Skip to main content
PLOS Genetics logoLink to PLOS Genetics
. 2019 Dec 13;15(12):e1008526. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1008526

Genome wide analysis reveals heparan sulfate epimerase modulates TDP-43 proteinopathy

Nicole F Liachko 1,2,#, Aleen D Saxton 1,#, Pamela J McMillan 3, Timothy J Strovas 1, C Dirk Keene 4, Thomas D Bird 1,5,6, Brian C Kraemer 1,2,3,6,*
Editor: Anne C Hart7
PMCID: PMC6934317  PMID: 31834878

Abstract

Pathological phosphorylated TDP-43 protein (pTDP) deposition drives neurodegeneration in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD-TDP). However, the cellular and genetic mechanisms at work in pathological TDP-43 toxicity are not fully elucidated. To identify genetic modifiers of TDP-43 neurotoxicity, we utilized a Caenorhabditis elegans model of TDP-43 proteinopathy expressing human mutant TDP-43 pan-neuronally (TDP-43 tg). In TDP-43 tg C. elegans, we conducted a genome-wide RNAi screen covering 16,767 C. elegans genes for loss of function genetic suppressors of TDP-43-driven motor dysfunction. We identified 46 candidate genes that when knocked down partially ameliorate TDP-43 related phenotypes; 24 of these candidate genes have conserved homologs in the human genome. To rigorously validate the RNAi findings, we crossed the TDP-43 transgene into the background of homozygous strong genetic loss of function mutations. We have confirmed 9 of the 24 candidate genes significantly modulate TDP-43 transgenic phenotypes. Among the validated genes we focused on, one of the most consistent genetic modifier genes protecting against pTDP accumulation and motor deficits was the heparan sulfate-modifying enzyme hse-5, the C. elegans homolog of glucuronic acid epimerase (GLCE). We found that knockdown of human GLCE in cultured human cells protects against oxidative stress induced pTDP accumulation. Furthermore, expression of glucuronic acid epimerase is significantly decreased in the brains of FTLD-TDP cases relative to normal controls, demonstrating the potential disease relevance of the candidate genes identified. Taken together these findings nominate glucuronic acid epimerase as a novel candidate therapeutic target for TDP-43 proteinopathies including ALS and FTLD-TDP.

Author summary

The protein TDP-43 forms aggregates in disease-affected neurons in patients with ALS and FTLD-TDP. In addition, mutations in the human gene coding for TDP-43 can cause inherited ALS. By expressing human mutant TDP-43 protein in C. elegans neurons, we have modelled aspects of ALS pathobiology. This animal model exhibits severe motor dysfunction, progressive neurodegeneration, and accumulation of abnormally modified TDP-43 protein. To identify genes controlling TDP-43 neurotoxicity in C. elegans, we have conducted a genome-wide reverse genetic screen and found 46 genes that participate in TDP-43 neurotoxicity. We demonstrated that one of them, glucuronic acid epimerase, is decreased in patients with FTLD-TDP suggesting inhibitors of glucuronic acid epimerase could have therapeutic value for ALS and FTLD.

Introduction

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a devastating neurodegenerative disease characterized by loss of motor neurons, leading to progressive muscle wasting and death typically by respiratory failure. Aggregates of the protein TDP-43 in disease-affected neurons are the hallmark of most cases of ALS, while mutations in the gene coding for TDP-43, TARDBP, have been identified in ~4% of families with heritable ALS directly linking TDP-43 dysfunction with disease [1]. TDP-43 is also the primary aggregating protein in about 50% of cases of frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD-TDP) [2]. Furthermore, TDP-43 positive aggregates occur as secondary pathologies in a subset of other neurodegenerative diseases including Alzheimer’s disease (AD) [3]. The presence of TDP-43 co-pathology correlates with a greater likelihood of clinical dementia and more rapid cognitive decline after diagnosis, indicating the presence or absence of pathological TDP-43 influences disease severity [4, 5]. Given the prevalence of TDP-43 pathology in neurodegenerative diseases, it is critical to understand the molecular pathways that interact with TDP-43 and promote disease.

Within inclusions in disease-affected neurons, TDP-43 exhibits post-translational modifications not observed in healthy neurons, including shorter C-terminal protein species, ubiquitination, acetylation, SUMOylation, and phosphorylation [69]. Of these modifications, abnormal phosphorylation of TDP-43 represents the most consistent pathological feature of ALS and FTLD-TDP; pTDP is used as a neuropathological marker to identify TDP-43-positive protein inclusions in brain and spinal cord post-mortem [10]. Phosphorylation at S409/410 of TDP-43 (pTDP) potentiates a number of toxic disruptions in normal TDP-43 metabolism, including decreased TDP-43 protein turnover, increased TDP-43 stabilization, cellular mislocalization of TDP-43, protein aggregation, and neurodegeneration [1116]. Phosphorylation may also alter the ability of TDP-43 to appropriately participate in liquid-liquid phase separated membrane-less organelles or granules [17, 18].

Unbiased molecular genetic screens in a variety of model systems provide a powerful way to identify novel modifiers of proteinopathy driven neurodegeneration and to elucidate key cellular pathways that contribute to disease [1926]. Several reverse genetic screens targeting pathological TDP-43 have been performed in model systems including yeast, Drosophila, and cultured cells [2733], and have nominated TDP-43 modifiers including ataxin 2, Dbr1, ITPR1, Wnd, p38, JNK, GSK, hat-trick, xmas-2, hnRNPs, and TCERG1, among others. These modifiers implicate diverse pathways affecting disease, including polyglutamine repeat size, RNA lariat debranching, mRNA splicing and export, nucleocytoplasmic shuttling, innate immunity, chromatin remodeling, and TDP-43 autoregulation. These screens differ in their methods of modeling TDP-43 toxicity as well as the readouts for suppression or enhancement of phenotypes. Moreover, the hits identified among them are also predominantly non-overlapping indicating these screens have not saturated the identification of TDP-43 modifiers. It is likely that additional screening may identify new modifiers with relevance to TDP-43 mechanisms of disease.

To model TDP-43 proteinopathy, we previously developed a Caenorhabditis elegans model that expresses full-length familial ALS (fALS) mutant TDP-43 pan-neuronally [16]. C. elegans provides a tractable, simple model useful for genetic manipulations, behavioral assays, biochemistry, in vivo imaging, and large-scale screening. Importantly, they also have a well-characterized differentiated nervous system that includes the major neuronal types found in humans [34]. TDP-43 transgenic C. elegans (TDP-43 tg) exhibit phosphorylation of TDP-43 at S409/410, accumulation of insoluble TDP-43, severe motor abnormalities, neurodegeneration, and shortened lifespan [16]. In C. elegans, prevention of phosphorylation at S409/410 protects against TDP-43 neurotoxic phenotypes.

Using this C. elegans model of ALS, we have conducted a genome-wide RNAi screen for genes that control TDP-43-driven phenotypes. This is the first large-scale genetic screen in C. elegans for TDP-43 modifying genes. From this work, we have identified genetic suppressors of TDP-43 neurotoxicity that fall into a variety of molecular categories. Finally, we have shown that the extracellular matrix modifying enzyme HSE-5/ GLCE impacts TDP-43 pathology and is decreased in FTLD-TDP.

Results

To identify genes and molecular pathways that modify TDP-43 toxicity, we performed an unbiased genome-wide RNAi screen in a C. elegans model of TDP-43 proteinopathy. This model expresses human fALS mutant TDP-43 (M337V) pan-neuronally (TDP-43 tg) and exhibits robust progressive motor dysfunction [16]. We used this phenotype to screen for visible suppression of motor dysfunction following RNAi-mediated gene inactivation. 16,757 RNAi clones, targeting 86% of the C. elegans genome [35], were individually screened for changes in behavior relative to control treated animals (Fig 1A). Following first-pass screening for candidate suppressors of TDP-43 tg motor dysfunction, hits were retested in non-transgenic C. elegans to eliminate those that affect C. elegans movement independent of TDP-43. Candidates with no effects on non-transgenic C. elegans were then retested against TDP-43 tg C. elegans in three biological replicate experiments to confirm the initial screen results. After the retesting of first-pass hits, 46 suppressor RNAi clones were identified that consistently improved motor function (Table 1 and Supplemental Table 1). While all the RNAi targets identified are potentially interesting TDP-43 modifiers, we prioritized candidates with translational relevance to human disease for follow-up experiments. To this end, we surveyed for conserved human homologs of candidate genes using the NCBI basic local alignment search tool (BLAST) [36]. Of the TDP-43 tg modifying genes, we found 24 suppressors with significant homology to human genes (Table 1). These gene lists were then annotated for roles in vivo using both searches of published literature and predictive gene functions from protein domain architecture. These genes fall into several functional classes, including genes involved in energy production and metabolism (cox-10, F23F12.3, F55G1.5, paqr-1, and cox-6A), extracellular matrix and cytoskeleton (col-89, gly-8, hse-5, sax-2, vab-9, and zig-3), ion transport (cnnm-3, C13B4.1, unc-77), nucleic acid function (dna-2, tbx-11, umps-1), proteostasis (C47E12.3, gpx-7, pcp-5), and signaling (F31E3.2, F40B5.2, Y44E3A.4) (Fig 1B). As RNAi-mediated inactivation of these genes partially suppressed toxic TDP-43 phenotypes, their normal cellular functions may promote TDP-43 toxicity, making them potential targets for treating TDP-43 proteinopathy.

Fig 1. Genome-wide RNAi screen identifies TDP-43 suppressors in several functional categories.

Fig 1

(A) Flowchart of the RNAi screen for modifiers of TDP-43-induced uncoordinated locomotion (Unc). (B) Percentage of suppressors identified in each functional group. Genes with no significant alignment within the human genome were not classified into functional groups.

Table 1. TDP-43 modifying genes with human homologs.

C. elegans gene HUGO symbol BlastP e-value Protein family/ domains
Energy production and metabolism
cox-10 COX10 9E-78 Heme A:farnesyltransferase
F23F12.3 SLC22A5 7E-36 Organic cation/ carnitine transporter
F55G1.5 SLC25A18 9E-68 Mitochondrial glutamate/H+ symporter
paqr-1 ADIPOR1/2 2E-116 Adiponectin receptor
cox-6A COX6A1 2E-14 Cytochrome C oxidase (COX) structural component
Extracellular matrix and cytoskeleton
col-89 COL22A1 1E-12 Fibrillar-associated collagen with interrupted triple helices
gly-8 GALNT11 1E-101 N-Acetylgalactosaminyltransferase
hse-5 GLCE 9E-113 glucuronic acid epimerase
sax-2 FRYL 0E+00 FRY protein
vab-9 TMEM47 2E-12 PMP22/EMP/claudin family
zig-3 HMCN1 1E-09 Immunoglobulin superfamily
Ion transport
cnnm-3 CNNM4 5E-118 Ancient conserved domain
C13B4.1 FRRS1 9E-23 Cytochrome b561 family; ferric chelate reductase
unc-77 NALCN 0E+00 Voltage-gated sodium channel
Nucleic acid function
dna-2 DNA2 2E-129 DNA2/NAM7 helicase
tbx-11 TBR1 2E-28 T-box transcription factor
umps-1 UMPS 1E-100 Uridine monophosphate synthetase
Proteostasis
C47E12.3 EDEM1 0E+00 ER degradation-enhancing alpha-mannosidase
gpx-7 GPX4 1E-39 Glutathione peroxidase
pcp-5 PRCP 1E-114 Prolylcarboxypeptidase
Signaling
F31E3.2 SGK494 5E-59 Serine/ threonine kinase
F40B5.2 TMPPE 1E-67 Metallophosphoesterase
Y44E3A.4 SH3KBP1 1E-31 SH3 domain
Unclassified
T24H10.4 TMEM53 7E-13 DUF829 domain-containing

RNAi is a rapid and powerful tool to decrease gene expression in vivo. However, a single RNAi clone has the potential to target multiple genes simultaneously if the genes have a stretch of identical nucleotide sequence. Thus, we used genetic loss-of-function mutations in candidate genes to confirm RNAi phenotypes. 15 existing C. elegans null mutations were available for candidate modifiers with human homologs (Table 2). We also selected two null mutations for testing from the candidates without human homologs. This cohort of mutants includes alleles from at least one gene per functional category, allowing us to test the contribution of these gene classes to TDP-43 phenotypes. Each of these mutant strains were crossed to TDP-43 tg C. elegans to evaluate changes in motor dysfunction. For genes that were present on the same chromosome as our primary TDP-43 tg transgenic strain (chromosome IV), we crossed to another fALS mutant TDP-43 (A315T) transgenic strain with the TDP-43 expression cassette integrated into a different chromosome (chromosome II), TDP-43 tg2. We observed significant improvement in locomotion, consistent with the RNAi screening results, in 9 of the 17 loss of function cross strains (Fig 2A and 2B, Table 2).

