Image_3_Detection of Synaptic Proteins in Microglia by Flow Cytometry.jpeg
A growing body of evidence indicates that microglia actively remove synapses in vivo, thereby playing a key role in synaptic refinement and modulation of brain connectivity. This phenomenon was mainly investigated in immunofluorescence staining and confocal microscopy. However, a quantification of synaptic material in microglia using these techniques is extremely time-consuming and labor-intensive. To address this issue, we aimed to quantify synaptic proteins in microglia using flow cytometry. With this approach, we first showed that microglia from the healthy adult mouse brain contain a detectable level of VGLUT1 protein. Next, we found more than two-fold increased VGLUT1 immunoreactivity in microglia from the developing brain (P15) as compared to adult microglia. These data indicate that microglia-mediated synaptic pruning mostly occurs during the brain developmental period. We then quantified the VGLUT1 staining in microglia in two transgenic models characterized by pathological microglia-mediated synaptic pruning. In the 5xFAD mouse model of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) microglia exhibited a significant increase in VGLUT1 immunoreactivity before the onset of amyloid pathology. Moreover, conditional deletion of TDP-43 in microglia, which causes a hyper-phagocytic phenotype associated with synaptic loss, also resulted in increased VGLUT1 immunoreactivity within microglia. This work provides a quantitative assessment of synaptic proteins in microglia, under homeostasis, and in mouse models of disease.
History
References
- https://doi.org//10.1038/nn.3560
- https://doi.org//10.1002/glia.22966
- https://doi.org//10.1007/bf00325030
- https://doi.org//10.4049/jimmunol.1900821
- https://doi.org//10.1038/nn1472
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.cell.2018.07.049
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.immuni.2018.04.016
- https://doi.org//10.1126/science.1194637
- https://doi.org//10.1101/cshperspect.a020537
- https://doi.org//10.1038/ni.3423
- https://doi.org//10.1038/nn.3531
- https://doi.org//10.1038/nn1997
- https://doi.org//10.1126/science.aad8373
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.neuron.2012.12.023
- https://doi.org//10.1038/nn.3318
- https://doi.org//10.1038/s41583-019-0201-x
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.neuron.2018.09.017
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.cell.2016.04.001
- https://doi.org//10.1038/ncomms12540
- https://doi.org//10.1038/nrn.2017.110
- https://doi.org//10.1126/science
- https://doi.org//10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1202-06.2006
- https://doi.org//10.1126/science.1202529
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.neuron.2017.05.037
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.cell.2013.11.030
- https://doi.org//10.1038/nm.4397
- https://doi.org//10.7554/eLife.15224
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.neuron.2012.03.026
- https://doi.org//10.1126/science.1219179
- https://doi.org//10.1126/scitranslmed.aaf6295
- https://doi.org//10.3389/fncel.2013.00006
- https://doi.org//10.1038/ncomms10905
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.celrep.2014.07.042
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.cell.2007.10.036
- https://doi.org//10.1038/s41593-019-0514-0
- https://doi.org//10.1038/npp.2009.115
- https://doi.org//10.1371/journal.pbio.1000527
- https://doi.org//10.1038/nn.3358
- https://doi.org//10.1126/science.aal3589
- https://doi.org//10.1038/nature18283
- https://doi.org//10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4363-08.2009
- https://doi.org//10.1038/s41467-018-03566-5
- https://doi.org//10.1002/glia.22727
- https://doi.org//10.1073/pnas.0401764101
- https://doi.org//10.1038/nn.3641
- https://doi.org//10.3389/fncel.2018.00473
CC BY 4.0