic processes. Supporting this hypothesis, blocking intracellular calcium rises reduced cytotoxicity induced by α-syn_O[35]. Moreover, α-syn-mediated cell death in a yeast model of cultured hippocampal cells was due to the ability of α-syn_O to increase basal intracellular calcium levels, resulting in an oxidative burst that ultimately lead to apoptotic processes and cell death[68]. Abolishing intracellular calcium elevation prevented cell death. Our data from native LDT neurons are consistent with the interpretation that rises in calcium induced by α-syn contribute to the heightened cell death seen in the LDT following exposure to α-syn_M and α-syn_F. The cell death induced by α-syn_M which was not seen in primary neuronal cultures from other brain regions could be due to differential sensitivity of distinct neuronal populations to intracellular calcium levels and suggest that as systemic levels rise of α-syn_M, damage could be induced primarily in select vulnerable neuronal populations.

Although there are discrepancies in the literature, a tenet has emerged that oligomers and fibrils induce cell death[35, 69], whereas the monomeric form is non-harmful[35]. However, in our previous report, we showed that monomers and fibrils induced a similar neuronal effect on excitatory currents a intracellular calcium levels of sleep-controlling neurons, and that the monomeric form induced cell death putatively through excitotoxic mechanisms, which provided evidence that challenges this tenant[30]. We have extended that work by showing here that monomeric, oligomeric and fibril α-syn induce similar excitatory cellular actions and that the fibril form as well as monomeric form is toxic to sleep-controlling neurons. The lack of concordance between previous studies and ours could derive from multiple factors such as differences in the in vitro model used. Many previous studies have utilized neuronal cultures[42] where it is possible to study single homogeneous cell populations, whereas, we have utilized brain slices where the three-dimensional architecture and micro milieu of the cells is closer to that seen in vivo[70]. Another technical difference may be ascribable to the differences in protein preparations in the various studies. Different purification protocols or fibrillation assays could result in various polymorphic structures and in addition not all studies verified the specific structure of the protein utilized in experiments. Different exposure methods to α-syn were utilized across the studies which included intracellular or extracellular exposure, acute applications or incubations for hours or days. In addition, a great variety in the concentrations utilized has been reported with some above those seen in pathological conditions (1 mM, 5 mM). Other differences in findings could result from the disparate brain regions investigated. Many previous studies were conducted recording neurons in the substantia nigra, striatum, cortex and hippocampus[42, 50, 56, 71], while we recorded from cells that regulate behaviors which are first affected in PD. Here, we carefully characterized each sample to ensure identification of the specific form used, which included on-pathway intermediate species. Furthermore, we conducted our recordings in native mammalian neurons of the LDT and PPT that are nuclei present in the brain stem which is a neural region hypothesized to be affected earlier in the disease[8, 15, 72]. Finally, by using nM concentrations, we exposed the neurons to α-syn concentrations similar to what is seen in clinical conditions based on cerebral spinal fluid studies of PD patients[73, 74]. Taken together, our findings suggest that neurons within the LDT and PPT are vulnerable and sensitive to three common forms of α-syn, including one that appears early or prodromal in PD etiology.

Different protein conformations of α-syn have been linked to distinct symptoms in α-synucleinopathies. Injections of fibrils lead to progressive motor impairment and cell death in a phenotypic PD-like animal model, whereas injections of oligomeric forms result in a distinct phenotype displaying a combination of Multiple System Atrophy traits with PD-like symptoms[34]. While the different α-synucleinopathies are characterized by separate cardinal symptoms, interestingly, sleep disorders can be present during the preclinical phase of many if not all of the α-synucleinopathies, including PD, Lewy Body Dementia and Multiple System Atrophy[10, 11, 75]. The fact that distinct sleep-controlling nuclei are equally affected by the presence of α-syn, regardless of protein structure, provides a mechanistic explanation regarding why SDs appear as a common prodromal symptom in the preclinical phase of this group of diseases. We speculate that neurodegeneration is wrought by rising levels of α-syn present early in the disease interacting with the LDT and PPT, irrespective of protein form. As the LDT and PPT are key regulators of motor control during sleep and arousal during wakefulness, α-synucleinopathies in the prodromal phase would share the common feature of sleeping disorders. Furthermore, the cell loss and alteration of neuronal transmission induced by α-syn in different neurotransmitter-defined subpopulations within LDT and PPT in the present study suggests that there could be early functional changes in these diseases beyond sleep as the LDT and PPT control behavior elements besides sleep and wakefulness cycles. PD patients develop postural instability and gait disorders which may be due, in part, to loss of PPT neurons[76–78]. Therefore, our data may shed light on other features and symptoms of α-synucleinopathies that may be altered in the preclinical phase of PD[79]. Altogether, our findings provide valuable new insight into the mechanisms associated with α-syn-induced cellular effects. We conjecture cellular effects seen in the LDT and PPT are harmful. Our data contribute to the understanding of the neuronal dysfunction observed in the preclinical phase of α-synucleinopathies, which opens novel avenues for diagnosis and therapeutic intervention.