Table 2. Loss of function mutations in TDP-43 modifier genes.

C. elegans gene HUGO symbol Allele tested Behavior TDP-43 protein
Energy production and metabolism
F55G1.5 SLC25A18 gk1250 NC NC
paqr-1 ADIPOR1/2 tm3262 ++ ++
Extracellular matrix and cytoskeleton
gly-8 GALNT11 tm1156 ++ ++
hse-5 GLCE tm472 ++ ++
sax-2 FRYL ky216 ++ ++
vab-9 TMEM47 gk398617 ++ NC
zig-3 HMCN1 tm924 ++ ++
Ion transport
unc-77 NALCN e625 NC NC
Nucleic acid function
tbx-11 TBR1 gk681547 NC NC
umps-1 UMPS zu456 NC NC
Proteostasis
gpx-7 GPX4 tm2166 NC NC
pcp-5 PRCP gk446 ++ NC
Signaling
F31E3.2 SGK494 ok2044 - - NC
F40B5.2 TMPPE gk920502 NC NC

NC = no change; ++ = suppressor; - - = enhancer

Fig 2. Suppressors of TDP-43 improve C. elegans motor function and reduce levels of toxic TDP-43.

Fig 2

(A) Motor function of animals doubly homozygous for the human mutant TDP-43 (M337V) transgene, TDP-43 tg, and loss-of-function mutations for the indicated suppressor genes was assessed. Dispersal velocity of developmentally staged L4 larvae was measured by calculating the radial distance traveled from a designated central starting point over time, N>200 for all strains tested. Significance was evaluated using one-way analysis of variance with Tukey’s multiple comparison test among strains tested. ***p<0.0001, *p<0.01 versus TDP-43 tg. non-Tg (N2) animals move 3.712 μm/ sec. (B) To assay the effects of loss-of-function mutations in suppressor genes present on the same chromosome as the TDP-43 tg transgene (Chr IV), a second human mutant TDP-43 (A315T) transgene was utilized on a different chromosome (Chr II), TDP-43 tg2. Animals doubly homozygous for the TDP-43 tg2 transgene and loss-of-function mutations for the TDP-43 suppressor genes indicated were assessed for motor function as above, N>200 for all strains tested. ***p<0.0001, **p<0.001, *p<0.01 versus TDP-43 tg2. (C-G) Measurement of levels of total and phosphorylated TDP-43 protein by immunoblot. Data shown are representative of triplicate independent experiments. Graphs plot relative total TDP-43 or phosphorylated TDP-43 signal normalized to tubulin protein levels from three or more independent replicate experiments. Significance was evaluated using Mann-Whitney test between strains tested. *p<0.05.

Improvements in TDP-43 tg C. elegans motor dysfunction could be the result of decreased TDP-43 transgene expression, or reduced levels of total TDP-43 protein or phosphorylation at amino acid residues S409 and S410 [16]. To determine if TDP-43 mRNA expression levels were altered in these strains, we performed quantitative reverse-transcription PCR (qRT-PCR) and found that expression of the TDP-43 is not decreased in the mutant strains (S1A and S1B Fig). Therefore, we tested whether the suppressor mutants crossed to TDP-43 tg exhibited changes in TDP-43 protein abundance or phosphorylation by immunoblot. We found that 5 of the mutants tested had decreased levels of total or phosphorylated TDP-43 protein (Fig 2C–2G). Interestingly, these results indicate the remaining 4 suppressor genes that improve TDP-43 motor dysfunction do so without a significant impact on TDP-43 phosphorylation or protein levels (S1 Fig).

Based on its predicted function and consistent partial suppression of TDP-43 tg motor phenotypes in C. elegans, we chose hse-5 for more detailed characterization. hse-5(tm472) animals have similar locomotion to non-Tg (N2) C. elegans (S2A Fig), indicating the improved motility of TDP-43 tg; hse-5(tm472) is not due to hyperactivity. hse-5(tm472) was initially identified as a suppressor of mutant human TDP-43 (M337V). To see whether it can also suppress wild-type TDP-43 toxicity, we crossed hse-5(tm472) with C. elegans expressing wild-type human TDP-43 pan-neuronally (WT TDP-43 tg; hse-5(tm472)) and assayed their motor function. We found that hse-5(tm472) can also suppress motility defects of WT TDP-43 tg (S2B Fig). To explore the possibility that hse-5 generally protects against aggregating or hyperphosphorylated neurodegenerative disease proteins, we crossed hse-5(tm472) with C. elegans expressing wild-type or mutant tau protein (tau tg (WT); hse-5(tm472) or tau tg (V337M); hse-5(tm472)). However, hse-5(tm472) did not suppress tau tg motor defects (S2C and S2D Fig), and conversely somewhat worsened tau tg motility. Therefore, hse-5(tm472) may be a specific suppressor of TDP-43.

Although predominantly expressed in the hypodermis and intestine, hse-5 has been previously shown in C. elegans to control axon pathfinding, and loss of hse-5 function (hse-5(tm472)) causes nerve cord defasciculation, aberrant axonal branching and extra processes [37, 38]. In addition, hse-5 may regulate the connectivity of neurons controlling stereotyped behaviors such as C. elegans male mating [39]. The human homolog of hse-5, GLCE, encodes the heparan sulfate-modifying enzyme glucuronic acid epimerase (GLCE). As a linear polysaccharide, heparan sulfate (HS) can be covalently attached to a protein core to form proteoglycans. HS proteoglycans play roles in both cellular and extracellular functions: they comprise part of the basement membrane matrix, are present in secretory vesicles, interact with regulatory factors such as cytokines and growth factors, facilitate cell-cell and cell-ECM interactions, and act as receptors for numerous signaling processes [40]. GLCE catalyzes the inversion stereochemistry of D-glucuronic acid to L-iduronic acid, which increases the flexibility of HS and promotes HS mediated ligand interaction and cellular signaling [41]. GLCE is an essential enzyme, and its targeted disruption results in murine neonatal lethality [42]. Additionally, loss of GLCE has been shown to promote neuritogenesis, supporting a neuronal role for this protein [43].

hse-5(tm472) may protect against TDP-43 neurotoxicity through a pro-longevity pathway. Therefore, we assayed whether hse-5(tm472) protects against the shortened lifespan of TDP-43 tg C. elegans. Surprisingly, hse-5(tm472) was significantly long-lived relative to non-Tg C. elegans, but did not rescue the shortened lifespan of TDP-43 tg (S2E Fig). TDP-43 tg animals display degeneration of specific neuronal types with aging, including gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) positive inhibitory motor neurons [16]. hse-5(tm472) may directly protect neuron cell viability, resulting in the improved movement observed in Fig 2A. C. elegans neuronal integrity can be assessed in vivo using a GABAergic D-type motor neuron reporter, Punc-47::GFP, which drives expression of GFP in all 19 D-type motor neurons [44]. To determine whether motor neurons are protected in TDP-43 tg; hse-5(tm472) animals, we used the Punc-47::GFP fluorescent reporter to score intact GABAergic motor neurons in vivo. We first scored animals at larval stage 4 (L4), when the first apparent neuronal loss occurs with TDP-43 tg. Surprisingly, we found that TDP-43 tg; hse-5(tm472) on average lost significantly more neurons than TDP-43 tg alone (Fig 3A). However, by day 1 of adulthood, there are no significant differences in numbers of neurons lost between TDP-43 tg and TDP-43 tg; hse-5(tm472) (Fig 3B). Therefore, the behavioral improvement seen in Fig 2A is not the result of hse-5(tm472) protection against aging or neurodegeneration.

Fig 3. hse-5 loss of function restores synaptic transmission in TDP-43 tg C. elegans.

Fig 3

(A) To assess neurodegeneration, GFP-labeled D-type GABAergic motor neurons were counted at L4 stage in vivo in living worms. TDP-43 tg; hse-5(tm472) animals lose slightly more neurons than TDP-43 tg alone, N>33 for all strains tested. Significance was evaluated using one-way analysis of variance with Tukey’s multiple comparison test among strains tested. *p<0.05, non-Tg versus TDP-43 tg and TDP-43 tg versus TDP-43 tg; hse-5(tm472), NS = not significant. (B) At day 1 adult, there are no differences in the number of D-type GABAergic motor neurons between TDP-43 tg versus TDP-43 tg; hse-5(tm472), N>33 for all strains tested. NS = not significant. p<0.0001 for non-Tg versus TDP-43tg and TDP-43 tg; hse-5(tm472). (C) hse-5(tm472) exhibit numerous axonal abnormalities including aberrant branching, looping, and inter-axonal connections. These non-canonical processes are increased in TDP-43 tg; hse-5(tm472) animals, N>33 for all strains tested. ***p<0.0001 for non-Tg versus hse-5(tm472), TDP-43tg, and TDP-43 tg; hse-5(tm472), and for TDP-43tg versus TDP-43 tg; hse-5(tm472). (D) Wild-type control axons ascend linearly from the ventral nerve cord without branching, looping, or inter-axonal connections. (E-F) TDP-43 tg; hse-5(tm472) axons frequently exhibit unusual branches, loops, or inter-axonal connections. (G) Pre-synaptic transmission was assessed using an aldicarb sensitivity assay. Animals were scored at the indicated time points for paralysis. Triplicate independent experiments are plotted. TDP-43 tg animals (orange diamond, p<0.005 at hours 3–7) are strongly resistant to aldicarb relative to non-Tg animals (blue circle) indicating decreased or defective synaptic transmission, while hse-5(tm472) animals (red square, p<0.05 at hours 3–4) are more modestly resistant to aldicarb. TDP-43 tg; hse-5(tm472) animals (black circle, p<0.05 at hours 3–5) have synaptic transmission restored to hse-5(tm472) levels. unc-29(e1072) (purple inverted triangle, p<0.05 at hours 3–7) and unc-31(e928) (green triangle, p<0.05 at hours 3 and 4) are controls for decreased aldicarb sensitivity. Significance was evaluated using two-way ANOVA with Tukey’s multiple comparisons test; p-values compared to non-Tg.

Loss of hse-5 causes aberrant axonal connectivity including non-canonical axonal branching [37]; these abnormalities were apparent when examining hse-5(tm472) mutant animals expressing the Punc-47::GFP reporter (Fig 3C–3F). In fact, the additional branches and processes appeared to create a more complex neuronal network in C. elegans, with non-standard axonal contacts between adjacent neurons and increased nerve cord contacts for some neurons (Fig 3E). When we quantitated the number of axonal abnormalities observed in individual worms, we found that while both hse-5(tm472) and TDP-43 tg alone had moderate numbers of axonal abnormalities, the TDP-43 tg; hse-5(tm472) had significantly more (Fig 3C). hse-5(tm472) may restore neuronal function in TDP-43 tg animals. One assay to measure synaptic transmission determines the sensitivity of C. elegans to the acetycholinesterase inhibitor aldicarb. Aldicarb prevents acetycholinesterase from breaking down acetycholine in the pre-synaptic cleft. This results in a build-up of acetylcholine, hyperactivation of cholinergic receptors, and eventual paralysis due to hypercontraction. Animals with defects in pre-synaptic transmission can have reduced pre-synaptic acetycholine release, making them resistant to the effects of aldicarb [45]. TDP-43 tg animals exhibit significant resistance to aldicarb, indicating they have a severe defect in synaptic transmission (Fig 3G). hse-5(tm472) has a moderate defect in synaptic transmission independent of TDP-43 tg. However, we found that TDP-43 tg; hse-5(tm472) aldicarb sensitivity is similar to the more modest defects of hse-5(tm472) alone, indicating that hse-5(tm472) restores TDP-43 tg synaptic transmission.

