4.8 Article

AMPK controls the axonal regenerative ability of dorsal root ganglia sensory neurons after spinal cord injury

Journal

NATURE METABOLISM
Volume 2, Issue 9, Pages 918-+

Publisher

NATURE RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1038/s42255-020-0252-3

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Department of Brain Sciences, Imperial College London
  2. Hertie Foundation
  3. International Spinal Research Trust (Nathalie Rose Barr PhD awards)
  4. Wings for Life
  5. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
  6. Medical Research Council
  7. Rosetrees Trust
  8. National Institute for Health Research Imperial Biomedical Research Centre
  9. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [INST 247/766-1 FUGG]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Regeneration after injury occurs in axons that lie in the peripheral nervous system but fails in the central nervous system, thereby limiting functional recovery. Differences in axonal signalling in response to injury that might underpin this differential regenerative ability are poorly characterized. Combining axoplasmic proteomics from peripheral sciatic or central projecting dorsal root ganglion (DRG) axons with cell body RNA-seq, we uncover injury-dependent signalling pathways that are uniquely represented in peripheral versus central projecting sciatic DRG axons. We identify AMPK as a crucial regulator of axonal regenerative signalling that is specifically downregulated in injured peripheral, but not central, axons. We find that AMPK in DRG interacts with the 26S proteasome and its CaMKII alpha-dependent regulatory subunit PSMC5 to promote AMPK alpha proteasomal degradation following sciatic axotomy. Conditional deletion of AMPK alpha 1 promotes multiple regenerative signalling pathways after central axonal injury and stimulates robust axonal growth across the spinal cord injury site, suggesting inhibition of AMPK as a therapeutic strategy to enhance regeneration following spinal cord injury.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available