α-syn - α-synuclein; LDT: Laterodorsal Tegmental nucleus ; PPT - Pedunculopontine Tegmental nucleus; PD – Parkinson’s Disease; SDs – sleeping disorders; REM - rapid eye movement sleep; Tht - Thioflavin T fluorescence spectroscopy; CD - circular dichroism spectroscopy; TEM -transmission electron microscope; SEC - size exclusion chromatography; GPCR – G-protein coupled receptor; bNOS – brain derived nitric oxide synthase; sEPSCs – spontaneous excitatory post synaptic currents; α-syn_{F -}fibril form of α-synuclein; α-syn_{O -}oligomeric form of α-synuclein; α-syn_{M -}Monomeric form of α-synuclein; Hz – hertz;

Funding

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES), Brazil for funding support in the form of a Ph.D Grant to Altair Brito dos Santos.

LKS, TS and AEL acknowledge funding from the Lundbeck Foundation Initiative BRAINSTRUC (2015-2666).

Competing Interests

All authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest in regard to this manuscript.

Author Contributions

A.B.D.S., M.P.K. and K.A.K. initiated the study and designed the experimental strategy. L.K.S., T.S.P, and A.E.L. expressed and characterized protein structure. A.B.D.S. and E.M. performed and analyzed electrophysiological, and calcium imaging experiments. A.B.D.S and C.R.R.L performed neurodegeneration imaging experiments and data analyzes A.B.D.S. and K.A.K. performed statistical evaluations. L.K.S., A.E.L., E.M., M.P.K., A.B.D.S. and K.A.K. prepared figures. A.B.D.S., A.E.L., M.P.K. and K.A.K. wrote the paper, and all authors provided critical feedback on early drafts. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Data Availability

Upon acceptance, data is available at a repository at the University of Copenhagen and made available upon reasonable request to the authors.

Ethics Approval

Animals were used under approval in accordance with European Communities Council Directive (86/609/EEC).

Statement about data used in another study

In the data set reporting amplitudes of effects with monomer and fibril, some of the same data were used in a previously published study (2021;11(4):1773-1790. doi: 10.3233/JPD-212554). However, the present report represents a distinctly different study as it examines a hypothesis, and presents conclusions which are different from those in the earlier publication. In addition, we present the results of many new experiments in this report.