Loss of C. elegans hse-5 protects against accumulation of phosphorylated TDP-43 (Fig 2C). However, it is unknown whether reduced expression of the human homolog, GLCE, would similarly protect against phosphorylated TDP-43 accumulation. To test this, we utilized a mammalian cell culture model that exhibits robust phosphorylation of endogenous TDP-43 driven by an oxidative chemical trigger [46]. Cells were treated with a GLCE-targeting siRNA and tested for their accumulation of phosphorylated TDP-43. We found that GLCE-targeted siRNA treatment reduced TDP-43 phosphorylation by 60–80% (Fig 4A and 4B), indicating a functional genetic interaction between hse-5/ GLCE and TDP-43 remains conserved between C. elegans and mammals.

Fig 4. GLCE changes in mammalian cultured cells and in FTLD-TDP.

Fig 4

(A-B) Cultured HEK293 cells treated with ethacrynic acid (EA) accumulate robust levels of phosphorylated TDP-43. (A) Representative immunoblots of cells treated with GLCE-targeted siRNA exhibit reduced pTDP accumulation in the presence of EA. (B) Triplicate independent experiments were quantified and graphed. Significance was evaluated using one-way analysis of variance with Tukey’s multiple comparison test among strains tested. **p = 0.0029, ***p = 0.0002 versus EA treated. (C-D) GLCE immunoreactivity is reduced in patients with FTLD-TDP compared with normal controls. (C) Quantitation of GLCE immunoreactivity in the deep layers of the frontal cortex (mid-frontal gyrus) from 14 patients with FTLD-TDP and 12 normal controls. Significance was evaluated using an unpaired t-test, *p = 0.0116. (D) Representative images of GLCE immunostaining in the frontal cortex of patients and controls. pTDP-43 accumulation is apparent in FTLD-TDP patients in this same brain region. Scale bar = 50um.

To test whether GLCE protein alterations occur in a human TDP-43 proteinopathy disorder, we examined GLCE immunoreactivity in the frontal cortex of 14 FTLD-TDP patients and 12 normal control cases. We found that GLCE immunoreactivity is robust in the frontal cortex of normal control subjects. In contrast, GLCE immunopositive neurons are sparse in the frontal cortex of FTLD-TDP patients and the neurons that are immunoreactive display much weaker staining. Quantitative immunohistochemistry within the deep layers of the frontal cortex (layers 5/6) revealed that the average optical density of GLCE positive immunostaining is significantly lower in patients with FTLD-TDP compared to controls without TDP-43 proteinopathy (Fig 4C and 4D). All FTLD-TDP patients exhibit robust phosphorylated TDP-43 pathology within this same brain region. These data indicate that decreased GLCE is a feature of FTLD-TDP and may represent a protective response to extend neuron function during disease.

Discussion

We have conducted an RNAi screen of 16,757 RNAi clones, targeting 86% of the C. elegans genome, for suppressors of TDP-43 toxicity in C. elegans. We found 46 genes that suppressed TDP-43 motor dysfunction following RNAi-targeted reduction in gene expression, 24 of which had human homologs. None of these genes have been previously implicated as potential modifiers of ALS through genome-wide association studies (GWAS) [47]. These genes fall into a variety of pathways, including energy production and metabolism, extracellular matrix and cytoskeleton, ion transport, nucleic acids, proteostasis, and cell signaling (Table 1). These TDP-43 suppressor genes increase our understanding of the mechanisms of TDP-43 toxicity by nominating involved cellular pathways and processes. Further, these genes and pathways represent potential new therapeutic targets for treating TDP-43 proteinopathies such as FTLD-TDP.

We identified 5 genes that participate in energy production and metabolism: cox-10, F23F12.3, F55G1.5, paqr-1, and cox-6A. Three of these, cox-10, cox-6A, and F23F12.3 function in mitochondria. Cytochrome C oxidase (COX) is the terminal enzyme in the electron transport chain and cox-10/ COX10 and cox-6A/ COX6A1 are a COX assembly factor and structural component, respectively. Mutations in COX6A1 and COX10 are associated with Charcot-Marie-Tooth (CMT) disease and mitochondrial disorders [4850]. F55G1.5/ SLC25A18 catalyzes the unidirectional transport of glutamate into mitochondria [51]. Two of the genes, F23F12.3 and paqr-1, are involved in fatty acid metabolism. F23F12.3/ SLC22A5 is a sodium dependent carnitine cotransporter required for beta-oxidation of long-chain fatty acids to produce ATP and is associated with primary systemic carnitine deficiency [52]. paqr-1/ ADIPOR1/2 is an adiponectin receptor mediating AMPK and PPARα activities to regulates glucose uptake and fatty acid oxidation by adiponectin [53].

Six of the suppressors are involved in the extracellular matrix and cytoskeleton: col-89, gly-8, hse-5, sax-2, vab-9, and zig-3. col-89/ COL22A1 functions as a collagen in cell adhesion ligand maintaining vascular integrity [54]. gly-8/ GALNT11 is an N-acetylgalactosaminyltransferase initiating O-linked glycosylation that regulates left-right asymmetry (through Notch signaling) and cilia during development [55]. hse-5/ GLCE is a D-glucuronyl C5-epimerase that modifies heparan sulfate, a key component of the extracellular matrix, and regulates neuronal migration and axonal pathfinding [56]. sax-2/ FRYL binds microtubules and aids in the maintenance of nerve ring structure and control of sensory dendrite termination points in C. elegans [5759]. vab-9/ TMEM47 is a transmembrane protein localized to the ER and plasma membrane that regulates organization of actin at tight junctions [60]. Finally, zig-3/ HMCN1 is a Ca2+ binding extracellular matrix protein that maintains mature axon positioning. Mutations in HMCN1 are associated with age-related macular degeneration [61].

We found three genes involved in ion transport: cnnm-3, C13B4.1, and unc-77. cnnm-3/ CNNM4 is a metal ion transporter, and mutations in CNNM4 cause Jalili syndrome, a disorder that includes retinal cone-rod dystrophy and amelogenesis imperfecta [62, 63]. C13B4.1/ FRRS1 is a ferric chelate reductase that reduces ferric to ferrous iron before its transport from the endosome to the cytoplasm. unc-77/ NALCN is a voltage-gated sodium channel that propagates neuronal activity from cell bodies to synapses. Recessive mutations in NALCN cause infantile hypotonia, developmental delay, and retardation [64].

Three genes have nucleic acid functions: dna-2, tbx-11, and umps-1. dna-2/ DNA2 is a DNA-dependent ATPase, helicase, and endonuclease that maintains mitochondrial and nuclear DNA stability. Mutations in DNA2 cause progressive external ophthalmoplegia with mitochondrial DNA deletions-6 and Seckel syndrome [65]. tbx-11/ TBR1 is a T-box transcription factor that regulates neuronal migration and axon pathfinding [66]. umps-1/ UMPS is a uridine monophosphate synthetase that catalyzes pyrimidine biosynthesis by converting orotate to uridine monophosphate. Mutations in UMPS are associated with orotic aciduria [67].

We also found three genes involved in proteostasis: C47E12.3, gpx-7, and pcp-5. C47E12.3/ EDEM1 is an ER degradation-enhancing alpha-mannosidase that targets misfolded glycoproteins for degradation [68]. gpx-7/ GPX4 is a glutathione peroxidase that reduces phospholipid hydroperoxides within membranes and lipoproteins, inhibiting lipid peroxidation. Mutations in GPX4 cause spondylometaphyseal dysplasia [69]. pcp-5/ PRCP is a prolylcarboxypeptidase that cleaves proline-linked C-terminal amino acids in the lysosome.

Three genes have roles in cell signaling: F31E3.2, F40B5.2, and Y44E3A.4. F31E3.2/ SGK494 is a serine/ threonine kinase, F40B5.2/ TMPPE is a transmembrane metallophosphoesterase, and Y44EA.4/ SH3KBP1 is an adaptor protein that regulates diverse signal transduction pathways.

Of the genes identified in our screen, several have previously been implicated in ALS pathobiology by the work of others. For instance, HMCN1, the human homolog of zig-3, was identified as being one of several cell adhesion and extracellular matrix genes aberrantly spliced in sporadic cases of ALS [70]. In addition, expression of the mouse homolog of TBR1/ tbx-11 is downregulated in a conditional TDP-43 knockout model [71], and GPX4/ gpx-7 is differentially expressed in a transgenic mouse model expressing human A315T mutant TDP-43 [72], indicating potentially conserved roles for these genes in disease that warrants further testing. Taken together, the previous identification of some of the hits from our screen reinforces the potential disease relevance of our findings. However, most of the TDP-43 modifying genes identified in our study have not been previously implicated in ALS or other TDP-43 proteinopathies. The C. elegans model used here expresses human mutant TDP-43 pan-neuronally, resulting in severe progressive motor impairment, neurodegeneration, and shortened lifespan. Most prominently, these animals accumulate robust phosphorylated TDP-43, making this a powerful model to study the regulation and biological effects of post-translationally modified TDP-43 [16].

17 of the RNAi-mediated suppressors were tested for protection against TDP-43 tg phenotypes using deletion loss-of-function mutants, and 9 of these recapitulated the RNAi results. Of those with human homologs, paqr-1/ ADIPOR1/2, gly-8/ GALNT11, hse-5/ GLCE, sax-2/ FRYL, and zig-3/ HMCN1 suppressed TDP-43-dependent motor dysfunction and reduced accumulation of total or phosphorylated TDP-43. vab-9/ TMEM47 and pcp-5/ PRCP suppressed TDP-43 tg motor dysfunction but did not significantly change accumulation of TDP-43, which indicates these genes may modulate TDP-43 toxicity indirectly rather than through a direct effect on TDP-43 protein.

Our subsequent analysis focused on the C. elegans homolog of GLCE, hse-5, a heparan sulfate epimerase. hse-5(tm472) protects against TDP-43-driven motor dysfunction and prevents accumulation of phosphorylated TDP-43. We found that while hse-5(tm472) does not prevent TDP-43-driven neurodegeneration, TDP-43 tg; hse-5(tm472) animals have numerous aberrant axonal connections among neurons and between nerve cords, consistent with previous work identifying roles for hse-5 in axonal outgrowth and regeneration [37, 38, 7375]. We also find that loss of hse-5 partially restored TDP-43 tg synaptic transmission, identifying a novel role for hse-5 in synapse function. hse-5 mediated changes in neuronal connectivity and function may account for the improved movement of TDP-43 tg; hse-5(tm472) animals by maintaining neuronal activity better in the face of neuronal loss. This could also be through the developmental role of hse-5(tm472) in mediating extracellular matrix cues driving axon guidance along the midline or neuroblast migration [38, 76]. Alternatively, hse-5(tm472) may exacerbate TDP-43 neurodegeneration (Fig 3A), but still have a net protective effect by promoting clearance of phosphorylated TDP-43 and delaying neuronal dysfunction. In support of this, we found that GLCE-targeted siRNAs in human cultured cells reduced accumulation of pTDP. Furthermore, in FTLD-TDP patient brain neurons, we found decreased GLCE protein compared to controls. Reduction in GLCE in FTLD-TDP may represent a protective response in neurons to decrease accumulation of toxic phosphorylated TDP-43. In fact, the expression of a number of extracellular matrix genes was found to be significantly disrupted in sporadic ALS motor neurons, highlighting the importance of local cell to cell communication between neighboring neurons in parallel, as well as between synapse connected neurons in series, to support motor neuron health [70]. Based on these results, our working model supports two parallel mechanisms by which loss of hse-5/ GLCE function is protective. First, normal activity of hse-5/ GLCE promotes TDP-43 phosphorylation, likely through indirect effects on cell homeostasis or transmission of intercellular signaling. Second, hse-5/ GLCE also controls axonal outgrowth and synaptic transmission, influencing neuronal signaling. Loss of hse-5/ GLCE thus simultaneously decreases accumulation of phosphorylated TDP-43 and alters synaptic transmission, protecting against TDP-43-induced neuronal dysfunction.

