Integration of Tmc1/2 into the mechanotransduction complex in zebrafish hair cells is regulated by Transmembrane O-methyltransferase (Tomt)

  1. Timothy Erickson
  2. Clive P Morgan
  3. Jennifer Olt
  4. Katherine Hardy
  5. Elisabeth M Busch-Nentwich
  6. Reo Maeda
  7. Rachel Clemens-Grisham
  8. Jocelyn F Krey
  9. Alex V Nechiporuk
  10. Peter G Barr-Gillespie
  11. Walter Marcotti
  12. Teresa Nicolson  Is a corresponding author
  1. Oregon Health and Science University, United States
  2. University of Sheffield, United Kingdom
  3. Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, United Kingdom

Abstract

Transmembrane O-methyltransferase (TOMT / LRTOMT) is responsible for non-syndromic deafness DFNB63. However, the specific defects that lead to hearing loss have not been described. Using a zebrafish model of DFNB63, we show that the auditory and vestibular phenotypes are due to a lack of mechanotransduction (MET) in Tomt-deficient hair cells. GFP-tagged Tomt is enriched in the Golgi of hair cells, suggesting that Tomt might regulate the trafficking of other MET components to the hair bundle. We found that Tmc1/2 proteins are specifically excluded from the hair bundle in tomt mutants, whereas other MET complex proteins can still localize to the bundle. Furthermore, mouse TOMT and TMC1 can directly interact in HEK 293 cells, and this interaction is modulated by His183 in TOMT. Thus, we propose a model of MET complex assembly where Tomt and the Tmcs interact within the secretory pathway to traffic Tmc proteins to the hair bundle.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Timothy Erickson

    Oregon Hearing Research Center and the Vollum Institute, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0910-2535
  2. Clive P Morgan

    Oregon Hearing Research Center and the Vollum Institute, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Jennifer Olt

    Department of Biomedical Science, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Katherine Hardy

    Department of Biomedical Science, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Elisabeth M Busch-Nentwich

    Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6450-744X
  6. Reo Maeda

    Oregon Hearing Research Center and the Vollum Institute, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Rachel Clemens-Grisham

    Oregon Hearing Research Center and the Vollum Institute, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Jocelyn F Krey

    Oregon Hearing Research Center and the Vollum Institute, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Alex V Nechiporuk

    Department of Cell, Developmental and Cancer Biology, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Peter G Barr-Gillespie

    Oregon Hearing Research Center and the Vollum Institute, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9787-5860
  11. Walter Marcotti

    Department of Biomedical Science, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8770-7628
  12. Teresa Nicolson

    Oregon Hearing Research Center and the Vollum Institute, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, United States
    For correspondence
    nicolson@ohsu.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0873-1583

Funding

National Institutes of Health (R01DC013572)

  • Teresa Nicolson

National Institutes of Health (NIH R01 DC013531)

  • Teresa Nicolson

Wellcome Trust (102892)

  • Walter Marcotti

National Institutes of Health (R01DC002368)

  • Peter G Barr-Gillespie

National Institutes of Health (P30DC005983)

  • Peter G Barr-Gillespie

National Institutes of Health (R01DC002368)

  • Alex V Nechiporuk

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Ethics

Animal experimentation: Animal research complied with guidelines stipulated by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committed at Oregon Health and Science University (IP00000100). Electrophysiological recordings from zebrafish larvae were licensed by the Home Office under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 and were approved by the University of Sheffield Ethical Review Committee.

Copyright

© 2017, Erickson et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 2,604
    views
  • 451
    downloads
  • 58
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Timothy Erickson
  2. Clive P Morgan
  3. Jennifer Olt
  4. Katherine Hardy
  5. Elisabeth M Busch-Nentwich
  6. Reo Maeda
  7. Rachel Clemens-Grisham
  8. Jocelyn F Krey
  9. Alex V Nechiporuk
  10. Peter G Barr-Gillespie
  11. Walter Marcotti
  12. Teresa Nicolson
(2017)
Integration of Tmc1/2 into the mechanotransduction complex in zebrafish hair cells is regulated by Transmembrane O-methyltransferase (Tomt)
eLife 6:e28474.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.28474

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.28474

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Masahiro Takigawa, Marta Huelin Gorriz ... Daniel Bendor
    Research Article

    During rest and sleep, memory traces replay in the brain. The dialogue between brain regions during replay is thought to stabilize labile memory traces for long-term storage. However, because replay is an internally-driven, spontaneous phenomenon, it does not have a ground truth - an external reference that can validate whether a memory has truly been replayed. Instead, replay detection is based on the similarity between the sequential neural activity comprising the replay event and the corresponding template of neural activity generated during active locomotion. If the statistical likelihood of observing such a match by chance is sufficiently low, the candidate replay event is inferred to be replaying that specific memory. However, without the ability to evaluate whether replay detection methods are successfully detecting true events and correctly rejecting non-events, the evaluation and comparison of different replay methods is challenging. To circumvent this problem, we present a new framework for evaluating replay, tested using hippocampal neural recordings from rats exploring two novel linear tracks. Using this two-track paradigm, our framework selects replay events based on their temporal fidelity (sequence-based detection), and evaluates the detection performance using each event's track discriminability, where sequenceless decoding across both tracks is used to quantify whether the track replaying is also the most likely track being reactivated.

    1. Neuroscience
    Friedrich Schuessler, Francesca Mastrogiuseppe ... Omri Barak
    Research Article

    The relation between neural activity and behaviorally relevant variables is at the heart of neuroscience research. When strong, this relation is termed a neural representation. There is increasing evidence, however, for partial dissociations between activity in an area and relevant external variables. While many explanations have been proposed, a theoretical framework for the relationship between external and internal variables is lacking. Here, we utilize recurrent neural networks (RNNs) to explore the question of when and how neural dynamics and the network’s output are related from a geometrical point of view. We find that training RNNs can lead to two dynamical regimes: dynamics can either be aligned with the directions that generate output variables, or oblique to them. We show that the choice of readout weight magnitude before training can serve as a control knob between the regimes, similar to recent findings in feedforward networks. These regimes are functionally distinct. Oblique networks are more heterogeneous and suppress noise in their output directions. They are furthermore more robust to perturbations along the output directions. Crucially, the oblique regime is specific to recurrent (but not feedforward) networks, arising from dynamical stability considerations. Finally, we show that tendencies toward the aligned or the oblique regime can be dissociated in neural recordings. Altogether, our results open a new perspective for interpreting neural activity by relating network dynamics and their output.