Hawkes CH, Del Tredici K, Braak H (2010) A timeline for Parkinson’s disease. Parkinsonism Relat Disord 16, 79–84. PMID: 19846332, DOI: 10.1016/j.parkreldis.2009.08.007
Mahlknecht P, Seppi K, Poewe W (2015) The Concept of Prodromal Parkinson’s Disease. J Parkinsons Dis 5, 681–697. PMID: 26485429, PMCID: PMC4927924, DOI: 10.3233/JPD-150685
Berg D, Postuma RB, Adler CH, Bloem BR, Chan P, Dubois B, Gasser T, Goetz CG, Halliday G, Joseph L, Lang AE, Liepelt-Scarfone I, Litvan I, Marek K, Obeso J, Oertel W, Olanow CW, Poewe W, Stern M, Deuschl G (2015) MDS research criteria for prodromal Parkinson’s disease. Mov Disord. 30(12):1600-11. DOI: 10.1002/mds.26431
Iranzo A, Santamaria J, Tolosa E (2016) Idiopathic rapid eye movement sleep behaviour disorder: diagnosis, management, and the need for neuroprotective interventions. Lancet Neurol 15, 405–419. PMID: 26971662, DOI: 10.1016/S1474-4422(16)00057-0
Postuma RB, Gagnon J-F, Bertrand J-A, Genier Marchand D, Montplaisir JY (2015) Parkinson risk in idiopathic REM sleep behavior disorder: Preparing for neuroprotective trials. Neurology 84, 1104–1113. PMID: 25681454, PMCID: PMC4371408, DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000001364
dos Santos AB, Kohlmeier KA, Barreto GE (2015) Are Sleep Disturbances Preclinical Markers of Parkinson’s Disease? Neurochem Res 40, 421–427. PMID: 25433714, DOI: 10.1007/s11064-014-1488-7
dos Santos AB, Barreto GE, Kohlmeier KA (2014) Treatment of sleeping disorders should be considered in clinical management of Parkinson’s disease. Front Aging Neurosci 6, 273. DOI: 10.3389/fnagi.2014.00273
Poewe W, Seppi K, Tanner CM, Halliday GM, Brundin P, Volkmann J, Schrag A-E, Lang AE (2017) Parkinson disease. Nat Rev Dis Prim 3, 17013. DOI: 10.1038/nrdp.2017.13
Postuma RB, Iranzo A, Hogl B, Arnulf I, Ferini-Strambi L, Manni R, Miyamoto T, Oertel W, Dauvilliers Y, Ju Y El, Puligheddu M, Sonka K, Pelletier A, Santamaria J, Frauscher B, Leu-Semenescu S, Zucconi M, Terzaghi M, Miyamoto M, Unger MM, Carlander B, Fantini ML, Montplaisir JY (2015) Risk factors for neurodegeneration in idiopathic rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder: A multicenter study. Ann Neurol. 77(5):830-9. DIO: 10.1002/ana.24385
Postuma RB, Iranzo A, Hu M, Högl B, Boeve BF, Manni R, Oertel WH, Arnulf I, Ferini-Strambi L, Puligheddu M, Antelmi E, Cochen De Cock V, Arnaldi D, Mollenhauer B, Videnovic A, Sonka K, Jung K-Y, Kunz D, Dauvilliers Y, Provini F, Lewis SJ, Buskova J, Pavlova M, Heidbreder A, Montplaisir JY, Santamaria J, Barber TR, Stefani A, St.Louis EK, Terzaghi M, Janzen A, Leu-Semenescu S, Plazzi G, Nobili F, Sixel-Doering F, Dusek P, Bes F, Cortelli P, Ehgoetz Martens K, Gagnon J-F, Gaig C, Zucconi M, Trenkwalder C, Gan-Or Z, Lo C, Rolinski M, Mahlknecht P, Holzknecht E, Boeve AR, Teigen LN, Toscano G, Mayer G, Morbelli S, Dawson B, Pelletier A (2019) Risk and predictors of dementia and parkinsonism in idiopathic REM sleep behaviour disorder: a multicentre study. Brain 142, 744–759. DOI: 10.1093/brain/awz030
Fernández-Arcos A, Iranzo A, Serradell M, Gaig C, Santamaria J (2016) The Clinical Phenotype of Idiopathic Rapid Eye Movement Sleep Behavior Disorder at Presentation: A Study in 203 Consecutive Patients. Sleep 39, 121–132. PMID: 26940460, PMCID: PMC4678361, DOI: 10.5665/sleep.5332
Iranzo A, Fernández-Arcos A, Tolosa E, Serradell M, Molinuevo JL, Valldeoriola F, Gelpi E, Vilaseca I, Sánchez-Valle R, Lladó A, Gaig C, Santamaría J (2014) Neurodegenerative disorder risk in idiopathic REM sleep behavior disorder: Study in 174 patients. PLoS One. 9(2):e89741. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0089741
Postuma RB, Gagnon JF, Vendette M, Fantini ML, Massicotte-Marquez J, Montplaisir J (2009) Quantifying the risk of neurodegenerative disease in idiopathic REM sleep behavior disorder. Neurology, 72(15):1296-1300. PMID: 19109537, PMCID: PMC2828948, DOI: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000340980.19702.6e