In summary, this work has identified new target genes and molecular pathways controlling TDP-43 toxicity. Additional investigation of these genes in mammalian systems will be important future work. Preliminary characterization of GLCE suggests it can act to detoxify pTDP and is a therapeutic target worth further examination.

Materials and methods

Ethics statement

We obtained samples of postmortem tissue from the University of Washington Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center (ADRC) Neuropathology Core (PI, Dr. C. Dirk Keene) after receiving human subjects approval (University of Washington Human Subjects Division approval: HSD# 06-0492-E/A 01). FTLD-TDP cases were selected on the basis of having an autopsy-confirmed neuropathological diagnosis of FTLD with TDP-43 deposits according to consensus criteria [81]. Control samples were from neurologically healthy control participants, who were of a similar age with low levels of AD pathology (Braak stage III or less and CERAD scores of none or sparse) [82, 83]. All patients or their next of kin provided written, informed consent.

C. elegans strains and transgenics

Wild-type C. elegans (Bristol strain N2) was maintained as previously described [77]. Transgenic strains used were CK674 eri-1(mg366); lin-15b(n744); bkIs674[Psnb-1::hTDP-43(M337V)+Pmyo-2::dsRED] (primary RNAi screen and retesting), CK423 bkIs423[Psnb-1::hTDP-43(M337V)+Pmyo-2::dsRED], and CK426 bkIs426[Psnb-1::hTDP-43(A315T)+Pmyo-2::dsRED] [16, 78]. GR1373 eri-1(mg366) was used for screen counter-selection. CK423 was crossed with the following loss-of-function alleles: vab-9(gk398617) II, T24H10.4(gk637193) II, hse-5(tm472) III, sax-2(ky216) III, tbx-11(gk681547) III, F31E3.2(ok2044) III, pcp-5(gk446) III, umps-1(zu456) III, F40B5.2(gk920502) X, and pqn-18(gk805921) X. CK426 was crossed with the following loss-of-function alleles: gly-8(tm1156) III, unc-77(e625) IV, paqr-1(tm3262) IV, F55G1.5(gk1250) IV, T28C6.7(tm5935) IV, C47E12.3(ok2898) IV, gpx-7(tm2166) X, and zig-3(tm924) X. hse-5(tm472) was crossed with CK410 bkIs410[Psnb-1::hTDP-43(WT)+Pmyo-2::dsRED], CK10 bkIs10[Paex-3::hTau(V337M)+Pmyo-2::GFP], and CK144 bkIs144[Paex-3::hTau(WT)+Pmyo-2::GFP] for motility assays. OH1487 hse-5(tm472), DA509 unc-31(e928), and CB1072 unc-29(e1072) were used as controls.

C. elegans RNAi screening

Initial screening of the feeding RNAi Ahringer library was conducted essentially as described [79]. Bacterial cultures were grown over night and 40μL were seeded on twelve well plates of Nematode Growth Medium (NGM) supplemented with 25μg/mL carbenicillin and 2mM isopropyl-b-D-thiolgalactophyranoside (IPTG) and allowed to dry for two days. Embryos were isolated by hypochlorite treatment of gravid adult worms, placed onto 12 well RNAi plates at a density of approximately 15 eggs per well, and allowed to grow for 10–12 days at 16°C until the F2 generation were young adults. Controls including RNAi vector alone, RNAi targeting human TDP-43 (suppressor control), and RNAi targeting unc-22 (enhancer control) were screened in parallel for all experiments. Follow-up screening of putative positives was carried out on individual 60mm plates and were given a semi-quantitative overall score from 0 to 5, where 0 is unable to differentiate from the empty L4440 vector control, and 5 is complete suppression to N2 wild-type behavior. All RNAi clones from the Ahringer library that passed initial screening were analyzed by Sanger sequencing to validate clone targeting.

Behavioral analysis

Assessments of C. elegans locomotion were carried out as previously described with minor modifications [16]. In brief, 15–20 animals were placed at the center of a 100mm plate of 5x concentrated peptone nematode growth media uniformly seeded with OP-50 bacteria. Animals were allowed to move freely for 30–60 minutes, and the radial distance traveled from the start point was recorded. Distance traveled was converted to micrometers per minute. Statistical significance was analyzed using Prism statistical software.

Neurodegeneration and axon abnormality assays

Strains with GFP marked gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA)-ergic motor neurons were generated by crossing hse-5(tm472) with CK423 and the reporter strain EG1285 oxIs12[Punc-47::GFP + lin-15(+)]. Animals were grown to the indicated stage at 20°C before scoring. Living animals were immobilized on a 2% agarose pad with 0.01% sodium azide, and intact GABA-ergic neurons (L4 or day 1 adult) or axon abnormalities (L4 stage) were scored under fluorescence microscopy on a DeltaVision Elite (GE) imaging system using an Olympus 60x oil objective. Statistical significance was analyzed using Prism statistical software.

Microscopy, image acquisition, and processing

Images were acquired using a Leica SP5 confocal microscope with a 40x oil immersion lens. Z-plane stacked images were flattened into a maximum intensity projection using Imaris x64 software. Images were minimally processed using Adobe Photoshop to enhance visibility of fluorescent signal.

Aldicarb sensitivity assay

C. elegans were grown to L4 stage at 20°C, and then transferred to NGM plates containing the indicated concentrations of aldicarb (Sigma). Animals were scored for paralysis using a gentle touch on the head and tail with a platinum wire [45].

Immunoblotting

Stage-matched day 1 adult C. elegans were harvested and snap frozen. Protein was extracted by resuspending pellets in 1X sample buffer, 20 s sonication, and 5 minutes boiling. 10 μL of samples were loaded onto precast 4–15% gradient Tris: HCL gels (Biorad). Total human TDP-43 was detected with mouse monoclonal antibody ab57105 (Abcam) and phosphorylated TDP-43 was detected with mouse monoclonal antibody TIP-PTD-M01 (CosmoBio). Beta-Tubulin antibody E7 (DSHB) was used as a load control for all samples.

Quantitative reverse-transcription PCR (qRT-PCR)

RNA was extracted using Trizol (Sigma), and cDNA was prepared using iScript Reverse Transcription Supermix for RT-qPCR (Bio-Rad). Each genotype was tested with three biological replicates. qPCR was performed using the iTaq Universal SYBR Green Supermix kit (Bio-Rad) on a CFX Connect Real-Time PCR Instrument (BioRad). Data were normalized within samples using an internal reference control gene (act-1).

Lifespan assay

C. elegans were grown at 20°C following a short (4–6 hour) egglay to L4 stage on NGM plates seeded with E. coli OP50, and then transferred onto seeded NGM plates with added 5-fluoro-2’-deoxyuridine (FUDR, 0.05 mg/mL) to inhibit growth of progeny. Individuals were scored every 2–3 days by gentle touching with a platinum wire. Failure to respond to touch was scored as dead. Statistical analysis was performed using GraphPad Prism software.

Cell culture, RNA interference, and EA treatment

HEK293 cells were cultured under standard tissue culture conditions (DMEM, 10% defined fetal bovine serum, Penicillin (1000 IU/mL) Streptomycin (1000μg/mL)) as previously described [80]. RNA interference was conducted following manufacture’s protocol (RNAiMAX, Invitrogen). Induction of pTDP-43 with ethacrynic acid was conducted as previously described [80].

Immunohistochemistry and quantification

Immunohistochemistry was performed on paraffin embedded frontal cortex sections from 14 patients with FTLD-TDP and 12 normal control cases. Antigen retrieval consisted of autoclaving in a citrate buffer. Sections were treated for endogenous peroxidases, blocked in 5% non-fat milk in PBS, and incubated overnight at 4°C with anti-GLCE polyclonal antibody (ThermoFisher Sci, 1:75). Biotinylated secondary antibody was applied, followed by incubation in an avidin-biotin complex (Vector’s Vectastain Elite ABC kit, Burlingame, CA) and the reaction product was visualized with 0.05% diaminobenzidine (DAB)/0.01% hydrogen peroxide in PBS. FTLD-TDP cases were also stained with an anti-phospho TDP-43 antibody (409/410 CosmoBio, 1:1000) to confirm TDP-43 pathology. In order to minimize variability, sections from all cases (normal and affected subjects) were stained simultaneously. Digital images were obtained using a Leica DM6 microscope with the DFC 7000 digital camera and LAS X imaging software. HALO digital image software (Indica Labs) was used to quantify GLCE immunoreactivity in the deep layers of the frontal cortex (layers 5/6) using the “Area Quantification” setting. Data represent the average optical density value of DAB staining within the region of interest and are displayed as mean +/- SEM. A two tailed Student’s t-test was used to assess differences in GLCE expression between cases and controls.

Supporting information

S1 Fig. Characterization of TDP-43 transgene expression levels and immunoblot analysis of suppressors without an effect on TDP-43 protein.

(A-B) Suppressors of TDP-43 motor function do not have decreased transgene expression levels. (A) Expression of the TDP-43 transgene was assessed in triplicate independent replicate samples using quantitative reverse transcription PCR (qRT-PCR), and signal normalized to expression of an internal reference gene act-1. p>0.05 for all samples tested versus TDP-43 tg. (B) To assay the effects of loss-of-function mutations in suppressor genes present on the same chromosome as the TDP-43 tg transgene (Chr IV), a second TDP-43 transgene was utilized on a different chromosome (Chr II), TDP-43 tg2. *p = 0.0371 versus TDP-43 tg2. (C-F) Measurement of levels of total and phosphorylated TDP-43 protein by immunoblot. Immunoblot data shown are representative of at least triplicate independent experiments, and graphs plot relative total TDP-43 or phosphorylated TDP-43 signal normalized to tubulin protein levels from three or more independent replicate experiments. (C) TDP-43 tg; vab-9(-), (D) TDP-43 tg; pcp-5(-), (E) TDP-43 tg; pqn-18(-), (F) TDP-43 tg2; T28C6.7(-). Significance was evaluated using Mann-Whitney test between strains tested. p>0.05 versus TDP-43 tg for all comparisons.

(TIF)

S2 Fig. Characterization of hse-5 in non-Tg, WT TDP-43 tg, and tau tg C. elegans.

(A) hse-5(tm472) do not have significant differences in motility relative to non-transgenic (non-Tg) C. elegans, N>200 per genotype. (B) Motility defects of C. elegans expressing wild-type TDP-43 (WT TDP-43 tg) are significantly improved by hse-5(tm472). p<0.0001, unpaired t-test, N>200 per genotype. (C) hse-5(tm472) does not significantly alter the motility defects in C. elegans expressing wild-type human tau, although it is trending towards worsened motility. p = 0.052, unpaired t-test, N>130 per genotype. (D) hse-5(tm472) significantly worsens motility defects in C. elegans expressing mutant V337M human tau. p = 0.0097, unpaired t-test, N>150 per genotype. (E) hse-5(tm472) are significantly long-lived relative to non-Tg animals (N2), p<0.0001, Log-rank test. TDP-43 tg are short-lived relative to non-Tg animals, p<0.0001. However, the lifespan of TDP-43 tg; hse-5(tm472) are not significantly different from TDP-43 tg animals alone, p = 0.143. (F) mRNA expression of hse-5 does not change in TDP-43 tg relative to non-Tg animals. Two different primer pairs were tested using quantitative reverse transcription real-time PCR (qRT-PCR) on three independent replicate samples. Signal was normalized to the expression an internal reference gene, act-1.

(TIF)

Acknowledgments

We thank Heather Currey, Elaine Loomis, Kim Howard, Josh Hincks, Kelsey Price, Kaili Chickering, Aristide Black, and Ashley Yeung for essential technical assistance. We thank Allison Beller for outstanding administrative support. We thank the National Bioresource Project (Japan) and C. elegans Genetics Center (CGC) for providing strains. We thank WormBase for essential C. elegans model organism information. We thank the Developmental Studies Hybridoma Bank (NICHD) for the β-tubulin primary antibody E7.

