4.8 Article

Heterogeneity of neurons reprogrammed from spinal cord astrocytes by the proneural factors Ascl1 and Neurogenin2

期刊

CELL REPORTS
卷 36, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2021.109409

关键词

-

资金

  1. German Research Foundation [SFB 870, SPP1757, TRR274, EN 1093/2-1]
  2. advanced ERC ChroNeuroRepair
  3. ERA-Net neuron grant MICRONET
  4. EU consortium NSC Reconstruct

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Astrocytes can be transformed into new neurons, but the neurogenic cascades triggered within astrocytes from different brain regions remain poorly understood. Ascl1 and Neurog2 initially induce different neurogenic programs in astrocytes which eventually converge into a V2 interneuron-like state. Patch-seq analysis reveals that, apart from K-channels, there is no clear overall correlation between the functional properties and transcriptome of induced neurons.
Astrocytes are a viable source for generating new neurons via direct conversion. However, little is known about the neurogenic cascades triggered in astrocytes from different regions of the CNS. Here, we examine the transcriptome induced by the proneural factors Ascl1 and Neurog2 in spinal cord-derived astrocytes in vitro. Each factor initially elicits different neurogenic programs that later converge to a V2 interneuronlike state. Intriguingly, patch sequencing (patch-seq) shows no overall correlation between functional properties and the transcriptome of the heterogenous induced neurons, except for K-channels. For example, some neurons with fully mature electrophysiological properties still express astrocyte genes, thus calling for careful molecular and functional analysis. Comparing the transcriptomes of spinal cord- and cerebral-cortex-derived astrocytes reveals profound differences, including developmental patterning cues maintained in vitro. These relate to the distinct neuronal identity elicited by Ascl1 and Neurog2 reflecting their developmental functions in subtype specification of the respective CNS region.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据