Barber TR, Lawton M, Rolinski M, Evetts S, Baig F, Ruffmann C, Gornall A, Klein JC, Lo C, Dennis G, Bandmann O, Quinnell T, Zaiwalla Z, Ben-Shlomo Y, Hu MTM (2017) Prodromal Parkinsonism and Neurodegenerative Risk Stratification in REM Sleep Behavior Disorder. Sleep 40 (8):zsx071. DOI: 10.1093/sleep/zsx071
Schenck CH, Bundlie SR, Mahowald MW (1996) Delayed emergence of a parkinsonian disorder in 38% of 29 older, men initially diagnosed with idiopathic rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder. Neurology 46, 388–393. PMID: 8614500, DOI: 10.1212/wnl.46.2.388
Schenck CH, Boeve BF, Mahowald MW (2013) Delayed emergence of a parkinsonian disorder or dementia in 81% of older men initially diagnosed with idiopathic rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder: A 16-year update on a previously reported series. Sleep Med 14, 744–748. PMID: 23347909, DOI: 10.1016/j.sleep.2012.10.009
Abbott RD, Ross GW, White LR, Tanner CM, Masaki KH, Nelson JS, Curb JD, Petrovitch H (2005) Excessive daytime sleepiness and subsequent development of Parkinson disease. Neurology 65, 1442–1446. PMID: 16275833, DOI: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000183056.89590.0d
Gao J, Huang X, Park Y, Hollenbeck A, Blair A, Schatzkin A, Chen H (2011) Daytime Napping, Nighttime Sleeping, and Parkinson Disease. Am J Epidemiol 173, 1032–1038.PMID: 21402730, PMCID: PMC3121222, DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwq478
Mena-Segovia J, Bolam JP (2017) Rethinking the Pedunculopontine Nucleus: From Cellular Organization to Function. Neuron 94, 7–18. PMID: 28384477, DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2017.02.027
Mena-Segovia J (2016) Structural and functional considerations of the cholinergic brainstem. J Neural Transm 123, 731–736. PMID: 26945862, DOI: 10.1007/s00702-016-1530-9
Armstrong DM, Saper CB, Levey AI, Wainer BH, Terry RD (1983) Distribution of cholinergic neurons in rat brain: Demonstrated by the immunocytochemical localization of choline acetyltransferase. J Comp Neurol 216, 53–68.
Ford B, Holmes CJ, Mainville L, Jones BE (1995) GABAergic neurons in the rat pontomesencephalic tegmentum: Codistribution with cholinergic and other tegmental neurons projecting to the posterior lateral hypothalamus. J Comp Neurol. 363(2):177-96. DOI: 10.1002/cne.903630203
Martinez-Gonzalez C, Bolam JP, Mena-Segovia J (2011) Topographical Organization of the Pedunculopontine Nucleus. Front Neuroanat 5:22. DOI:10.3389/fnana.2011.00022.
Van Dort CJ, Zachs DP, Kenny JD, Zheng S, Goldblum RR, Gelwan N a, Ramos DM, Nolan MA, Wang K, Weng F-J, Lin Y, Wilson M a, Brown EN (2015) Optogenetic activation of cholinergic neurons in the PPT or LDT induces REM sleep. Proc Natl Acad Sci 112, 584–589. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1423136112
Zweig RM, Jankel WR, Hedreen JC, Mayeux R, Price DL (1989) The pedunculopontine nucleus in Parkinson’s disease. Ann Neurol 26, 41–46.
Braak H, Del Tredici K, Rüb U, De Vos RAI, Jansen Steur ENH, Braak E (2003) Staging of brain pathology related to sporadic Parkinson’s disease. Neurobiol Aging 24, 197–211.
Spillantini MG, Crowther RA, Jakes R, Hasegawa M, Goedert M (1998) alpha-Synuclein in filamentous inclusions of Lewy bodies from Parkinson’s disease and dementia with lewy bodies. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 95(11):6469-73. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.95.11.6469.
Recasens A, Dehay B (2014) Alpha-synuclein spreading in Parkinson's disease. Front Neuroanat 8:159.doi: 10.3389/fnana.2014.00159. eCollection 2014.
Deschenes, C. L. and McCurry SM (2009) Current treatments for sleep disturbances in individuals with dementia. Curr Psychiatry Rep 11, 20–26.