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

We thank the National Institutes of Health R01NS064131 (BCK) and P50AG005136 (CDK-- UW ADRC Neuropathology Core). We also thank the Department of Veterans Affairs (Merit Review Grant I01BX003755 to BCK and Merit Review Grant I01BX004044 to NFL) for funding and training support. We also thank the Nancy and Buster Alvord endowment (CDK). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Tan RH, Ke YD, Ittner LM, Halliday GM. ALS/FTLD: experimental models and reality. Acta Neuropathologica. 2017:1–20. 10.1007/s00401-016-1666-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Mann DMA, Snowden JS. Frontotemporal lobar degeneration: Pathogenesis, pathology and pathways to phenotype. Brain Pathol. 2017. 10.1111/bpa.12486 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Chornenkyy Y, Fardo DW, Nelson PT. Tau and TDP-43 proteinopathies: kindred pathologic cascades and genetic pleiotropy. Lab Invest. 2019. 10.1038/s41374-019-0196-y . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Wilson RS, Yu L, Trojanowski JQ, Chen EY, Boyle PA, Bennett DA, et al. TDP-43 pathology, cognitive decline, and dementia in old age. JAMA Neurol. 2013;70(11):1418–24. 10.1001/jamaneurol.2013.3961 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.James BD, Wilson RS, Boyle PA, Trojanowski JQ, Bennett DA, Schneider JA. TDP-43 stage, mixed pathologies, and clinical Alzheimer’s-type dementia. Brain. 2016;139(11):2983–93. 10.1093/brain/aww224 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Cohen TJ, Hwang AW, Restrepo CR, Yuan CX, Trojanowski JQ, Lee VM. An acetylation switch controls TDP-43 function and aggregation propensity. Nat Commun. 2015;6:5845 10.1038/ncomms6845 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Seyfried NT, Gozal YM, Dammer EB, Xia Q, Duong DM, Cheng D, et al. Multiplex SILAC analysis of a cellular TDP-43 proteinopathy model reveals protein inclusions associated with SUMOylation and diverse polyubiquitin chains. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2010;9(4):705–18. Epub 2010/01/0610. 10.1074/mcp.M800390-MCP200 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Neumann M, Sampathu DM, Kwong LK, Truax AC, Micsenyi MC, Chou TT, et al. Ubiquitinated TDP-43 in frontotemporal lobar degeneration and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Science. 2006;314(5796):130–3. Epub 2006/10/07. 10.1126/science.1134108 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Arai T, Hasegawa M, Akiyama H, Ikeda K, Nonaka T, Mori H, et al. TDP-43 is a component of ubiquitin-positive tau-negative inclusions in frontotemporal lobar degeneration and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2006;351(3):602–11. Epub 2006/11/07. 10.1016/j.bbrc.2006.10.093 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Neumann M, Kwong LK, Lee EB, Kremmer E, Flatley A, Xu Y, et al. Phosphorylation of S409/410 of TDP-43 is a consistent feature in all sporadic and familial forms of TDP-43 proteinopathies. Acta Neuropathol. 2009;117(2):137–49. 10.1007/s00401-008-0477-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Liachko NF, McMillan PJ, Guthrie CR, Bird TD, Leverenz JB, Kraemer BC. CDC7 inhibition blocks pathological TDP-43 phosphorylation and neurodegeneration. Ann Neurol. 2013;74(1):39–52. 10.1002/ana.23870 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Ayala YM, Zago P, D’Ambrogio A, Xu YF, Petrucelli L, Buratti E, et al. Structural determinants of the cellular localization and shuttling of TDP-43. J Cell Sci. 2008;121(Pt 22):3778–85. Epub 2008/10/30. 10.1242/jcs.038950 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Hasegawa M, Arai T, Nonaka T, Kametani F, Yoshida M, Hashizume Y, et al. Phosphorylated TDP-43 in frontotemporal lobar degeneration and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Ann Neurol. 2008;64(1):60–70. 10.1002/ana.21425 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Zhang YJ, Gendron TF, Xu YF, Ko LW, Yen SH, Petrucelli L. Phosphorylation regulates proteasomal-mediated degradation and solubility of TAR DNA binding protein-43 C-terminal fragments. Mol Neurodegener. 2010;5:33 Epub 2010/09/02. 10.1186/1750-1326-5-33 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Brady OA, Meng P, Zheng Y, Mao Y, Hu F. Regulation of TDP-43 aggregation by phosphorylation and p62/SQSTM1. J Neurochem. 2011;116(2):248–59. Epub 2010/11/11. 10.1111/j.1471-4159.2010.07098.x . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Liachko NF, Guthrie CR, Kraemer BC. Phosphorylation Promotes Neurotoxicity in a Caenorhabditis elegans Model of TDP-43 Proteinopathy. J Neurosci. 2010;30(48):16208–19. Epub 2010/12/03. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2911-10.2010 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Li HR, Chiang WC, Chou PC, Wang WJ, Huang JR. TAR DNA-binding protein 43 (TDP-43) liquid-liquid phase separation is mediated by just a few aromatic residues. J Biol Chem. 2018;293(16):6090–8. 10.1074/jbc.AC117.001037 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Conicella AE, Zerze GH, Mittal J, Fawzi NL. ALS Mutations Disrupt Phase Separation Mediated by alpha-Helical Structure in the TDP-43 Low-Complexity C-Terminal Domain. Structure. 2016;24(9):1537–49. 10.1016/j.str.2016.07.007 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Ritson GP, Custer SK, Freibaum BD, Guinto JB, Geffel D, Moore J, et al. TDP-43 mediates degeneration in a novel Drosophila model of disease caused by mutations in VCP/p97. J Neurosci. 2010;30(22):7729–39. Epub 2010/06/04. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5894-09.2010 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Nollen EA, Garcia SM, van Haaften G, Kim S, Chavez A, Morimoto RI, et al. Genome-wide RNA interference screen identifies previously undescribed regulators of polyglutamine aggregation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004;101(17):6403–8. 10.1073/pnas.0307697101 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Kraemer BC, Burgess JK, Chen JH, Thomas JH, Schellenberg GD. Molecular pathways that influence human tau-induced pathology in Caenorhabditis elegans. Hum Mol Genet. 2006;15(9):1483–96. 10.1093/hmg/ddl067 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Karsten SL, Sang TK, Gehman LT, Chatterjee S, Liu J, Lawless GM, et al. A genomic screen for modifiers of tauopathy identifies puromycin-sensitive aminopeptidase as an inhibitor of tau-induced neurodegeneration. Neuron. 2006;51(5):549–60. 10.1016/j.neuron.2006.07.019 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Dimitriadi M, Sleigh JN, Walker A, Chang HC, Sen A, Kalloo G, et al. Conserved genes act as modifiers of invertebrate SMN loss of function defects. PLoS Genet. 2010;6(10):e1001172 10.1371/journal.pgen.1001172 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Manzo E, O’Conner AG, Barrows JM, Shreiner DD, Birchak GJ, Zarnescu DC. Medium-Chain Fatty Acids, Beta-Hydroxybutyric Acid and Genetic Modulation of the Carnitine Shuttle Are Protective in a Drosophila Model of ALS Based on TDP-43. Front Mol Neurosci. 2018;11:182 10.3389/fnmol.2018.00182 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Wang J, Farr GW, Hall DH, Li F, Furtak K, Dreier L, et al. An ALS-linked mutant SOD1 produces a locomotor defect associated with aggregation and synaptic dysfunction when expressed in neurons of Caenorhabditis elegans. PLoS Genet. 2009;5(1):e1000350 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000350 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Berson A, Goodman LD, Sartoris AN, Otte CG, Aykit JA, Lee VM, et al. Drosophila Ref1/ALYREF regulates transcription and toxicity associated with ALS/FTD disease etiologies. Acta Neuropathol Commun. 2019;7(1):65 10.1186/s40478-019-0710-x . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Elden AC, Kim HJ, Hart MP, Chen-Plotkin AS, Johnson BS, Fang X, et al. Ataxin-2 intermediate-length polyglutamine expansions are associated with increased risk for ALS. Nature. 2010;466(7310):1069–75. 10.1038/nature09320 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Armakola M, Higgins MJ, Figley MD, Barmada SJ, Scarborough EA, Diaz Z, et al. Inhibition of RNA lariat debranching enzyme suppresses TDP-43 toxicity in ALS disease models. Nat Genet. 2012;44(12):1302–9. 10.1038/ng.2434 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Kim SH, Zhan L, Hanson KA, Tibbetts RS. High-content RNAi screening identifies the Type 1 inositol triphosphate receptor as a modifier of TDP-43 localization and neurotoxicity. Hum Mol Genet. 2012;21(22):4845–56. 10.1093/hmg/dds321 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Sreedharan J, Neukomm LJ, Brown RH, Jr., Freeman MR. Age-Dependent TDP-43-Mediated Motor Neuron Degeneration Requires GSK3, hat-trick, and xmas-2. Curr Biol. 2015;25(16):2130–6. 10.1016/j.cub.2015.06.045 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Zhan L, Xie Q, Tibbetts RS. Opposing roles of p38 and JNK in a Drosophila model of TDP-43 proteinopathy reveal oxidative stress and innate immunity as pathogenic components of neurodegeneration. Hum Mol Genet. 2015;24(3):757–72. 10.1093/hmg/ddu493 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Appocher C, Mohagheghi F, Cappelli S, Stuani C, Romano M, Feiguin F, et al. Major hnRNP proteins act as general TDP-43 functional modifiers both in Drosophila and human neuronal cells. Nucleic Acids Res. 2017;45(13):8026–45. 10.1093/nar/gkx477 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Pons M, Prieto S, Miguel L, Frebourg T, Campion D, Sune C, et al. Identification of TCERG1 as a new genetic modulator of TDP-43 production in Drosophila. Acta Neuropathol Commun. 2018;6(1):138 10.1186/s40478-018-0639-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.White JG, Southgate E, Thomson JN, Brenner S. The structure of the nervous system of the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1986;314(1165):1–340. 10.1098/rstb.1986.0056 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Kamath RS F A, Dong Y, Poulin G, Durbin R, Gotta M, Kanapin A, Le Bot N, Moreno S, Sohrmann M, Welchman DP, Zipperlen P, Ahringer J. Systematic functional analysis of the Caenorhabditis elegans genome using RNAi. Nature. 2003;421((6920)):231–7. 10.1038/nature01278 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Myers EW, Lipman DJ. Basic local alignment search tool. J Mol Biol. 1990;215(3):403–10. Epub 1990/10/05. 10.1016/S0022-2836(05)80360-2 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Rhiner C, Gysi S, Frohli E, Hengartner MO, Hajnal A. Syndecan regulates cell migration and axon guidance in C. elegans. Development. 2005;132(20):4621–33. 10.1242/dev.02042 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Bulow HE, Hobert O. Differential sulfations and epimerization define heparan sulfate specificity in nervous system development. Neuron. 2004;41(5):723–36. 10.1016/s0896-6273(04)00084-4 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Lazaro-Pena MI, Diaz-Balzac CA, Bulow HE, Emmons SW. Synaptogenesis Is Modulated by Heparan Sulfate in Caenorhabditis elegans. Genetics. 2018;209(1):195–208. 10.1534/genetics.118.300837 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Sarrazin S, Lamanna WC, Esko JD. Heparan sulfate proteoglycans. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol. 2011;3(7). 10.1101/cshperspect.a004952 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Jia J, Maccarana M, Zhang X, Bespalov M, Lindahl U, Li JP. Lack of L-iduronic acid in heparan sulfate affects interaction with growth factors and cell signaling. J Biol Chem. 2009;284(23):15942–50. 