Search

The ability of neurons to process and store salient environmental features underlies information processing in the brain. Long-term information storage requires synaptic plasticity and regulation of gene expression. While distinct patterns of activity have been linked to synaptic plasticity, their impact on immediate early gene (IEG) expression remains poorly understood. The activity regulated cytoskeleton associated (Arc) gene has received wide attention as an IEG critical for long-term synaptic plasticity and memory. Yet, to date, the transcriptional dynamics of Arc in response to compartment and input-specific activity is unclear. By developing a knock-in mouse to fluorescently tag Arc alleles, we studied real-time transcription dynamics after stimulation of dentate granule cells (GCs) in acute hippocampal slices. To our surprise, we found that Arc transcription displayed distinct temporal kinetics depending on the activation of excitatory inputs that convey functionally distinct information, i.e., medial and lateral perforant paths (MPP and LPP, respectively). Moreover, the transcriptional dynamics of Arc after synaptic stimulation was similar to direct activation of GCs, although the contribution of ionotropic glutamate receptors, L-type voltage-gated calcium channel, and the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) differed. Specifically, we observed an ER-mediated synapse-to-nucleus signal that supported elevations in nuclear calcium and, thereby, rapid induction of Arc transcription following MPP stimulation. By delving into the complex excitation-transcription coupling for Arc, our findings highlight how different synaptic inputs may encode information by modulating transcription dynamics of an IEG linked to learning and memory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

SARS-CoV-2 infection remains a global burden. Despite intensive research, the mechanism and dynamics of early viral replication are not completely understood, such as the kinetics of the formation of genomic RNA (gRNA), sub-genomic RNA (sgRNA), and replication centers/organelles (ROs). We employed single-molecule RNA-fluorescence in situ hybridization (smRNA-FISH) to simultaneously detect viral gRNA and sgRNA and immunofluorescence to detect nsp3 protein, a marker for the formation of RO, and carried out a time-course analysis. We found that single molecules of gRNA are visible within the cytoplasm at 30 min post infection (p.i.). Starting from 2 h p.i., most of the viral RNA existed in clusters/speckles, some of which were surrounded by single molecules of sgRNA. These speckles associated with nsp3 protein starting at 3 h p.i., indicating that these were precursors to ROs. Furthermore, RNA replication was asynchronous, as cells with RNA at all stages of replication were found at any given time point. Our probes detected the SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern, and also suggested that the BA.1 strain exhibited a slower rate of replication kinetics than the WA1 strain. Our results provide insights into the kinetics of SARS-CoV-2 early post-entry events, which will facilitate identification of new therapeutic targets for early-stage replication to combat COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

RNA binding proteins (RBPs) regulate nearly all post-transcriptional processes within cells. To fully understand RBP function, it is essential to identify their in vivo targets. Standard techniques for profiling RBP targets, such as crosslinking immunoprecipitation (CLIP) and its variants, are limited or suboptimal in some situations, e.g. when compatible antibodies are not available and when dealing with small cell populations such as neuronal subtypes and primary stem cells. This review summarizes and compares several genetic approaches recently designed to identify RBP targets in such circumstances. TRIBE (targets of RNA binding proteins identified by editing), RNA tagging, and STAMP (surveying targets by APOBEC-mediated profiling) are new genetic tools useful for the study of post-transcriptional regulation and RBP identification. We describe the underlying RNA base editing technology, recent applications, and therapeutic implications. RNA editing regulates the splicing, coding, and metabolic features of RNAs. In this review, Xu et al. highlight how RNA editing enzymes are being used to identify RNA binding protein targets with high sensitivity and specificity and the implications of these technological advances for RNA editing-based therapeutics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Full-length mRNAs transfer between adjacent mammalian cells via direct cell-to-cell connections called tunneling nanotubes (TNTs). However, the extent of mRNA transfer at the transcriptome-wide level (the 'transferome') is unknown. Here, we analyzed the transferome in an in vitro human-mouse cell co-culture model using RNA-sequencing. We found that mRNA transfer is non-selective, prevalent across the human transcriptome, and that the amount of transfer to mouse embryonic fibroblasts (MEFs) strongly correlates with the endogenous level of gene expression in donor human breast cancer cells. Typically,<1% of endogenous mRNAs undergo transfer. Non-selective, expression-dependent RNA transfer was further validated using synthetic reporters. RNA transfer appears contact-dependent via TNTs, as exemplified for several mRNAs. Notably, significant differential changes in the native MEF transcriptome were observed in response to co-culture, including the upregulation of multiple cancer and cancer-associated fibroblast-related genes and pathways. Together, these results lead us to suggest that TNT-mediated RNA transfer could be a phenomenon of physiological importance under both normal and pathogenic conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Molecular profiles of neurons influence neural development and function but bridging the gap between genes, circuits, and behavior has been very difficult. Here we used single cell RNAseq to generate a complete gene expression atlas of the Drosophila larval central nervous system composed of 131,077 single cells across three developmental stages (1 h, 24 h and 48 h after hatching). We identify 67 distinct cell clusters based on the patterns of gene expression. These include 31 functional mature larval neuron clusters, 1 ring gland cluster, 8 glial clusters, 6 neural precursor clusters, and 13 developing immature adult neuron clusters. Some clusters are present across all stages of larval development, while others are stage specific (such as developing adult neurons). We identify genes that are differentially expressed in each cluster, as well as genes that are differentially expressed at distinct stages of larval life. These differentially expressed genes provide promising candidates for regulating the function of specific neuronal and glial types in the larval nervous system, or the specification and differentiation of adult neurons. The cell transcriptome Atlas of the Drosophila larval nervous system is a valuable resource for developmental biology and systems neuroscience and provides a basis for elucidating how genes regulate neural development and function. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