Dos Santos AB, Skaanning LK, Mikkelsen E, Romero-Leguizamón CR, Kristensen MP, Klein AB, Thaneshwaran S, Langkilde AE, Kohlmeier KA (2021) α-Synuclein Responses in the Laterodorsal Tegmentum, the Pedunculopontine Tegmentum, and the Substantia Nigra: Implications for Early Appearance of Sleep Disorders in Parkinson’s Disease. J Parkinsons Dis 11, 1773–1790.
Burré J (2015) The Synaptic Function of α-Synuclein. J Parkinsons Dis 5, 699–713.
Guo JL, Lee VMY (2014) Cell-to-cell transmission of pathogenic proteins in neurodegenerative diseases. Nat Med. 20(2):130-8.doi: 10.1038/nm.3457
Bousset L, Pieri L, Ruiz-Arlandis G, Gath J, Jensen PH, Habenstein B, Madiona K, Olieric V, Böckmann A, Meier BH, Melki R (2013) Structural and functional characterization of two alpha-synuclein strains. Nat Commun. 4:2575. doi: 10.1038/ncomms3575
Peelaerts W, Bousset L, Van Der Perren A, Moskalyuk A, Pulizzi R, Giugliano M, Van Den Haute C, Melki R, Baekelandt V (2015) α-Synuclein strains cause distinct synucleinopathies after local and systemic administration. Nature. 522(7556):340-4.doi: 10.1038/nature14547. Epub 2015 Jun 10
Angelova PR, Ludtmann MHR, Horrocks MH, Negoda A, Cremades N, Klenerman D, Dobson CM, Wood NW, Pavlov E V., Gandhi S, Abramov AY (2016) Ca 2+ is a key factor in α-synuclein-induced neurotoxicity. J Cell Sci 129, 1792–1801.
Deas E, Cremades N, Angelova PR, Ludtmann MHR, Yao Z, Chen S, Horrocks MH, Banushi B, Little D, Devine MJ, Gissen P, Klenerman D, Dobson CM, Wood NW, Gandhi S, Abramov AY (2016) Alpha-Synuclein Oligomers Interact with Metal Ions to Induce Oxidative Stress and Neuronal Death in Parkinson’s Disease. Antioxid Redox Signal 24, 376–391.
Thakur P, Breger LS, Lundblad M, Wan OW, Mattsson B, Luk KC, Lee VMY, Trojanowski JQ, Björklund A (2017) Modeling Parkinson’s disease pathology by combination of fibril seeds and α-synuclein overexpression in the rat brain. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 114(39):E8284-E8293.doi: 10.1073/pnas.1710442114
Giehm L, Svergun DI, Otzen DE, Vestergaard B (2011) Low-resolution structure of a vesicle disrupting α-synuclein oligomer that accumulates during fibrillation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 108, 3246–3251.
van Maarschalkerweerd A, Vetri V, Langkilde AE, Foderà V, Vestergaard B (2014) Protein/Lipid Coaggregates are Formed During α-Synuclein-Induced Disruption of Lipid Bilayers. Biomacromolecules 15, 3643–3654.
Skamris T, Marasini C, Madsen KL, Foderà V, Vestergaard B (2019) Early Stage Alpha-Synuclein Amyloid Fibrils are Reservoirs of Membrane-Binding Species. Sci Rep 9, 1733.
Sepulveda FJ, Parodi J, Peoples RW, Opazo C, Aguayo LG (2010) Synaptotoxicity of Alzheimer beta amyloid can be explained by its membrane perforating property. PLoS One. 5(7):e11820.doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0011820
Pacheco CR, Morales CN, Ramírez AE, Muñoz FJ, Gallegos SS, Caviedes PA, Aguayo LG, Opazo CM (2015) Extracellular α-synuclein alters synaptic transmission in brain neurons by perforating the neuronal plasma membrane. J Neurochem. 132(6):731-41. doi: 10.1111/jnc.13060
Ipsen TH, Polli FS, Kohlmeier KA (2018) Calcium rises induced by AMPA and nicotine receptors in the ventral tegmental area show differences in mouse brain slices prenatally exposed to nicotine. Dev Neurobiol 78, 828–848.
Veleanu M, Axen TE, Kristensen MP, Kohlmeier KA (2016) Comparison of bNOS and chat immunohistochemistry in the laterodorsal tegmentum (LDT) and the pedunculopontine tegmentum (PPT) of the mouse from brain slices prepared for electrophysiology. J Neurosci Methods 263, 23–35.
Surguchev A, Surguchov A (2015) Effect of α-synuclein on membrane permeability and synaptic transmission: a clue to neurodegeneration? J Neurochem 132, 619–621.
Tsigelny IF, Sharikov Y, Wrasidlo W, Gonzalez T, Desplats PA, Crews L, Spencer B, Masliah E (2012) Role of α-synuclein penetration into the membrane in the mechanisms of oligomer pore formation. FEBS J. 279(6):1000-13. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-4658.2012.08489.x