10.1074/jbc.M809577200 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Li JP, Gong F, Hagner-McWhirter A, Forsberg E, Abrink M, Kisilevsky R, et al. Targeted disruption of a murine glucuronyl C5-epimerase gene results in heparan sulfate lacking L-iduronic acid and in neonatal lethality. J Biol Chem. 2003;278(31):28363–6. 10.1074/jbc.C300219200 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Li J, Fang J, Qin Y, Liao W, Liu H, Zhou Y, et al. GLCE regulates PC12 cell neuritogenesis induced by nerve growth factor through activating SMAD/ID3 signalling. Biochem J. 2014;459(2):405–15. 10.1042/BJ20131360 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.McIntire SL, Reimer RJ, Schuske K, Edwards RH, Jorgensen EM. Identification and characterization of the vesicular GABA transporter. Nature. 1997;389(6653):870–6. 10.1038/39908 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Mahoney TR, Luo S, Nonet ML. Analysis of synaptic transmission in Caenorhabditis elegans using an aldicarb-sensitivity assay. Nat Protoc. 2006;1(4):1772–7. 10.1038/nprot.2006.281 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Iguchi Y, Katsuno M, Takagi S, Ishigaki S, Niwa J, Hasegawa M, et al. Oxidative stress induced by glutathione depletion reproduces pathological modifications of TDP-43 linked to TDP-43 proteinopathies. Neurobiol Dis. 2012;45(3):862–70. 10.1016/j.nbd.2011.12.002 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Nicolas A, Kenna KP, Renton AE, Ticozzi N, Faghri F, Chia R, et al. Genome-wide Analyses Identify KIF5A as a Novel ALS Gene. Neuron. 2018;97(6):1268–83 e6. 10.1016/j.neuron.2018.02.027 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Antonicka H, Leary SC, Guercin GH, Agar JN, Horvath R, Kennaway NG, et al. Mutations in COX10 result in a defect in mitochondrial heme A biosynthesis and account for multiple, early-onset clinical phenotypes associated with isolated COX deficiency. Hum Mol Genet. 2003;12(20):2693–702. 10.1093/hmg/ddg284 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Timmerman V, Strickland AV, Zuchner S. Genetics of Charcot-Marie-Tooth (CMT) Disease within the Frame of the Human Genome Project Success. Genes (Basel). 2014;5(1):13–32. 10.3390/genes5010013 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Tamiya G, Makino S, Hayashi M, Abe A, Numakura C, Ueki M, et al. A mutation of COX6A1 causes a recessive axonal or mixed form of Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease. Am J Hum Genet. 2014;95(3):294–300. 10.1016/j.ajhg.2014.07.013 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Fiermonte G, Palmieri L, Todisco S, Agrimi G, Palmieri F, Walker JE. Identification of the mitochondrial glutamate transporter. Bacterial expression, reconstitution, functional characterization, and tissue distribution of two human isoforms. J Biol Chem. 2002;277(22):19289–94. 10.1074/jbc.M201572200 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Magoulas PL, El-Hattab AW. Systemic primary carnitine deficiency: an overview of clinical manifestations, diagnosis, and management. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2012;7:68 10.1186/1750-1172-7-68 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Parker-Duffen JL, Nakamura K, Silver M, Zuriaga MA, MacLauchlan S, Aprahamian TR, et al. Divergent roles for adiponectin receptor 1 (AdipoR1) and AdipoR2 in mediating revascularization and metabolic dysfunction in vivo. J Biol Chem. 2014;289(23):16200–13. 10.1074/jbc.M114.548115 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Ton QV, Leino D, Mowery SA, Bredemeier NO, Lafontant PJ, Lubert A, et al. Collagen COL22A1 maintains vascular stability and mutations in COL22A1 are potentially associated with intracranial aneurysms. Dis Model Mech. 2018;11(12). 10.1242/dmm.033654 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Boskovski MT, Yuan S, Pedersen NB, Goth CK, Makova S, Clausen H, et al. The heterotaxy gene GALNT11 glycosylates Notch to orchestrate cilia type and laterality. Nature. 2013;504(7480):456–9. 10.1038/nature12723 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Li JP. Glucuronyl C5-epimerase an enzyme converting glucuronic acid to iduronic acid in heparan sulfate/heparin biosynthesis. Prog Mol Biol Transl Sci. 2010;93:59–78. 10.1016/S1877-1173(10)93004-4 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Benard C, Tjoe N, Boulin T, Recio J, Hobert O. The small, secreted immunoglobulin protein ZIG-3 maintains axon position in Caenorhabditis elegans. Genetics. 2009;183(3):917–27. 10.1534/genetics.109.107441 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Gallegos ME, Bargmann CI. Mechanosensory neurite termination and tiling depend on SAX-2 and the SAX-1 kinase. Neuron. 2004;44(2):239–49. 10.1016/j.neuron.2004.09.021 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Jia L, Emmons SW. Genes that control ray sensory neuron axon development in the Caenorhabditis elegans male. Genetics. 2006;173(3):1241–58. 10.1534/genetics.106.057000 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Simske JS, Koppen M, Sims P, Hodgkin J, Yonkof A, Hardin J. The cell junction protein VAB-9 regulates adhesion and epidermal morphology in C. elegans. Nat Cell Biol. 2003;5(7):619–25. 10.1038/ncb1002 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Fisher SA, Rivera A, Fritsche LG, Keilhauer CN, Lichtner P, Meitinger T, et al. Case-control genetic association study of fibulin-6 (FBLN6 or HMCN1) variants in age-related macular degeneration (AMD). Hum Mutat. 2007;28(4):406–13. 10.1002/humu.20464 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Parry DA, Mighell AJ, El-Sayed W, Shore RC, Jalili IK, Dollfus H, et al. Mutations in CNNM4 cause Jalili syndrome, consisting of autosomal-recessive cone-rod dystrophy and amelogenesis imperfecta. Am J Hum Genet. 2009;84(2):266–73. 10.1016/j.ajhg.2009.01.009 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Polok B, Escher P, Ambresin A, Chouery E, Bolay S, Meunier I, et al. Mutations in CNNM4 cause recessive cone-rod dystrophy with amelogenesis imperfecta. Am J Hum Genet. 2009;84(2):259–65. 10.1016/j.ajhg.2009.01.006 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Al-Sayed MD, Al-Zaidan H, Albakheet A, Hakami H, Kenana R, Al-Yafee Y, et al. Mutations in NALCN cause an autosomal-recessive syndrome with severe hypotonia, speech impairment, and cognitive delay. Am J Hum Genet. 2013;93(4):721–6. 10.1016/j.ajhg.2013.08.001 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Ronchi D, Di Fonzo A, Lin W, Bordoni A, Liu C, Fassone E, et al. Mutations in DNA2 link progressive myopathy to mitochondrial DNA instability. Am J Hum Genet. 2013;92(2):293–300. 10.1016/j.ajhg.2012.12.014 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.McKenna WL, Betancourt J, Larkin KA, Abrams B, Guo C, Rubenstein JL, et al. Tbr1 and Fezf2 regulate alternate corticofugal neuronal identities during neocortical development. J Neurosci. 2011;31(2):549–64. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4131-10.2011 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Suchi M, Mizuno H, Kawai Y, Tsuboi T, Sumi S, Okajima K, et al. Molecular cloning of the human UMP synthase gene and characterization of point mutations in two hereditary orotic aciduria families. Am J Hum Genet. 1997;60(3):525–39. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Molinari M, Calanca V, Galli C, Lucca P, Paganetti P. Role of EDEM in the release of misfolded glycoproteins from the calnexin cycle. Science. 2003;299(5611):1397–400. 10.1126/science.1079474 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Smith AC, Mears AJ, Bunker R, Ahmed A, MacKenzie M, Schwartzentruber JA, et al. Mutations in the enzyme glutathione peroxidase 4 cause Sedaghatian-type spondylometaphyseal dysplasia. J Med Genet. 2014;51(7):470–4. 10.1136/jmedgenet-2013-102218 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Rabin SJ, Kim JM, Baughn M, Libby RT, Kim YJ, Fan Y, et al. Sporadic ALS has compartment-specific aberrant exon splicing and altered cell-matrix adhesion biology. Hum Mol Genet. 2010;19(2):313–28. Epub 2009/10/30. 10.1093/hmg/ddp498 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Wu LS, Cheng WC, Chen CY, Wu MC, Wang YC, Tseng YH, et al. Transcriptomopathies of pre- and post-symptomatic frontotemporal dementia-like mice with TDP-43 depletion in forebrain neurons. Acta Neuropathol Commun. 2019;7(1):50 10.1186/s40478-019-0674-x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Stribl C, Samara A, Trumbach D, Peis R, Neumann M, Fuchs H, et al. Mitochondrial dysfunction and decrease in body weight of a transgenic knock-in mouse model for TDP-43. J Biol Chem. 2014;289(15):10769–84. 10.1074/jbc.M113.515940 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Blanchette CR, Thackeray A, Perrat PN, Hekimi S, Benard CY. Functional Requirements for Heparan Sulfate Biosynthesis in Morphogenesis and Nervous System Development in C. elegans. PLoS Genet. 2017;13(1):e1006525 10.1371/journal.pgen.1006525 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Bulow HE, Tjoe N, Townley RA, Didiano D, van Kuppevelt TH, Hobert O. Extracellular sugar modifications provide instructive and cell-specific information for axon-guidance choices. Curr Biol. 2008;18(24):1978–85. 10.1016/j.cub.2008.11.023 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Edwards TJ, Hammarlund M. Syndecan promotes axon regeneration by stabilizing growth cone migration. Cell Rep. 2014;8(1):272–83. 10.1016/j.celrep.2014.06.008 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Wang X, Liu J, Zhu Z, Ou G. The heparan sulfate-modifying enzyme glucuronyl C5-epimerase HSE-5 controls Caenorhabditis elegans Q neuroblast polarization during migration. Dev Biol. 2015;399(2):306–14. 10.1016/j.ydbio.2015.01.007 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Brenner S. The genetics of Caenorhabditis elegans. Genetics. 1974;77:71–94. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78.Liachko NF, McMillan PJ, Guthrie CR, Bird TD, Leverenz JB, Kraemer BC. CDC7 inhibition blocks pathological TDP-43 phosphorylation and neurodegeneration. Ann Neurol. 2013. 10.1002/ana.23870 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79.Kamath RS, Ahringer J. Genome-wide RNAi screening in Caenorhabditis elegans. Methods. 2003;30:313–21. 10.1016/s1046-2023(03)00050-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80.Liachko NF, Saxton AD, McMillan PJ, Strovas TJ, Currey HN, Taylor LM, et al. The phosphatase calcineurin regulates pathological TDP-43 phosphorylation. Acta Neuropathologica. 2016;132(4):545–61. 10.1007/s00401-016-1600-y [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81.Mackenzie IR, Neumann M, Baborie A, Sampathu DM, Du Plessis D, Jaros E, et al. A harmonized classification system for FTLD-TDP pathology. Acta Neuropathol. 2011;122(1):111–3. 10.1007/s00401-011-0845-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82.Braak H, Braak E. Neuropathological stageing of Alzheimer-related changes. Acta Neuropathol. 1991;82(4):239–59. 10.1007/bf00308809 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83.Mirra SS, Heyman A, McKeel D, Sumi SM, Crain BJ, Brownlee LM, et al. The Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer’s Disease (CERAD). Part II. Standardization of the neuropathologic assessment of Alzheimer’s disease. Neurology. 1991;41(4):479–86. 10.1212/wnl.41.4.479 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Gregory S Barsh, Anne C Hart

