Faculty Opinions recommendation of Blue Light Increases Neuronal Activity-Regulated Gene Expression in the Absence of Optogenetic Proteins.

Author(s):  
M Foster Olive
Author(s):  
Lon S. Kaufman ◽  
Kathleen A. Marrs ◽  
Katherine M. F. Warpeha ◽  
Jie Gao ◽  
Keshab Bhattacharya ◽  
...  

Neuron ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 79 (6) ◽  
pp. 1109-1122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrii Rudenko ◽  
Meelad M. Dawlaty ◽  
Jinsoo Seo ◽  
Albert W. Cheng ◽  
Jia Meng ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelsey M. Tyssowski ◽  
Jesse M. Gray

Optogenetics is widely used to control diverse cellular functions with light, requiring experimenters to expose cells to bright light. Because extended exposure to visible light can be toxic to cells, it is important to characterize the effects of light stimulation on cellular function in the absence of exogenous optogenetic proteins. Here we exposed cultured mouse cortical neurons that did not express optogenetic proteins to several hours of flashing blue, red, or green light. We found that exposing neurons to as short as one hour of blue, but not red or green, light results in the induction of neuronal-activity-regulated genes without inducing neuronal activity. Our findings suggest blue light stimulation is ill-suited to long-term optogenetic experiments, especially those that measure transcription.Significance StatementOptogenetics is widely used to control cellular functions using light. In neuroscience, channelrhodopsins, exogenous light-sensitive channels, are used to achieve light-dependent control of neuronal firing. This optogenetic control of neuronal firing requires exposing neurons to high-powered light. We ask how this light exposure, in the absence of channelrhodopsin, affects the expression of neuronal-activity-regulated genes, i.e., the genes that are transcribed in response to neuronal stimuli. Surprisingly, we find that neurons without channelrhodopsin express neuronal-activity-regulated genes in response to as short as an hour of blue, but not red or green, light exposure. These findings suggest that experimenters wishing to achieve longer-term (an hour or more) optogenetic control over neuronal firing should avoid using systems that require blue light.


2006 ◽  
Vol 73 ◽  
pp. 85-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard J. Reece ◽  
Laila Beynon ◽  
Stacey Holden ◽  
Amanda D. Hughes ◽  
Karine Rébora ◽  
...  

The recognition of changes in environmental conditions, and the ability to adapt to these changes, is essential for the viability of cells. There are numerous well characterized systems by which the presence or absence of an individual metabolite may be recognized by a cell. However, the recognition of a metabolite is just one step in a process that often results in changes in the expression of whole sets of genes required to respond to that metabolite. In higher eukaryotes, the signalling pathway between metabolite recognition and transcriptional control can be complex. Recent evidence from the relatively simple eukaryote yeast suggests that complex signalling pathways may be circumvented through the direct interaction between individual metabolites and regulators of RNA polymerase II-mediated transcription. Biochemical and structural analyses are beginning to unravel these elegant genetic control elements.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Calin-Jageman ◽  
Irina Calin-Jageman ◽  
Tania Rosiles ◽  
Melissa Nguyen ◽  
Annette Garcia ◽  
...  

[[This is a Stage 1 Registered Report manuscript. The project was submitted for review to eNeuro. Upon revision and acceptance, this version of the manuscript was pre-registered on the OSF (9/11/2019, https://osf.io/fqh8j) (but due to an oversight not posted as a preprint until July 2020). A Stage 2 manuscript is now posted as a pre-print (https://psyarxiv.com/h59jv) and is under review at eNeuro. A link to the final Stage 2 manuscript will be added when available.]]There is fundamental debate about the nature of forgetting: some have argued that it represents the decay of the memory trace, others that the memory trace persists but becomes inaccessible due to retrieval failure. These different accounts of forgetting make different predictions about savings memory, the rapid re-learning of seemingly forgotten information. If forgetting is due to decay then savings requires re-encoding and should thus involve the same mechanisms as initial learning. If forgetting is due to retrieval-failure then savings should be mechanistically distinct from encoding. In this registered report we conducted a pre-registered and rigorous test between these accounts of forgetting. Specifically, we used microarray to characterize the transcriptional correlates of a new memory (1 day from training), a forgotten memory (8 days from training), and a savings memory (8 days from training but with a reminder on day 7 to evoke a long-term savings memory) for sensitization in Aplysia californica (n = 8 samples/group). We find that the transcriptional correlates of savings are [highly similar / somewhat similar / unique] relative to new (1-day-old) memories. Specifically, savings memory and a new memory share [X] of [Y] regulated transcripts, show [strong / moderate / weak] similarity in sets of regulated transcripts, and show [r] correlation in regulated gene expression, which is [substantially / somewhat / not at all] stronger than at forgetting. Overall, our results suggest that forgetting represents [decay / retrieval-failure / mixed mechanisms].


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document