R370 --> 787.3 --> MS2 system is widely used to image mRNAs in living cells, where the spatial distribution of mRNAs regulates various aspects of cell biology, including translation and RNA decay. To image an mRNA of interest, the mRNA's 3' untranslated region (UTR) is genetically fused with an array of MS2 stem loops, which recruit fluorescently labeled MS2 coat proteins. And each mRNA molecule appears as a diffraction‐limited spot under fluorescent microscope. Here, we report that the MS2 system renders some of the tagged mRNAs less stable and being degraded by the nonsense‐mediated mRNA decay (NMD) pathway. To resolve this issue, we improved the MS2 system by fusing the MS2 coat protein with the translation termination factor eRF3, which protects the mRNA from being degraded through the NMD pathway. Our improved MS2 system faithfully reports the mRNAs' stability and localization, and will see wide applications in future studies of RNA biology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Activity-dependent expression of immediate early genes (IEGs) is critical for long-term synaptic remodeling and memory. It remains unknown how IEGs are maintained for memory despite rapid transcript and protein turnover. To address this conundrum, we monitored Arc , an IEG essential for memory consolidation. Using a knockin mouse where endogenous Arc alleles were fluorescently tagged, we performed real-time imaging of Arc mRNA dynamics in individual neurons in cultures and brain tissue. Unexpectedly, a single burst stimulation was sufficient to induce cycles of transcriptional reactivation in the same neuron. Subsequent transcription cycles required translation, whereby new Arc proteins engaged in autoregulatory positive feedback to reinduce transcription. The ensuing Arc mRNAs preferentially localized at sites marked by previous Arc protein, assembling a "hotspot" of translation, and consolidating "hubs" of dendritic Arc. These cycles of transcription-translation coupling sustain protein expression and provide a mechanism by which a short-lived event may support long-term memory. [Display omitted] • Reactivation of transcription drives cycling of the Arc gene in individual neurons • Feedback from new proteins reinduces Arc transcription in the next cycle • Arc mRNAs from later cycles localize to sites marked with previous Arc protein • Repetitive translation in hotspots consolidates dendritic Arc in selective hubs How are short-lived mRNAs and proteins maintained over time to impact long-term memory? Das et al. report that repetitive cycles of transcription and local translation of the immediate early gene Arc amplify a single burst stimulation over time to assemble Arc protein hubs, revealing a molecular mechanism that supports memory consolidation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cortex G: Cortex glia, Enshea G: Ensheathing glia, Astro G: Astrocyte glia, Surf G: Surface glia The original article has been corrected. A single-cell transcriptomic atlas of complete insect nervous systems across multiple life stages. [Extracted from the article]

Learning and memory rely on long-lasting, synapse-specific modifications. Although postsynaptic forms of plasticity typically require local protein synthesis, whether and how local protein synthesis contributes to presynaptic changes remain unclear. Here, we examined the mouse hippocampal mossy fiber (MF)-CA3 synapse, which expresses both structural and functional presynaptic plasticity and contains presynaptic fragile X messenger ribonucleoprotein (FMRP), an RNA-binding protein involved in postsynaptic protein-synthesis-dependent plasticity. We report that MF boutons contain ribosomes and synthesize protein locally. The long-term potentiation of MF-CA3 synaptic transmission (MF-LTP) was associated with the translation-dependent enlargement of MF boutons. Remarkably, increasing in vitro or in vivo MF activity enhanced the protein synthesis in MFs. Moreover, the deletion of presynaptic FMRP blocked structural and functional MF-LTP, suggesting that FMRP is a critical regulator of presynaptic MF plasticity. Thus, presynaptic FMRP and protein synthesis dynamically control presynaptic structure and function in the mature mammalian brain. [Display omitted] • Mossy fiber boutons (MFBs) contain ribosomes and synthesize protein locally • Local presynaptic translation is increased by in vitro and in vivo GC activity • MFB structural plasticity relies on de novo protein synthesis • Presynaptic FMRP is required for MF-CA3 structural and functional plasticity Monday, Kharod et al. report that neuronal activity regulates presynaptic FMRP function and the local synthesis of β-actin. In vitro activity and in vivo experience engage the FMRP-dependent spatiotemporal regulation of protein synthesis that is required for presynaptic remodeling and long-term changes in neurotransmitter release. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the discussion on DNA surveillance pathway using the biomechanical link between supercoiling and transcription for homeostatically amplifying transcriptional fluctuations including differentiation of embryonic stem cells into neural ectodermal cells.