Transfer Alert

This paper was transferred from another journal. As a result, its full editorial history (including decision letters, peer reviews and author responses) may not be present.

10 Jul 2019

Dear Dr Kraemer,

Thank you very much for submitting your Research Article entitled 'Genome wide analysis reveals heparan sulfate epimerase modulates TDP-43 proteinopathy' to PLOS Genetics. Your manuscript was fully evaluated at the editorial level and by independent peer reviewers. The reviewers appreciated the importance of your screen and the analysis provided, but they raised some substantial concerns about the current manuscript. Based on the reviews, we will not be able to accept this version of the manuscript, but we would be quite willing to review again a revised version that addresses the issues raised by the reviewers. We cannot, of course, promise publication at that time.

Should you decide to revise the manuscript for further consideration here, your revisions should address each of the specific points made by each reviewer. As noted in the comments, some of these can be dealt with by revising manuscript text or including information requested. We will require a detailed list of your responses to the review comments and a description of the changes you have made in the manuscript.

If you decide to revise the manuscript for further consideration at PLOS Genetics, please aim to resubmit within the next 60 days, unless it will take extra time to address the concerns of the reviewers, in which case we would appreciate an expected resubmission date by email to plosgenetics@plos.org.

If present, accompanying reviewer attachments are included with this email; please notify the journal office if any appear to be missing. They will also be available for download from the link below. You can use this link to log into the system when you are ready to submit a revised version, having first consulted our Submission Checklist.

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see our guidelines.

Please be aware that our data availability policy requires that all numerical data underlying graphs or summary statistics are included with the submission, and you will need to provide this upon resubmission if not already present. In addition, we do not permit the inclusion of phrases such as "data not shown" or "unpublished results" in manuscripts. All points should be backed up by data provided with the submission.

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool.  PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org.

PLOS has incorporated Similarity Check, powered by iThenticate, into its journal-wide submission system in order to screen submitted content for originality before publication. Each PLOS journal undertakes screening on a proportion of submitted articles. You will be contacted if needed following the screening process.

To resubmit, use the link below and 'Revise Submission' in the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder.

[LINK]

We are sorry that we cannot be more positive about your manuscript at this stage. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any concerns or questions.

Yours sincerely,

Anne C. Hart

Associate Editor

PLOS Genetics

Gregory Barsh

Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Genetics

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Authors:

Please note here if the review is uploaded as an attachment.

Reviewer #1: This study by Liachko et al perform the first genome-wide RNAi screen for modifiers of TDP-43 M337V toxicity. They find a number of candidates in interesting GO categories such as energy metabolism, protein homeostasis, and ECM/cytoskeleton. They then follow up on a single candidate gene, hse-5. They find that an hse-5 mutant decreases TDP-43 neurodegeneration of GABAergic cells in C. elegans, and that knock down of the ortholog GLCE in a mammaliam model of pTDP-43 is also protective. Finally they see decreased levels of GLCE in human brains with TDP-43 pathology. Overall, this is a well-done, comprehensive screen for modifiers of TDP-43 toxicity. The candidate gene hse-5/GLCE is quite intriguing with solid follow up in cell culture and human neuropath. A few minor additions would strengthen this paper but overall an important, well-done study.

1) For the Western blots of TDP-43 and pTDP-43, some quantification of the results would be helpful. The suppressor hits that did not change TDP-43 and pTDP-43 levels would also be interesting to see.

2) In regards to TDP-43 levels, the authors are careful to avoid saying that the decreased levels are due to improved clearance, but nonetheless it would be important to see if the candidates change TDP-43 mRNA levels. If they do so, it would not disqualify the candidates, but one would have a better, different idea of mechanism of protection.

3) In regards to hse-5, one wonders if adult only (or from L4 onwards) RNAi has an effect and would avoid the potentially protective/potentially harmful axonal abnormalities

4) The screen was performed in a mutant TDP-43 line, however the cell culture and FTLD-TDP would presumably express wild-type TDP-43. Therefore, it would be interesting to see if the hse-5 RNAi or mutant is protective against the WT TDP-43.

5) Also, Table 2 is referred to in the text, but was not included in the manuscript for review.

Reviewer #2: Genome wide analysis reveals heparan sulfate epimerase modulates TDP-43 proteinopathy

The manuscript by Liachko and colleagues is an investigation into finding genetic modifiers of TDP-43 toxicity. These genetic modifiers may inform into the mechanisms underlying TDP-43 linked pathologies, and they may also serve as new targets for therapeutic intervention. The work is done with a well characterized C. elegans model of TDP-43 neuronal toxicity and a genome wide reverse genetics screen using RNA interference to screen for suppression of TDP-43 induced motility phenotypes.

The work is well done, the manuscript is clearly written and logical in its presentation. Furthermore, I would like to commend the authors on completing such a labour intensive genetic screen. The results are novel and likely to aid further research in the field. However, there are a few outstanding issues that need to be addressed before considering the work for publication.

Major points

Unbiased genetic screens are powerful ways to advance understanding. However, sometimes it is not evident by which mechanism a modifier achieves its phenotypic effects. Here the authors sequentially limit their candidate genes to a select few before settling on hse-5/GLCE.

There is no doubt that this gene has an effect on phosopho TDP-43 phenotypes. But the mechanism for the suppression is not sufficiently accounted for.

p. 10 “Preliminary characterization of GLCE suggests it can act to detoxify pTDP and is a therapeutic target worth further examination.”

The choice of focusing on one gene, hse-5 is reasonable, but I have several questions.

How does a potential ECM protein affect the levels of TDP-43 phosphorylation in worms and tissues? What is the working model? The gap in understanding should be addressed, at least as speculation in the discussion.

Has GLCE showed up as a modifier of ALS in GWAS studies?

Where is hse-5 expressed in C. elegans and how does this relate to the expression of mutant TDP-43?

Were both deletion alleles of hse-5 tested?

The fact that hse-5 does not suppress neurodegeneration is unfortunate, perhaps this is the key mechanism, but at the same time maybe it is non-specific. Does hse-5 result in alternative neuronal connections that simply compensate for impaired movement in TDP-43 animals? Do hse-5 animals have generally improved motility? How do they respond to aldicarb and/or levamisole? They say that RNAi candidates working in non-transgenic worms were excluded as part of the selection process, but it is possible that retesting of hse-5 RNAi in N2 worms would miss subtle effects. Thus, do hse-5 mutants have improved motility compared to N2 worms?

Furthermore, a control that is missing is tests versus wild type TDP-43 transgenics. The 2010 Liachko et al. manuscript describes the WT control strains, thus these are likely the floor for the amount of suppression possible with this approach and hse-5 should be tested in these WT TDP-43 strains.

Suppression of phenotypes associated with human disease proteins is of wide interest. Thus, it would be good to know if suppression of TDP-43 toxicity by hse-5 is specific. Does hse-5 protect against other forms of toxicity, perhaps Tau, given the role of phosphorylation in tau toxicity.

Does hse-5 affect the expression of the TDP-43 transgenes? This would be good to know as it could change interpretation of the potential mechanism for reduced pTDP-43. Perhaps for the other 4 candidate genes as well.

Finally, does hse-5 affect lifespan? Also good to know in terms of modifiers of age-dependent phenotypes.

Minor issues

Table 2 is missing.

p. 5 “We found that 5 of the mutants tested had decreased levels of TDP-43 protein accompanied by reduced phosphorylation (Fig. 2C-G). Interestingly, these results indicate the remaining 4 suppressor genes that improve TDP-43 motor dysfunction do so without a direct impact on TDP-43 phosphorylation or protein levels.”

It looks like there is more of a mix of reduced total TDP-43 versus pTDP-43. It is clear that something is happening, but perhaps a simple relative quantification would aid the figure. Also, what happened to TDP-43 in the gly-8 mutants?

Reviewer #3: The authors present data on an unbiased genome-wide RNAi screen for suppressors of tdp-43(M337V) toxicity. After screening 16757 individual gene knockdowns, they identified 46 candidate genes that were required for tdp-43(M337V) toxicity. Based on sequence homology, 24/46 genes appeared to have human homologs. These 24 genes fell into several functional classes. The authors obtained loss-of-function mutants for 17 genes and found that 9 mutants mimicked the RNAi results and suppressed tdp-43(M337V) toxicity. For five of these mutants, the authors showed that overall tdp-43 protein levels were reduced. The authors focus their attention on one gene, hse-5, which consistently suppressed tdp-43(M337V) toxicity. hse-5 appears homologous to the human gene GLCE, which modifies heparin sulfate proteoglycans. An hse-5 mutant, tm472, exhibits improved motor function in the tdp-43(M337V) background. Surprisingly, hse-5(tm472) significantly increases the loss of GABA motor neurons in the tdp-43(M337V) background. The remaining neurons exhibit excessive branching and axonal complexities. This increase in axon abnormalities was additive with tdp-43(M337V). The authors also show that siRNA inhibition of GLCE in human HEK cells substantially reduced endogenous tdp-43 phosphorylation. Finally, the authors examine frontal cortex brain sections from post-mortem FTLD patients and observed significantly reduced GLCE staining in the FTLD patients.

The manuscript is concise and clearly written. The introduction clearly frames the significance of the work. However, the discussion section essentially restates the results and does not offer substantial insights into any of the hits or their potential significance to the field. It would be extremely useful to discuss whether any of these genes or their homologs have been identified in the other screens mentioned by the authors. If so, what can be learned? If not, what might be unique about this tdp-43 model that facilitated their identification? Could the over-expression of mutant human tdp-43 in the background of an endogenous WT worm tdp-43 influence the results of the screen? How might this be addressed? I would also like to see more discussion of why a gene involved in (mostly) extracellular protein modification that is predicting to be localized within the secretory pathway is required for toxicity of a nucleo-cytoplasmic protein. This is not clear and is one of the most interesting conclusions from this work. There is also a lot known about the role of hse-5 in neuronal migration and axon regeneration from previous work, which is basically not discussed. Could these functions possibly explain how hse-5 might be protecting against tdp-43? Additional discussion in this area is warranted.

I also have several major and minor concerns regarding the data as presented:

Major

1. In the screen flow chart, the authors indicate that gene knockdowns that are “different for TDP-43 tg versus non-transgenic” are discarded. Given that the phenotype being screened for is improved motility in the tdp-43(M337V) background, how would one see improved motility in a non-tg (ie wild type) background? Were any hits eliminated based on this criteria? Or was the filtering for gene knockdowns that had similar motility in WT and tdp-43(M337V)? This description needs to be clarified. Along these lines, it would be useful to see the motility of WT in Fig 2A and 2B.

2. Figure 2 C-G, the authors show that 5 loss of function mutants, including hse-5, exhibit reduced phosphorylated tdp-43(M337V) protein levels, as well as total tdp-43(M337V) levels (although paqr mutants look to have similar total tdp but reduced phospho but the authors do not discuss this). The reduction in phospho-tdp could be due to several less interesting effects that have nothing to do with tdp-43, including transgene suppression (ie gly-8 mutants appear to have NO tdp expression) or reduced snb-1 promoter activity and subsequent reductions in tdp mRNA. Were any of these possibilities examined? This is important not only for the authors to interpret their data but also to prevent others from chasing non-existent tdp-43 toxicity mechanisms.

3. The authors state that the results from Fig 2C-G “indicate the remaining 4 suppressor genes improve TDP-43 motor dysfunction without a direct impact on TDP-43 phosphorylation or protein levels.” Given that no data were presented for these 4 mutants, there are no data in the manuscript to support this conclusion.

4. On pg7, para2, the authors state “Loss of C. elegans hse-5 protects against accumulation of phosphorylated TDP-43(Fig. 2C). This is not supported by the data, which show a qualitatively similar decrease in both total tdp-43 protein levels and phospho-tdp-43 levels in hse-5 mutants. Therefore, when hse-5 is lost, there is LESS tdp-43 to protect against.

Minor

1. Why does 2A show motility data in the M337V while 2B shows it in the A315T? Have any suppressors been identified that exhibit allele-specific suppression? Is there something preventing comparisons in the same tdp-43(M337V) background, given that authors went to the trouble to make two unlinked integrated strains?

2. There are two Figure 4C panels

3. The PDF file that I reviewed lacked Table 2, which is referenced in the paper at least twice. Not sure if this was an author or a journal issue.

4. The reduction in GLCE protein in the frontal cortex of FTLD patients is interesting. The hypothesis that reduced GLCE expression in the FTLD patients is protective is quite provocative. If this is true, one might expect GLCE expression levels to be normal in other brain regions not undergoing neurodegeneration. Have other non-degenerating regions been examined? Perhaps this could be more easily addressed in worms. For example, is hse-5 expression down-regulated in tdp-43(M337V) worms?

**********

Have all data underlying the figures and results presented in the manuscript been provided?

Large-scale datasets should be made available via a public repository as described in the PLOS Genetics data availability policy, and numerical data that underlies graphs or summary statistics should be provided in spreadsheet form as supporting information.

Reviewer #1: No: Table 2 is referred to in the text, but I cannot find it in the manuscript provided.

Reviewer #2: No: Table 2 was missing.

Reviewer #3: No: numerical data underlying graphs was not provided in a spreadsheet.