Betzer C, Lassen LB, Olsen A, Kofoed RH, Reimer L, Gregersen E, Zheng J, Calì T, Gai W, Chen T, Moeller A, Brini M, Fu Y, Halliday G, Brudek T, Aznar S, Pakkenberg B, Andersen JP, Jensen PH (2018) Alpha‐synuclein aggregates activate calcium pump SERCA leading to calcium dysregulation. EMBO Rep 19, e44617.
Leandrou E, Emmanouilidou E, Vekrellis K (2019) Voltage-Gated Calcium Channels and α-Synuclein: Implications in Parkinson’s Disease. Front Mol Neurosci 12, 237.
Pellistri F, Bucciantini M, Relini A, Nosi D, Gliozzi A, Robello M, Stefani M (2008) Nonspecific Interaction of Prefibrillar Amyloid Aggregates with Glutamatergic Receptors Results in Ca2+ Increase in Primary Neuronal Cells. J Biol Chem 283, 29950–29960.
Diogenes MJ, Dias RB, Rombo DM, Vicente Miranda H, Maiolino F, Guerreiro P, Nasstrom T, Franquelim HG, Oliveira LMA, Castanho MARB, Lannfelt L, Bergstrom J, Ingelsson M, Quintas A, Sebastiao AM, Lopes L V., Outeiro TF (2012) Extracellular Alpha-Synuclein Oligomers Modulate Synaptic Transmission and Impair LTP Via NMDA-Receptor Activation. J Neurosci 32, 11750–11762.
Jae Kim S, Yul Kim S, Na YS, Lee HJ, Chung KC, Baik JH (2006) α-Synuclein enhances dopamine D2 receptor signaling. Brain Res. 1124(1):5-9. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2006.09.079
Aman TK, Shen RY, Haj-Dahmane S (2007) D2-like dopamine receptors depolarize dorsal raphe serotonin neurons through the activation of nonselective cationic conductance. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 320(1):376-85.doi: 10.1124/jpet.106.111690
Feng LR, Federoff HJ, Vicini S, Maguire-Zeiss KA (2010) α-Synuclein mediates alterations in membrane conductance: A potential role for α-synuclein oligomers in cell vulnerability. Eur J Neurosci. 32(1):10-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2010.07266.x
Schmidt F, Levin J, Kamp F, Kretzschmar H, Giese A, Bötzel K (2012) Single-Channel Electrophysiology Reveals a Distinct and Uniform Pore Complex Formed by α-Synuclein Oligomers in Lipid Membranes. PLoS One 7, e42545.
Shrivastava AN, Redeker V, Fritz N, Pieri L, Almeida LG, Spolidoro M, Liebmann T, Bousset L, Renner M, Léna C, Aperia A, Melki R, Triller A (2015) α‐synuclein assemblies sequester neuronal α3‐Na + /K + ‐ ATP ase and impair Na + gradient . EMBO J. 34(19):2408-23.doi: 10.15252/embj.201591397
Ronzitti G, Bucci G, Emanuele M, Leo D, Sotnikova TD, Mus, LV, Soubrane CH, Dallas ML, Thalhammer A, Cingolani LA, Mochida S, Gainetdinov RR, Stephens G, Chieregatti E (2014) Exogenous α-synuclein decreases raft partitioning of CAv2.2 channels inducing dopamine release. J Neurosci. 34(32):10603-10615; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0608-14.2014
Ahn KJ, Paik SR, Chung KC, Kim J (2006) Amino acid sequence motifs and mechanistic features of the membrane translocation of α-synuclein. J Neurochem. 97(1):265-79. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-4159.2006.03731.x
Yin J, Han J, Zhang C, Ma QL, Li X, Cheng F, Liu G, Li Y, Uéda K, Chan P, Yu S (2011) C-terminal part of α-synuclein mediates its activity in promoting proliferation of dopaminergic cells. J Neural Transm. 118(8):1155-64.doi: 10.1007/s00702-011-0592-y
Hassink GC, Raiss CC, Segers-Nolten IMJ, Van Wezel RJA, Subramaniam V, Le Feber J, Claessens MMAE (2018) Exogenous α-synuclein hinders synaptic communication in cultured cortical primary rat neurons. PLoS One. 13(3):e0193763.doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0193763
PREPRINT Kowalski A, Betzer C, Larsen ST, Gregersen E, Bermejo MC, Jensen PH, Nissen P (2022) Monomeric α-Synuclein activates the Plasma Membrane Calcium Pump. bioRxiv 2022.02.21.481193.
Choi DW (1992) Excitotoxic cell death. J Neurobiol 23, 1261–1276.
Lau A, Tymianski M (2010) Glutamate receptors, neurotoxicity and neurodegeneration. Pflügers Arch - Eur J Physiol 460, 525–542.
Vergun O, Keelan J, Khodorov BI, Duchen MR (1999) Glutamate-induced mitochondrial depolarisation and perturbation of calcium homeostasis in cultured rat hippocampal neurones. J Physiol 519, 451–466.
Vergun O, Sobolevsky AI, Yelshansky M V., Keelan J, Khodorov BI, Duchen MR (2001) Exploration of the role of reactive oxygen species in glutamate neurotoxicity in rat hippocampal neurones in culture. J Physiol 531, 147–163.
Stout AK, Raphael HM, Kanterewicz BI, Klann E, Reynolds IJ (1998) Glutamate-induced neuron death requires mitochondrial calcium uptake. Nat Neurosci. 1(5):366-73. doi: 10.1038/1577
Stout AK, Reynolds IJ (1999) High-affinity calcium indicators underestimate increases in intracellular calcium concentrations associated with excitotoxic glutamate stimulations. Neuroscience. 89(1):91-100. doi: 10.1016/s0306-4522(98)00441-2
Abramov AY, Duchen MR (2010) Impaired mitochondrial bioenergetics determines glutamate-induced delayed calcium deregulation in neurons. Biochim Biophys Acta - Gen Subj. 1800(3):297-304. doi: 10.1016/j.bbagen.2009.08.002
Büttner S, Faes L, Reichelt WN, Broeskamp F, Habernig L, Benke S, Kourtis N, Ruli D, Carmona-Gutierrez D, Eisenberg T, D’Hooge P, Ghillebert R, Franssens V, Harger A, Pieber TR, Freudenberger P, Kroemer G, Sigrist SJ, Winderickx J, Callewaert G, Tavernarakis N, Madeo F (2013) The Ca 2+ /Mn 2+ ion-pump PMR1 links elevation of cytosolic Ca 2+ levels to -synuclein toxicity in Parkinson’s disease models. Cell Death Differ. 20(3):465-77. doi: 10.1038/cdd.2012.142
Volpicelli-Daley LA, Luk KC, Patel TP, Tanik SA, Riddle DM, Stieber A, Meaney DF, Trojanowski JQ, Lee VM-Y (2011) Exogenous α-Synuclein Fibrils Induce Lewy Body Pathology Leading to Synaptic Dysfunction and Neuron Death. Neuron 72, 57–71.
Humpel C (2015) Organotypic brain slice cultures: A review. Neuroscience. 305:86-98. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2015.07.086
Kaufmann TJ, Harrison PM, Richardson MJE, Pinheiro TJT, Wall MJ (2016) Intracellular soluble α-synuclein oligomers reduce pyramidal cell excitability. J Physiol 594, 2751–2772.
Braak H, Ghebremedhin E, Rüb U, Bratzke H, Del Tredici K (2004) Stages in the development of Parkinson’s disease-related pathology. Cell Tissue Res 318, 121–134.
Mollenhauer B, Cullen V, Kahn I, Krastins B, Outeiro TF, Pepivani I, Ng J, Schulz-Schaeffer W, Kretzschmar HA, McLean PJ, Trenkwalder C, Sarracino DA, VonSattel J-P, Locascio JJ, El-Agnaf OMA, Schlossmacher MG (2008) Direct quantification of CSF α-synuclein by ELISA and first cross-sectional study in patients with neurodegeneration. Exp Neurol 213, 315–325.
Wang Y, Shi M, Chung KA, Zabetian CP, Leverenz JB, Berg D, Srulijes K, Trojanowski JQ, Lee VM-Y, Siderowf AD, Hurtig H, Litvan I, Schiess MC, Peskind ER, Masuda M, Hasegawa M, Lin X, Pan C, Galasko D, Goldstein DS, Jensen PH, Yang H, Cain KC, Zhang J (2012) Phosphorylated -Synuclein in Parkinson’s Disease. Sci Transl Med 4, 121ra20. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3002566
Schenck CH (2016) Expanded Insights into Idiopathic REM Sleep Behavior Disorder. Sleep 39, 7–9.
Karachi C, Grabli D, Bernard FA, Tandé D, Wattiez N, Belaid H, Bardinet E, Prigent A, Nothacker HP, Hunot S, Hartmann A, Lehéricy S, Hirsch EC, François C (2010) Cholinergic mesencephalic neurons are involved in gait and postural disorders in Parkinson disease. J Clin Invest. 120(8):2745-54.doi: 10.1172/JCI42642
Gilman S, Koeppe RA, Nan B, Wang CN, Wang X, Junck L, Chervin RD, Consens F, Bhaumik A (2010) Cerebral cortical and subcortical cholinergic deficits in parkinsonian syndromes. Neurology 74, 1416–1423.
Müller MLTM, Bohnen NI (2013) Cholinergic dysfunction in parkinson’s disease. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep. 13(9):377. doi: 10.1007/s11910-013-0377-9
Postuma RB, Aarsland D, Barone P, Burn DJ, Hawkes CH, Oertel W, Ziemssen T (2012) Identifying prodromal Parkinson’s disease: Pre-Motor disorders in Parkinson’s disease. Mov Disord 27, 617–626.

Download PDF

Editorial decision: Major Revision
31 May, 2022
Reviews received at journal
03 May, 2022
Reviewers invited by journal
01 May, 2022
Editor assigned by journal
22 Apr, 2022
First submitted to journal
21 Apr, 2022

You are reading this latest preprint version

Sleep-controlling neurons are sensitive and vulnerable to multiple forms of α-synuclein: implications for the early appearance of sleeping disorders in α-synucleinopathies

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Materials And Methods

Preparation of the different forms of α-syn

LDT and PPT Brain Slices

Compounds applied to Brain Slices:

Results

4 α-syn alters intracellular calcium in sleep-controlling nuclei

6.1 Cell Death

6.2 α-syn_M associates with the membrane of LDT neurons

6.3 Membrane perforations are not induced by α-syn_M

6.4 α-syn_M induced depolarization of the membrane due to direct actions on LDT postsynaptic neurons

6.7 GPCR-mediated transmission

7.0 α-syn_M induces calcium responses directly in postsynaptic neurons which involve G-protein mediated signaling

7.1 α-syn_M induced membrane effect and calcium rise in single-cell via GPCR-mediated mechanism

Discussion

Abbreviations

Declarations

References

Status:

Version 1

Sleep-controlling neurons are sensitive and vulnerable to multiple forms of α-synuclein: implications for the early appearance of sleeping disorders in α-synucleinopathies

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Materials And Methods

Preparation of the different forms of α-syn

LDT and PPT Brain Slices

Compounds applied to Brain Slices:

Results

4 α-syn alters intracellular calcium in sleep-controlling nuclei

6.1 Cell Death

6.2 α-synM associates with the membrane of LDT neurons

6.3 Membrane perforations are not induced by α-synM

6.4 α-synM induced depolarization of the membrane due to direct actions on LDT postsynaptic neurons

6.7 GPCR-mediated transmission

7.0 α-synM induces calcium responses directly in postsynaptic neurons which involve G-protein mediated signaling

7.1 α-synM induced membrane effect and calcium rise in single-cell via GPCR-mediated mechanism

Discussion

Abbreviations

Declarations

References

Status:

Version 1

6.2 α-syn_M associates with the membrane of LDT neurons

6.3 Membrane perforations are not induced by α-syn_M

6.4 α-syn_M induced depolarization of the membrane due to direct actions on LDT postsynaptic neurons

7.0 α-syn_M induces calcium responses directly in postsynaptic neurons which involve G-protein mediated signaling

7.1 α-syn_M induced membrane effect and calcium rise in single-cell via GPCR-mediated mechanism