Abstract

Increased astrocytic Ca2+ signaling has been shown in Alzheimer's disease mouse models, but to date no reports have characterized behaviorally induced astrocytic Ca2+ signaling in such mice. Here, we employ an event-based algorithm to assess astrocytic Ca2+ signals in the neocortex of awake-behaving tg-ArcSwe mice and non-transgenic wildtype littermates while monitoring pupil responses and behavior. We demonstrate an attenuated astrocytic Ca2+ response to locomotion and an uncoupling of pupil responses and astrocytic Ca2+ signaling in 15-months old plaque-bearing mice. Using the genetically encoded fluorescent norepinephrine sensor GRABNE we demonstrate a reduced norepinephrine signaling during spontaneous running and startle responses in the transgenic mice, providing a possible mechanistic underpinning of the observed reduced astrocytic Ca2+ responses. Our data points to a dysfunction in the norepinephrine-astrocyte Ca2+ activity-axis, which may account for some of the cognitive deficits observed in Alzheimer's disease.

Data availability

The numerical data for the statistical analyses in Figures 3-5 are available as Source Data File 1. The complete dataset is available at http://dx.doi.org/10.11582/2021.00100.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Knut Sindre Åbjørsbråten

    Department of Molecular Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Gry HE Skaaraas

    Department of Molecular Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Céline Cunen

    Department of Mathematics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Daniel M Bjørnstad

    Department of Molecular Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Kristin M Binder

    Department of Molecular Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Laura Bojarskaite

    Department of Molecular Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Vidar Jensen

    Department of Molecular Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Lars NG Nilsson

    Department of Pharmacology, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Shreyas B Rao

    Department of Molecular Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Wannan Tang

    Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Gudmund Horn Hermansen

    Department of Mathematics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Erlend A Nagelhus

    Department of Pharmacology, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Ole Petter Ottersen

    Office of the President, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Reidun Torp

    Department of Molecular Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Rune Enger

    Department of Molecular Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
    For correspondence
    rune.enger@medisin.uio.no
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9418-7117

Funding

Norges Forskningsråd (Grant 249988)

  • Rune Enger

Norges Forskningsråd (Grant 302326)

  • Rune Enger

Letten Foundation (Research support)

  • Rune Enger

Olav Thon Stiftelsen (Olav Thon Award)

  • Erlend A Nagelhus

Helse Sør-Øst RHF (Grant 2016070)

  • Rune Enger

Norges Forskningsråd (Medical Student Research Program)

  • Kristin M Binder

Helse Sør-Øst RHF (2020039)

  • Rune Enger

Norges Forskningsråd (Grant 271555/F20)

  • Kristin M Binder

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

Ethics

Animal experimentation: The study was performed in strict accordance with the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals of the National Institutes of Health and approved by the Norwegian Food Safety Authority (project number: FOTS #11983).

Copyright

© 2022, Åbjørsbråten 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

  • 2,756
    views
  • 651
    downloads
  • 27
    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. Knut Sindre Åbjørsbråten
  2. Gry HE Skaaraas
  3. Céline Cunen
  4. Daniel M Bjørnstad
  5. Kristin M Binder
  6. Laura Bojarskaite
  7. Vidar Jensen
  8. Lars NG Nilsson
  9. Shreyas B Rao
  10. Wannan Tang
  11. Gudmund Horn Hermansen
  12. Erlend A Nagelhus
  13. Ole Petter Ottersen
  14. Reidun Torp
  15. Rune Enger
(2022)
Impaired astrocytic Ca2+ signaling in awake-behaving Alzheimer's disease transgenic mice
eLife 11:e75055.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.75055

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.75055

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Damian Koevoet, Laura Van Zantwijk ... Christoph Strauch
    Research Article

    What determines where to move the eyes? We recently showed that pupil size, a well-established marker of effort, also reflects the effort associated with making a saccade (‘saccade costs’). Here, we demonstrate saccade costs to critically drive saccade selection: when choosing between any two saccade directions, the least costly direction was consistently preferred. Strikingly, this principle even held during search in natural scenes in two additional experiments. When increasing cognitive demand experimentally through an auditory counting task, participants made fewer saccades and especially cut costly directions. This suggests that the eye-movement system and other cognitive operations consume similar resources that are flexibly allocated among each other as cognitive demand changes. Together, we argue that eye-movement behavior is tuned to adaptively minimize saccade-inherent effort.

    1. Medicine
    2. Neuroscience
    Ayni Sharif, Matthew S Jeffers ... Manoj M Lalu
    Research Article

    C-C chemokine receptor type 5 (CCR5) antagonists may improve both acute stroke outcome and long-term recovery. Despite their evaluation in ongoing clinical trials, gaps remain in the evidence supporting their use. With a panel of patients with lived experiences of stroke, we performed a systematic review of animal models of stroke that administered a CCR5 antagonist and assessed infarct size or behavioural outcomes. MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Embase were searched. Article screening and data extraction were completed in duplicate. We pooled outcomes using random effects meta-analyses. We assessed risk of bias using the Systematic Review Centre for Laboratory Animal Experimentation (SYRCLE) tool and alignment with the Stroke Treatment Academic Industry Roundtable (STAIR) and Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable (SRRR) recommendations. Five studies representing 10 experiments were included. CCR5 antagonists reduced infarct volume (standard mean difference −1.02; 95% confidence interval −1.58 to −0.46) when compared to stroke-only controls. Varied timing of CCR5 administration (pre- or post-stroke induction) produced similar benefit. CCR5 antagonists significantly improved 11 of 16 behavioural outcomes reported. High risk of bias was present in all studies and critical knowledge gaps in the preclinical evidence were identified using STAIR/SRRR. CCR5 antagonists demonstrate promise; however, rigorously designed preclinical studies that better align with STAIR/SRRR recommendations and downstream clinical trials are warranted. Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO CRD42023393438).