**********

PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

Decision Letter 1

Gregory S Barsh, Anne C Hart

23 Oct 2019

* Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out. *

Dear Dr Kraemer,

Thank you very much for submitting your Research Article entitled 'Genome wide analysis reveals heparan sulfate epimerase modulates TDP-43 proteinopathy' to PLOS Genetics. Your manuscript was fully evaluated at the editorial level and by independent peer reviewers. The manuscript describes important work and the revised manuscript has dealt with all substantive concerns raised by the reviewers. There are still some minor concerns raised by reviewer 3. In my opinion as academic editor, these last small concerns do not preclude accepting the manuscript-- but I want to give you the opportunity to read these comments and consider changing the manuscript text. Adopting these reviewer suggested changes may increase clarity and readability of the manuscript. Therefore, I am returning the manuscript to you for "minor revisions". When you resubmit, I will reread the revised manuscript and your response to the reviewer; I do not plan to send the manuscript out to the reviewers again.

In addition we ask that you:

1) Provide a detailed list of your responses to the review comments and a description of the changes you have made in the manuscript.

2) Upload a Striking Image with a corresponding caption to accompany your manuscript if one is available (either a new image or an existing one from within your manuscript). If this image is judged to be suitable, it may be featured on our website. Images should ideally be high resolution, eye-catching, single panel square images. For examples, please browse our archive. If your image is from someone other than yourself, please ensure that the artist has read and agreed to the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution License. Note: we cannot publish copyrighted images.

We hope to receive your revised manuscript within the next 30 days. If you anticipate any delay in its return, we would ask you to let us know the expected resubmission date by email to plosgenetics@plos.org.

If present, accompanying reviewer attachments should be included with this email; please notify the journal office if any appear to be missing. They will also be available for download from the link below. You can use this link to log into the system when you are ready to submit a revised version, having first consulted our Submission Checklist.

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org.

Please be aware that our data availability policy requires that all numerical data underlying graphs or summary statistics are included with the submission, and you will need to provide this upon resubmission if not already present. In addition, we do not permit the inclusion of phrases such as "data not shown" or "unpublished results" in manuscripts. All points should be backed up by data provided with the submission.

PLOS has incorporated Similarity Check, powered by iThenticate, into its journal-wide submission system in order to screen submitted content for originality before publication. Each PLOS journal undertakes screening on a proportion of submitted articles. You will be contacted if needed following the screening process.

To resubmit, you will need to go to the link below and 'Revise Submission' in the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder.

[LINK]

Please let us know if you have any questions while making these revisions.

Yours sincerely,

Anne C. Hart

Associate Editor

PLOS Genetics

Gregory Barsh

Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Genetics

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Authors:

Please note here if the review is uploaded as an attachment.

Reviewer #1: The authors have addressed my concerns as stated in the earlier review.

Reviewer #2: This is a much improved manuscript, and the authors have adequately addressed most of my concerns.

Reviewer #3: 1. Were RNAi clones sequenced to confirm their identity? Neither the methods nor the results state that they were sequence verified. Table 2 suggests that many ‘hits’ were not phenocopied using LOF mutants. One possibility for this is that the RNAi clone targeted a different gene. From many RNAi screens, we find that ~10% of Ahringer library RNAi clones do not correspond to the predicted gene when sequenced.

2. There are still some nomenclature issues

a. Allele names in Table 2 are not italicized

b. Mutant name in Fig 2A & B, 3A,B,C,G, S1A,B,S2A-E are not italicized. Also, the allele should be listed, not (-). There is no evidence presented that these alleles are null mutants, as implied by the (-) designation

3. P7 ‘ To confirm mRNA expression of the TDP-43 transgene in these strains…’. I believe the authors meant to say ‘ To determine if TDP43 mRNA expression levels were altered in these strains…’. To me, statements that aim to confirm imply that the authors are trying to prove their hypothesis is true, rather than attempting to disprove their hypothesis.

4. The extended paragraph on hse-5 expression, mutant phenotypes, physiological roles, etc (p7-8) doesn’t seem to belong in the results section and should be moved to the discussion.

5. The authors refer to an interaction between hse-5/GLCE and TDP-43 (p9). Since the authors have not demonstrated that there is a physical interaction between these two proteins, they need to be more precise with this statement and indicate that they are referring to a genetic interaction.

6. I find the first two pages of the discussion section to be largely uninformative. It simply restates the molecular associations for many of the hits from this screen. Virtually all of that information is found in Table 1 and the discussion does not really expand on anything. On the other hand, the discussion that occurs after these sections is much improved.

**********

Have all data underlying the figures and results presented in the manuscript been provided?

Large-scale datasets should be made available via a public repository as described in the PLOS Genetics data availability policy, and numerical data that underlies graphs or summary statistics should be provided in spreadsheet form as supporting information.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

Decision Letter 2

Gregory S Barsh, Anne C Hart

15 Nov 2019

Dear Dr Kraemer,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript entitled "Genome wide analysis reveals heparan sulfate epimerase modulates TDP-43 proteinopathy" has been editorially accepted for publication in PLOS Genetics. Congratulations!

Before your submission can be formally accepted and sent to production you will need to complete our formatting changes, which you will receive in a follow up email. Please be aware that it may take several days for you to receive this email; during this time no action is required by you. Please note: the accept date on your published article will reflect the date of this provisional accept, but your manuscript will not be scheduled for publication until the required changes have been made.

Once your paper is formally accepted, an uncorrected proof of your manuscript will be published online ahead of the final version, unless you’ve already opted out via the online submission form. If, for any reason, you do not want an earlier version of your manuscript published online or are unsure if you have already indicated as such, please let the journal staff know immediately at plosgenetics@plos.org.

In the meantime, please log into Editorial Manager at https://www.editorialmanager.com/pgenetics/, click the "Update My Information" link at the top of the page, and update your user information to ensure an efficient production and billing process. Note that PLOS requires an ORCID iD for all corresponding authors. Therefore, please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field.  This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager.

If you have a press-related query, or would like to know about one way to make your underlying data available (as you will be aware, this is required for publication), please see the end of this email. If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming article at this point, to enable them to help maximise its impact. Inform journal staff as soon as possible if you are preparing a press release for your article and need a publication date.

Thank you again for supporting open-access publishing; we are looking forward to publishing your work in PLOS Genetics!

Yours sincerely,

Anne C. Hart

Associate Editor

PLOS Genetics

Gregory Barsh

Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Genetics

www.plosgenetics.org

Twitter: @PLOSGenetics

----------------------------------------------------

Comments from the reviewers (if applicable):

----------------------------------------------------

Data Deposition

If you have submitted a Research Article or Front Matter that has associated data that are not suitable for deposition in a subject-specific public repository (such as GenBank or ArrayExpress), one way to make that data available is to deposit it in the Dryad Digital Repository. As you may recall, we ask all authors to agree to make data available; this is one way to achieve that. A full list of recommended repositories can be found on our website.

The following link will take you to the Dryad record for your article, so you won't have to re‐enter its bibliographic information, and can upload your files directly: 

http://datadryad.org/submit?journalID=pgenetics&manu=PGENETICS-D-19-00919R2

More information about depositing data in Dryad is available at http://www.datadryad.org/depositing. If you experience any difficulties in submitting your data, please contact help@datadryad.org for support.

Additionally, please be aware that our data availability policy requires that all numerical data underlying display items are included with the submission, and you will need to provide this before we can formally accept your manuscript, if not already present.

----------------------------------------------------

Press Queries

If you or your institution will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, or if you need to know your paper's publication date for media purposes, please inform the journal staff as soon as possible so that your submission can be scheduled accordingly. Your manuscript will remain under a strict press embargo until the publication date and time. This means an early version of your manuscript will not be published ahead of your final version. PLOS Genetics may also choose to issue a press release for your article. If there's anything the journal should know or you'd like more information, please get in touch via plosgenetics@plos.org.

Acceptance letter

Gregory S Barsh, Anne C Hart

5 Dec 2019

PGENETICS-D-19-00919R2

Genome wide analysis reveals heparan sulfate epimerase modulates TDP-43 proteinopathy

Dear Dr Kraemer,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript entitled "Genome wide analysis reveals heparan sulfate epimerase modulates TDP-43 proteinopathy" has been formally accepted for publication in PLOS Genetics! Your manuscript is now with our production department and you will be notified of the publication date in due course.

The corresponding author will soon be receiving a typeset proof for review, to ensure errors have not been introduced during production. Please review the PDF proof of your manuscript carefully, as this is the last chance to correct any errors. Please note that major changes, or those which affect the scientific understanding of the work, will likely cause delays to the publication date of your manuscript.

Soon after your final files are uploaded, unless you have opted out or your manuscript is a front-matter piece, the early version of your manuscript will be published online. The date of the early version will be your article's publication date. The final article will be published to the same URL, and all versions of the paper will be accessible to readers.

Thank you again for supporting PLOS Genetics and open-access publishing. We are looking forward to publishing your work!

With kind regards,

Nicholas White

PLOS Genetics

On behalf of:

The PLOS Genetics Team

Carlyle House, Carlyle Road, Cambridge CB4 3DN | United Kingdom

plosgenetics@plos.org | +44 (0) 1223-442823

plosgenetics.org | Twitter: @PLOSGenetics

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Fig. Characterization of TDP-43 transgene expression levels and immunoblot analysis of suppressors without an effect on TDP-43 protein.

    (A-B) Suppressors of TDP-43 motor function do not have decreased transgene expression levels. (A) Expression of the TDP-43 transgene was assessed in triplicate independent replicate samples using quantitative reverse transcription PCR (qRT-PCR), and signal normalized to expression of an internal reference gene act-1. p>0.05 for all samples tested versus TDP-43 tg. (B) To assay the effects of loss-of-function mutations in suppressor genes present on the same chromosome as the TDP-43 tg transgene (Chr IV), a second TDP-43 transgene was utilized on a different chromosome (Chr II), TDP-43 tg2. *p = 0.0371 versus TDP-43 tg2. (C-F) Measurement of levels of total and phosphorylated TDP-43 protein by immunoblot. Immunoblot data shown are representative of at least triplicate independent experiments, and graphs plot relative total TDP-43 or phosphorylated TDP-43 signal normalized to tubulin protein levels from three or more independent replicate experiments. (C) TDP-43 tg; vab-9(-), (D) TDP-43 tg; pcp-5(-), (E) TDP-43 tg; pqn-18(-), (F) TDP-43 tg2; T28C6.7(-). Significance was evaluated using Mann-Whitney test between strains tested. p>0.05 versus TDP-43 tg for all comparisons.

    (TIF)

    S2 Fig. Characterization of hse-5 in non-Tg, WT TDP-43 tg, and tau tg C. elegans.

    (A) hse-5(tm472) do not have significant differences in motility relative to non-transgenic (non-Tg) C. elegans, N>200 per genotype. (B) Motility defects of C. elegans expressing wild-type TDP-43 (WT TDP-43 tg) are significantly improved by hse-5(tm472). p<0.0001, unpaired t-test, N>200 per genotype. (C) hse-5(tm472) does not significantly alter the motility defects in C. elegans expressing wild-type human tau, although it is trending towards worsened motility. p = 0.052, unpaired t-test, N>130 per genotype. (D) hse-5(tm472) significantly worsens motility defects in C. elegans expressing mutant V337M human tau. p = 0.0097, unpaired t-test, N>150 per genotype. (E) hse-5(tm472) are significantly long-lived relative to non-Tg animals (N2), p<0.0001, Log-rank test. TDP-43 tg are short-lived relative to non-Tg animals, p<0.0001. However, the lifespan of TDP-43 tg; hse-5(tm472) are not significantly different from TDP-43 tg animals alone, p = 0.143. (F) mRNA expression of hse-5 does not change in TDP-43 tg relative to non-Tg animals. Two different primer pairs were tested using quantitative reverse transcription real-time PCR (qRT-PCR) on three independent replicate samples. Signal was normalized to the expression an internal reference gene, act-1.

    (TIF)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to REviews_9_11_19_.pdf

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: PLOSGenetics_cover letter_resbut_10_29_19.docx.pdf

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLoS Genetics are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES