Permalink
Cannot retrieve contributors at this time
Fetching contributors…
Cannot retrieve contributors at this time
| <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.1d1 20130915//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.1d1"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="nlm-ta">elife</journal-id><journal-id journal-id-type="hwp">eLife</journal-id><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">eLife</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>eLife</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn publication-format="electronic">2050-084X</issn><publisher><publisher-name>eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">04287</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.7554/eLife.04287</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="display-channel"><subject>Research article</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Neuroscience</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>Synaptic plasticity and cognitive function are disrupted in the absence of Lrp4</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" id="author-17698"><name><surname>Gomez</surname><given-names>Andrea M</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref><xref ref-type="other" rid="par-3"/><xref ref-type="fn" rid="con1"/><xref ref-type="fn" rid="conf1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" id="author-17699"><name><surname>Froemke</surname><given-names>Robert C</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref><xref ref-type="other" rid="par-1"/><xref ref-type="other" rid="par-3"/><xref ref-type="fn" rid="con2"/><xref ref-type="fn" rid="conf1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" id="author-17291"><name><surname>Burden</surname><given-names>Steven J</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1">*</xref><xref ref-type="other" rid="par-2"/><xref ref-type="other" rid="par-3"/><xref ref-type="fn" rid="con3"/><xref ref-type="fn" rid="conf1"/></contrib><aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution content-type="dept">Graduate Program in Developmental Genetics, Molecular Neurobiology Program</institution>, <institution>Skirball Institute of Biomolecular Medicine, NYU Medical Center</institution>, <addr-line><named-content content-type="city">New York</named-content></addr-line>, <country>United States</country></aff></contrib-group><contrib-group content-type="section"><contrib contrib-type="editor"><name><surname>Rosenmund</surname><given-names>Christian</given-names></name><role>Reviewing editor</role><aff><institution>Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin</institution>, <country>Germany</country></aff></contrib></contrib-group><author-notes><corresp id="cor1"><label>*</label>For correspondence: <email>steve.burden@med.nyu.edu</email></corresp></author-notes><pub-date publication-format="electronic" date-type="pub"><day>19</day><month>11</month><year>2014</year></pub-date><pub-date pub-type="collection"><year>2014</year></pub-date><volume>3</volume><elocation-id>e04287</elocation-id><history><date date-type="received"><day>10</day><month>08</month><year>2014</year></date><date date-type="accepted"><day>19</day><month>11</month><year>2014</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>Copyright © 2014, Gomez et al</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><copyright-holder>Gomez et al</copyright-holder><license xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"><license-p>This article is distributed under the terms of the <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution License</ext-link>, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.</license-p></license></permissions><self-uri content-type="pdf" xlink:href="elife04287.pdf"/><abstract><object-id pub-id-type="doi">10.7554/eLife.04287.001</object-id><p>Lrp4, the muscle receptor for neuronal Agrin, is expressed in the hippocampus and areas involved in cognition. The function of Lrp4 in the brain, however, is unknown, as <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup> mice fail to form neuromuscular synapses and die at birth. <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup> mice, rescued for Lrp4 expression selectively in muscle, survive into adulthood and showed profound deficits in cognitive tasks that assess learning and memory. To learn whether synapses form and function aberrantly, we used electrophysiological and anatomical methods to study hippocampal CA3–CA1 synapses. In the absence of Lrp4, the organization of the hippocampus appeared normal, but the frequency of spontaneous release events and spine density on primary apical dendrites were reduced. CA3 input was unable to adequately depolarize CA1 neurons to induce long-term potentiation. Our studies demonstrate a role for Lrp4 in hippocampal function and suggest that patients with mutations in <italic>Lrp4</italic> or auto-antibodies to Lrp4 should be evaluated for neurological deficits.</p><p><bold>DOI:</bold> <ext-link ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.7554/eLife.04287.001">http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.04287.001</ext-link></p></abstract><abstract abstract-type="executive-summary"><object-id pub-id-type="doi">10.7554/eLife.04287.002</object-id><title>eLife digest</title><p>LRP4 is a muscle protein that is found in the hippocampus, a region of the brain that controls cognitive processes such as learning and memory. However, we know very little about what exactly LRP4 does in the hippocampus, and how it affects learning and memory.</p><p>A standard way to figure out what a protein does is to study mice that have been genetically modified so that they cannot produce that protein. However, deleting the gene for LRP4 leads to muscle problems that kill these mutant mice at birth.</p><p>To get around this problem, Gomez et al. have developed a method to restore the production of LRP4 in the muscles of mutant mice but not in their brains. These mutant mice were then subjected to a battery of tests to measure their ability to learn and recall new memories. These tests showed that LRP4 must be present in the brain, otherwise learning and memory are impaired.</p><p>Gomez et al. also explored a process known as long-term potentiation. This process, which involves strengthening the functional connections between neurons, is believed to be essential for learning and other cognitive process. Gomez et al. demonstrated that long-term potentiation was disrupted by the lack of LRP4.</p><p>Further experiments are needed to work out how LRP4 controls the learning process in the hippocampus and to explore the connection between LRP4 and various neuromuscular and neurological diseases.</p><p><bold>DOI:</bold> <ext-link ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.7554/eLife.04287.002">http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.04287.002</ext-link></p></abstract><kwd-group kwd-group-type="author-keywords"><title>Author keywords</title><kwd>synapse</kwd><kwd>low-density lipoprotein-related receptor</kwd><kwd>behavior</kwd><kwd>learning</kwd><kwd>hippocampus</kwd><kwd>long-term potentiation</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group kwd-group-type="research-organism"><title>Research organism</title><kwd>mouse</kwd></kwd-group><funding-group><award-group id="par-1"><funding-source><institution-wrap><institution-id institution-id-type="FundRef">http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000879</institution-id><institution>Alfred P. Sloan Foundation (Sloan Foundation)</institution></institution-wrap></funding-source><award-id>Robert Froemke</award-id><principal-award-recipient><name><surname>Froemke</surname><given-names>Robert C</given-names></name></principal-award-recipient></award-group><award-group id="par-2"><funding-source><institution-wrap><institution-id institution-id-type="FundRef">http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000065</institution-id><institution content-type="university">National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke</institution></institution-wrap></funding-source><award-id>NS36193</award-id><principal-award-recipient><name><surname>Burden</surname><given-names>Steven J</given-names></name></principal-award-recipient></award-group><award-group id="par-3"><funding-source><institution-wrap><institution-id institution-id-type="FundRef">http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000054</institution-id><institution content-type="university">National Cancer Institute</institution></institution-wrap></funding-source><award-id>P30CA16087</award-id><principal-award-recipient><name><surname>Gomez</surname><given-names>Andrea M</given-names></name><name><surname>Froemke</surname><given-names>Robert C</given-names></name><name><surname>Burden</surname><given-names>Steven J</given-names></name></principal-award-recipient></award-group><funding-statement>The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.</funding-statement></funding-group><custom-meta-group><custom-meta><meta-name>elife-xml-version</meta-name><meta-value>2.0</meta-value></custom-meta><custom-meta specific-use="meta-only"><meta-name>Author impact statement</meta-name><meta-value>Lrp4 mutant mice display profound deficits in cognitive tasks that assess learning and memory with disruptions in the subcellular organization of synaptic inputs and synaptic plasticity in the hippocampus.</meta-value></custom-meta></custom-meta-group></article-meta></front><body><sec sec-type="intro" id="s1"><title>Introduction</title><p>In humans, mutations in genes encoding synaptic organizing complexes have been implicated in numerous and diverse neurological diseases, ranging from congenital myasthenia to autism spectrum disorders (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib39">Sudhof, 2008</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib3">Burden et al., 2013</xref>). Lrp4 plays a key role in the formation and maintenance of neuromuscular synapses, as a loss of Lrp4 leads to a failure to form neuromuscular synapses, and mutations in <italic>Lrp4</italic> or auto-antibodies to Lrp4 cause congenital myasthenia and myasthenia gravis, respectively (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib37">Shen et al., 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib32">Ohkawara et al., 2014</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib42">Tsivgoulis et al., 2014</xref>). Lrp4 functions bidirectionally at neuromuscular synapses, where it responds to neuronal Agrin, stimulating MuSK, a receptor tyrosine kinase that functions as a master regulator of synapse formation, and functions in a retrograde manner to stimulate differentiation of motor nerve terminals (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib46">Yumoto et al., 2012</xref>).</p><p>Lrp4 belongs to the low-density lipoprotein receptor (LDLR) family, an ancient group of endocytic type 1, single-pass transmembrane proteins. Although LDLR family members were initially studied for their roles in receptor-mediated endocytosis, multiple other physiological roles have been described. Lrp4 has multifunctional roles in tissues other than the nervous system, including bone homeostasis, limb patterning, kidney formation, and placode development (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib16">Johnson et al., 2005</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib44">Weatherbee et al., 2006</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib31">Ohazama et al., 2008</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib27">Li et al., 2010</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1">Ahn et al., 2013</xref>).</p><p>Lrp4 is expressed in the central nervous system (CNS) as well as in the peripheral nervous system (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib43">Visel et al., 2004</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib41">Tian et al., 2006</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib44">Weatherbee et al., 2006</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib25">Lein et al., 2007</xref>). Within the CNS, Lrp4 is expressed prominently in the hippocampus, olfactory bulb, cerebellum, and neocortex and present in postsynaptic membranes (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib41">Tian et al., 2006</xref>). The role of Lrp4 in the CNS is not understood, as <italic>Lrp4</italic> mutant mice die at birth from neuromuscular and respiratory failure, before synapse formation in the CNS ensues (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib6">De Felipe et al., 1997</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib41">Tian et al., 2006</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib44">Weatherbee et al., 2006</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib22">Kim et al., 2008</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib46">Yumoto et al., 2012</xref>). Previously, we generated mice that lack Lrp4 in all tissues except skeletal muscle and found that muscle-selective expression of Lrp4 (<italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup><italic>)</italic> rescued the neuromuscular deficits of <italic>Lrp4</italic> mutant mice, allowing the mice to survive as adults (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib13">Gomez and Burden, 2011</xref>). To learn whether Lrp4 plays a role in the CNS, we used multiple behavioral paradigms to study the behavior of these muscle-rescued mice. Next, we examined the synaptic transmission and the anatomical organization of inputs onto CA1 hippocampal pyramidal neurons. Our data show that the rescued mice perform poorly in several learning and memory paradigms, demonstrating that Lrp4 has a critical role in the CNS. Moreover, we show that Lrp4 is enriched in postsynaptic membranes from the hippocampus, and our electrophysiological studies demonstrate a dramatic loss in long-term potentiation (LTP), accompanied by a reduction in synapses on apical dendrites of CA1 neurons.</p></sec><sec sec-type="results" id="s2"><title>Results</title><sec id="s2-1"><title>Lrp4 is required for associative learning and spatial memory</title><p>Newborn mice, which lack Lrp4 in all tissues except skeletal muscle (<italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup>), retained the fused digit and appendage defects found in <italic>Lrp4</italic> mutant mice. In other respects, the rescued mice appeared indistinguishable from their wild-type littermates (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1A</xref>, inset). By three weeks after birth the growth rate of <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice began to slow and by 6 weeks the mice were modestly runted (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1B</xref>). Nonetheless<italic>, Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice were fertile and lived a normal lifespan, indicating that Lrp4 is not required in tissues other than muscle for postnatal survival. The macroscopic morphology of the brain from adult <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice appeared normal, although brain size, like body mass, was modestly reduced (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1C,D</xref>).<fig id="fig1" position="float"><object-id pub-id-type="doi">10.7554/eLife.04287.003</object-id><label>Figure 1.</label><caption><title>Restoring Lrp4 expression selectively in muscle of <italic>Lrp4</italic> mutant mice rescues neonatal lethality.</title><p>(<bold>A</bold>) <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> mice are fertile and live a normal lifespan. (<bold>B</bold>) The body mass of six-week old <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> mice is reduced by 16% (wild-type, 21.4 ± 0.8 g, n = 10; <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic>, 18.0 ± 0.5 g, n = 5). (<bold>C</bold>) The gross morphology of the adult brain is similar in wild-type and <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> mice. (<bold>D</bold>) The size of the adult brain is reduced by 11% in <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> mice (wild-type, 0.45 ± 0.005 g, n = 17; <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic>, 0.4 ± 0.008 g, n = 15). (<bold>E</bold>, <bold>F</bold>, <bold>G</bold>) The locomotor activity of <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> mice in an open field test was normal as measured by distance traveled (<bold>E</bold>), mean velocity (<bold>F</bold>), and maximum velocity (<bold>G</bold>) (wild-type, n = 17; <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic>, n = 15). (<bold>H</bold>) <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> mice showed reduced exploratory behavior (wild-type, 22.3 ± 2.2%, n = 29; <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic>, 14.9 ± 1.2%, n = 25). (<bold>I</bold>) Representative heat maps of wild-type and <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> mice during a 30 min open field test.</p><p><bold>DOI:</bold> <ext-link ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.7554/eLife.04287.003">http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.04287.003</ext-link></p></caption><graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="elife04287f001"/></fig></p><p>Motor function is required to execute behavioral paradigms, thus we first asked if locomotion was normal in <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice using an open-field test. When placed in the open-field arena, <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice traveled as far and fast as control animals (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1E–G</xref>), indicating that <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice do not have obvious motor or skeletal defects. However, <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice exhibited different open-field behavior compared to control animals (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1H,I</xref>). The heat map in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1I</xref> shows that control mice roamed throughout the open-field, whereas <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice avoided the center of the arena (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1H,I</xref>). Additionally, when suspended by the tail, <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice display a stereotyped limb clasping behavior, similar to other mouse models of neurological disorders, including Rett Syndrome (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib14">Guy et al., 2001</xref>).<fig id="fig2" position="float"><object-id pub-id-type="doi">10.7554/eLife.04287.004</object-id><label>Figure 2.</label><caption><title>Forelimb and hindlimb clasping in <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> mice.</title><p>Wild-type mice splay their limbs when suspended by their tail, whereas <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> mice clasp their limbs.</p><p><bold>DOI:</bold> <ext-link ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.7554/eLife.04287.004">http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.04287.004</ext-link></p></caption><graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="elife04287f002"/></fig></p><p>To examine cognitive function and associative learning in these animals, we next assessed their behavior with classical fear-conditioning and passive avoidance paradigms (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib24">LeDoux, 2003</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib23">Lai and Ip, 2013</xref>). In the fear-conditioning assay, mice were trained to associate an auditory cue with a foot shock, which elicited a freezing response. During training, both control and <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice responded similarly to the tone and foot shock (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3A</xref>), demonstrating that these sensory systems remained intact in the rescued mice. The next day, mice were exposed to the same tone in the absence of the foot shock, and the time spent freezing was measured. As expected, wild-type mice froze in response to the tone alone. In contrast, <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice spent much less time freezing, suggesting impaired learning or memory for the tone–shock pairing (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3A</xref>).<fig id="fig3" position="float"><object-id pub-id-type="doi">10.7554/eLife.04287.005</object-id><label>Figure 3.</label><caption><title>Mice lacking Lrp4 in the CNS display defects in learning and memory.</title><p>(<bold>A</bold>) A schematic representation of the fear-conditioning paradigm. <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> mice exhibit a decrease in freezing behavior, compared to littermate control mice, when presented with an aversive conditioned stimulus (<italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic>, n = 12; littermate controls, n = 14). (<bold>B</bold>) A schematic representation of the passive avoidance paradigm. <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> mice were less hesitant to enter a dark chamber associated with an aversive stimulus (<italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic>, n = 13; littermate controls, n = 17). (<bold>C</bold>) <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> mice showed spatial learning deficits and reduced cognitive flexibility in the Morris water maze. Both control and <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> mice were able to locate the escape platform during the visible version of the water maze (<italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic>, n = 8; littermate controls, n = 9). (<bold>D</bold>) <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> and control mice displayed comparable swimming velocity during the Morris water maze. (<bold>E</bold>) <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> and control mice spent more time searching in the target quadrant region than other quadrants during the probe trial. (<bold>F</bold>) <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> and control mice crossed the platform site with similar frequency during the probe trial. (<bold>G</bold>) <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> mice spent less time in the new target quadrant during reversal training. See also <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>.</p><p><bold>DOI:</bold> <ext-link ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.7554/eLife.04287.005">http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.04287.005</ext-link></p></caption><graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="elife04287f003"/></fig></p><p>We next assessed the rescued mice using a passive avoidance paradigm, which exploits an innate preference of mice to avoid a well-lit environment. Mice were placed in a well-lit chamber and freely allowed to enter a dark chamber, where they received a foot shock (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3B</xref>). During training, control and <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice showed a similar latency to enter the dark chamber. 2 days later, mice were once again placed in a well-lit chamber, and the time to enter the dark chamber was recorded. Control mice were slow to enter the dark chamber after training, whereas <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice entered the dark chamber with a shorter latency than control mice, indicating an impaired association of the dark chamber with the foot shock (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3B</xref>).</p><p>Fear conditioning and passive avoidance paradigms involve activity in the hippocampus among other brain areas (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib24">LeDoux, 2003</xref>). Because the hippocampus plays a major role in spatial learning, we used the Morris water maze to more specifically test whether <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice have spatial learning and memory deficits. <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice were trained for several days to associate visible spatial cues with the position of a hidden platform in an opaque pool (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3C</xref> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4A</xref>). During this acquisition phase, the latency of control animals to locate the hidden platform decreased (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3 fig4">Figures 3C and 4B</xref>). Although the latency for <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice also decreased during this training period, they consistently took longer to find the platform than control mice (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3 fig4">Figures 3C and 4B</xref>). After training, the hidden platform was removed and a trial was conducted to assess recall for the position of the hidden platform. Recall was quantitated by measuring the time spent in the target quadrant that previously contained the hidden platform. <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice displayed a preference for the correct target quadrant and crossed the former platform location with similar frequency to control mice (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3 fig4">Figures 3D and 4C</xref>). These findings indicate that while the rescued mice had difficulty learning the position of the hidden platform; however, with repeated training, they were able to learn the position and eventually behave in a manner similar to control mice.<fig id="fig4" position="float"><object-id pub-id-type="doi">10.7554/eLife.04287.006</object-id><label>Figure 4.</label><caption><title>Mice lacking Lrp4 in the CNS display defects in learning and memory in the Morris water maze.</title><p>(<bold>A</bold>) A schematic representation of the Morris water maze training protocol. Mice were trained for 5 days to locate a hidden platform. A probe trial was performed on the fifth day, when the platform was removed. The hidden platform was moved to the opposite quadrant during reversal training. A flag was placed on the hidden platform during the visible training phase. Representative trajectories of control and <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> mice during the acquisition (<bold>B</bold>), probe (<bold>C</bold>), reversal (<bold>D</bold>), and visible (<bold>E</bold>) tests of the Morris water maze trial.</p><p><bold>DOI:</bold> <ext-link ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.7554/eLife.04287.006">http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.04287.006</ext-link></p></caption><graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="elife04287f004"/></fig></p><p>In order to assess cognitive flexibility of <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice, we placed a hidden platform in the quadrant opposite to the original target quadrant and tested the mice. Control mice rapidly learned the new location of the platform, whereas <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice showed a significant impairment (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3 fig4">Figures 3C and 4D</xref>) and spent less time than control mice in the new target region (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3G</xref>). These data indicate that the rescued mice were slower to extinguish their memory of the original target, learn the position of the new target, or both. Control and <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice were similarly able to locate a visible platform and had comparable swimming velocities, indicating that the impaired performance of <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice was not due to compromised visual acuity, swimming ability, or motivation to escape the water (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3 fig4">Figure 3C,D, 4E</xref>).</p></sec><sec id="s2-2"><title>Hippocampal LTP is impaired without Lrp4</title><p>To determine whether the cognitive deficits observed in <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice are associated with synaptic dysfunction, we examined synaptic transmission using whole-cell recordings in acute hippocampal slices. We focused on examining excitatory postsynaptic currents (EPSCs) in CA1 pyramidal cells evoked by stimulation of CA3 Schaffer collaterals (SC; <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5A</xref>) because of the extensive characterization of CA3–CA1 synapses in many mouse models (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib29">Malenka and Bear, 2004</xref>). We first determined whether Lrp4 is critical for synaptic transmission. SCs were briefly stimulated twice with varied inter-stimulus intervals, and EPSCs were recorded. At wild-type synapses, the second stimulus, delivered 50 ms later, elicited a greater postsynaptic response (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5B</xref>, inset), possibly due to higher basal levels of residual calcium in nerve terminals following the first stimulus (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib20">Katz and Miledi, 1968</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib49">Zucker and Regehr, 2002</xref>). Paired-pulse facilitation was similar in control and <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice, indicating that Lrp4 is not essential for this form of evoked transmitter release and short-term plasticity (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5B</xref>).<fig id="fig5" position="float"><object-id pub-id-type="doi">10.7554/eLife.04287.007</object-id><label>Figure 5.</label><caption><title>Lrp4 is required for normal synaptic transmission.</title><p>(<bold>A</bold>) The panel shows the configuration of whole-cell voltage-clamp recordings made from acute hippocampal slices of young, adult mice. Postsynaptic responses in CA1 pyramidal neurons were measured following stimulation of Schaffer collaterals (SC). (<bold>B</bold>) Representative traces from CA1 neurons to paired stimuli show that paired-pulsed facilitation is normal in <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> mice (wild-type, n = 9; <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic>, n = 6). (<bold>C</bold>) Representative traces of spontaneous miniature excitatory postsynaptic currents (mEPSC) of wild-type or <italic>Lrp4</italic> mutant CA1 neurons. (<bold>D</bold>) mEPSC frequency is reduced in <italic>Lrp4</italic> mutant CA1 neurons (wild-type, n = 12; <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic>, n = 12. (<bold>E</bold>, <bold>F</bold>) mEPSC ampitudes of <italic>Lrp4</italic> mutant CA1 neurons are comparable to wild-type (wild-type, n = 12; <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic>, n = 12). (<bold>G</bold>, <bold>H</bold>) Representative traces from individual CA1 neurons following a TBS delivered to neurons, which were voltage-clamped at −70 mV, show LTP from wild-type but not <italic>Lrp4</italic> mutant neurons (upper panel). Excitation, measured as the amplitude of an EPSC (pA), is shown below, and input resistance (Ri) is shown in the bottom panel. There is considerable variability in the baseline EPSC amplitudes in slices from wild-type and <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> mice. However, there was no significant difference in the baseline EPSC amplitudes between wild-type and mutant mice (wild-type, 52.6 ± 9.7 pA, n = 21; <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic>, 44.9 ± 4.9 pA, n = 27, p = 0.44). Further, there was not a significant correlation between the magnitude of LTP and initial synaptic strength (wild-type, R2 = 0.05, n = 21, p = 0.35; <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic>, R2 = 0.09, n = 21, p = 0.13). (<bold>I</bold>) Representative traces from individual CA1 neurons during TBS show a reduction in the integral of the summed EPCSs recorded during a single TBS in Lrp4-deficient neurons, top panel. Induction volume, quantified as the integral of the postsynaptic response, is shown in the bottom panel (wild-type, n = 21; <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic>; n = 32) (<bold>J</bold>, <bold>K</bold>) Representative responses from individual CA1 neurons following a TBS delivered to neurons, which were voltage-clamped at 0 mV, show a restoration of LTP in <italic>Lrp4</italic> mutant neurons (upper panel). Excitation, measured as the amplitude of an EPSC (pA), is shown in the middle panel, and input resistance (Ri) is shown in the bottom panel. (<bold>L</bold>) Averaged data from control cells (n = 21) and <italic>Lrp4</italic> mutant (n = 32) neurons shows that the response from wild-type neurons is potentiated 1.5-fold, whereas <italic>Lrp4</italic> mutant CA1 neurons potentiate little, if at all 30 min following a TBS delivered at Vc = −70 mV. (<bold>M</bold>) Depolarization of <italic>Lrp4</italic> mutant CA1 neurons during TBS restores LTP (wild-type, n = 11; <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic>, n = 9). (<bold>N</bold>) Quantitation of potentiation at 10-20 min after TBS demonstrates a lack of LTP in <italic>Lrp4</italic> mutant CA1 neurons, which is restored upon depolarization (Vc = −70 mV: wild-type, n = 21; <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic>, n = 32; Vc = 0 mV: wild-type, n = 11; <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic>, n = 9).</p><p><bold>DOI:</bold> <ext-link ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.7554/eLife.04287.007">http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.04287.007</ext-link></p></caption><graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="elife04287f005"/></fig></p><p>Next, we examined basal activity by measuring spontaneous miniature excitatory postsynaptic currents (mEPSC) in CA1 neurons. mEPSC frequency was reduced twofold in <italic>Lrp4</italic> mutant neurons (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5C,D</xref>), although the mEPSC amplitude was normal (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5C,E,F</xref>). The lower mEPSC frequency could be due to a reduced probability of vesicle fusion or a reduction in the number of synapses on CA1 neurons.</p><p>To determine whether Lrp4 is essential for induction or expression of LTP at CA3–CA1 synapses, where long-term synaptic plasticity is known to require postsynaptic depolarization and activation of postsynaptic NMDA receptors (Malenka and Nicoll, 1999), theta burst stimulation (TBS) was used to strongly activate SCs. EPSCs were recorded before and after repetitive TBS. TBS induced robust LTP from wild-type CA1 neurons (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5G,L,N</xref>), whereas TBS failed to induce LTP in <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup> CA1 neurons (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5H,M,N</xref>). During the induction procedure the amplitudes of TBS-evoked EPSCs were reduced in <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup> CA1 neurons compared to wild-type (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5I</xref>). This dramatic loss of LTP demonstrates that Lrp4 is critical for a form of synaptic plasticity that has been linked to learning and memory.</p><p>We hypothesized that the smaller EPSCs during TBS in <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup>−/−</sup> CA1 neurons prevented LTP induction in these cells. Induction of LTP in CA1 neurons requires that SC-released glutamate binds to AMPA receptors to depolarize postsynaptic neurons to a level sufficient to release the Mg<sup>2+</sup>-block of NMDA receptors and drive Ca<sup>2+</sup> influx into postsynaptic compartments (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib30">Nowak et al., 1984</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib5">Collingridge et al., 1988</xref>). To determine whether CA3 Schaeffer collaterals are unable to adequately depolarize CA1 neurons during TBS, we paired repetitive TBS with direct postsynaptic depolarization to 0 mV during LTP induction. We found that this brief period of depolarization of CA1 neurons was sufficient to restore normal TBS-induced LTP (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5J,K,M,N</xref>). Importantly, these data show that expression of LTP in <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup>−/−</sup> CA1 neurons is intact as long as CA1 neurons are adequately depolarized during TBS. Thus, CA3 SCs appear unable to depolarize CA1 neurons to a level required to recruit NMDA receptors. Consistent with the idea that AMPA and NMDA receptors are available to participate in LTP, AMPA, and NMDA receptors are expressed at normal levels in synaptosomes isolated from <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> hippocampus (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6C,D</xref>).<fig id="fig6" position="float"><object-id pub-id-type="doi">10.7554/eLife.04287.008</object-id><label>Figure 6.</label><caption><title>Lrp4 is enriched in synaptic membranes.</title><p>(<bold>A</bold>) Quantitative analysis of proteins in hippocampal lysates from wild-type and <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> mice. The expression level of each protein, normalized to actin, was determined and assigned a value of 1.0 in wild-type mice. The graph shows the ratio of values in <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> mice compared to wild-type mice. Expression of most proteins is not dependent upon Lrp4, but expression of the synaptic vesicle-associated protein, Synaptophysin, was modestly elevated (30%) and expression of the GABAARγ2 subunit was modestly decreased (20%) in <italic>Lrp4</italic> mutant hippocampi. (<bold>B</bold>) Lrp4 expression is detected in cultured hippocampal neurons, grown in cell culture for 21 days, and in hippocampal tissue from wild-type but not from <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> mice. (<bold>C</bold>) Lrp4 co-isolates with synaptosomes, the pH 6-solubilzed fraction, which is enriched for Synaptophysin, a presynaptic marker, and the postsynaptic density (PSD) fraction, which is highly enriched for NR1. (<bold>D</bold>) The expression levels of presynaptic and postsynaptic proteins present in the synaptosomal fraction (<bold>C</bold>) are not altered in <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> mutant hippocampi.</p><p><bold>DOI:</bold> <ext-link ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.7554/eLife.04287.008">http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.04287.008</ext-link></p></caption><graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="elife04287f006"/></fig></p><p>However, we also considered the possibility that in the absence of Lrp4, inhibition on CA1 neurons may have been strengthened, and depolarization-induced suppression of inhibition (DSI) may have removed the enhanced inhibition, unmasking LTP (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib35">Pitler and Alger, 1994</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib45">Wilson et al., 2001</xref>). We therefore directly measured inhibition to determine whether it was strengthened in <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig7">Figure 7</xref>). Contrary to this notion, we found that inhibition was modestly reduced at low stimulation intensities and unchanged at higher stimulation intensities in <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig7">Figure 7G</xref>). Because excitation was reduced while inhibition remained largely unaffected (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5 fig7">Figures 5,7</xref>), the E/I ratio at CA1 synapses was diminished (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig7">Figure 7H</xref>). Together, these data are inconsistent with the idea that enhanced inhibition is responsible for a failure to elicit LTP and instead favor the idea that a failure of presynaptic input to adequately depolarize CA1 neurons underlies the LTP deficit.<fig id="fig7" position="float"><object-id pub-id-type="doi">10.7554/eLife.04287.009</object-id><label>Figure 7.</label><caption><title>The strength of inhibition is unchanged in CA1 neurons from <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> mice.</title><p>(<bold>A</bold>) Representative traces of spontaneous miniature inhibitory postsynaptic currents (mIPSC) from CA1 neurons from wild-type or <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> mice, which were voltage-clamped at 0 mV. (<bold>B</bold>) The mIPSC frequency is similar in Lrp4 mutant and wild-type CA1 neurons (wild-type, 0.017 ± 0.005 /sec, n = 7; <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic>, 0.026 ± 0.009 /sec, n = 6). (<bold>C</bold>, <bold>D</bold>) mIPSC amplitudes are increased in CA1 neurons from <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> mice (wild-type, 25.4 ± 1.6 pA, n = 7; <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic>, 34.7 ± 3.7 pA, n = 6). (<bold>E</bold>) Representative traces of excitation (black) and inhibition (blue) at varied stimulus intensities. (<bold>F</bold>) Excitation is decreased in CA1 neurons from <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> mice. (<bold>G</bold>) Inhibition is similar in CA1 neurons from wild-type and <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> mice. (<bold>H</bold>) The E/I ratio is decreased in CA1 neurons from <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic> mice.</p><p><bold>DOI:</bold> <ext-link ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.7554/eLife.04287.009">http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.04287.009</ext-link></p></caption><graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="elife04287f007"/></fig></p></sec><sec id="s2-3"><title>Spine density is reduced in CA1 primary apical dendrites</title><p>To assess whether the defects in synaptic transmission and failure of LTP induction were due to disorganization of hippocampal synaptic circuitry, we stained hippocampal slices from adult <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> hippocampus with probes that label nuclei, nerve endings, and excitatory postsynaptic membranes. The distribution of DAPI-stained nuclei and NeuN, a neuronal transcription factor, were comparable in slices from wild-type and <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig8">Figure 8A</xref>). Additionally, the distributions of the presynaptic marker Synapsin and the excitatory postsynaptic marker PSD95 were similar in sections from wild-type and rescued mice (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig8">Figure 8A</xref>). Together, these data indicate that the defects in synaptic transmission and plasticity in <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice were not accompanied by a gross morphological disorganization of the hippocampus.<fig id="fig8" position="float"><object-id pub-id-type="doi">10.7554/eLife.04287.010</object-id><label>Figure 8.</label><caption><title>A loss of Lrp4 decreases spine density in primary apical dendrites of CA1 neurons.</title><p>(<bold>A</bold>) The organization of the hippocampus appears normal as assessed by staining sections of the adult hippocampus for DNA (DAPI), neuronal nuclei (NeuN), presynaptic terminals (synapsin) or excitatory postsynaptic membranes (PSD95). (<bold>B</bold>) Representative images of dendrites of Thy1-YFP labeled CA1 Lrp4 mutant pyramidal neurons near (basal and apical) and far (oblique apical and tufts) from the cell body. Scale bar: 5 μm. (<bold>C</bold>) The spine density is reduced selectively at primary apical dendrites (basal: wild-type, n = 45; <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic>, n = 45; primary apical: wild-type, n = 43; <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic>, n = 46; oblique apical: wild-type, n = 42; <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic>, n = 46; tufts: wild-type, n = 42; <italic>Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>−/−</sup></italic><italic>; Lrp4</italic><italic><sup>m</sup></italic>, n = 45).</p><p><bold>DOI:</bold> <ext-link ext-link-type="doi" xlink:href="10.7554/eLife.04287.010">http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.04287.010</ext-link></p></caption><graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="elife04287f008"/></fig></p><p>Dendritic spines contain the majority of excitatory synapses on CA1 pyramidal neurons, and changes in spine density lead to alterations in mEPSC frequency and are associated with aberrations in synaptic plasticity (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib36">Sala et al., 2001</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib40">Tada and Sheng, 2006</xref>). The inputs to CA1 pyramidal neurons are topographically organized at stereotyped positions along their apical–basal arborization (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib38">Spruston, 2008</xref>). Thus, we generated mice that are mutant for <italic>Lrp4</italic>, carry the <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> transgene that restores Lrp4 expression in muscle, and also carry the <italic>Thy1::YFP-H</italic> transgene, which sparsely labels neurons, to examine spine density along the apical–basal axis (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib10">Feng et al., 2000</xref>). The spine density at several locations (basal, oblique apical, and tufts) was similar in <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> and wild-type mice (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig8">Figure 8B,C</xref>). However, the density of spines on primary apical dendrites on CA1 neurons was reduced (∼20%) in <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig8">Figure 8B,C</xref>). This decrease in spine density in CA1 neurons of <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice is consistent with the reduction in mEPSC frequency and impaired synaptic plasticity.</p></sec><sec id="s2-4"><title>Lrp4 is enriched in synaptic membranes</title><p>During neuromuscular synapse formation, Lrp4 organizes synaptic differentiation by bidirectional signaling from the postsynaptic membrane (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib13">Gomez and Burden, 2011</xref>). To determine whether Lrp4 is enriched at synapses in the hippocampus we fractionated membranes from wild-type and <italic>Lrp4</italic> mutant hippocampus. We found that Lrp4 co-isolates with synaptosomes and is enriched in postsynaptic membranes, containing NMDA receptors, as well as presynaptic membranes, containing Synaptophysin (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6</xref>).</p><p>Defects in LTP and changes in spine density are often associated with changes in the activity of NMDA receptors and/or AMPA receptors, two components critical for synaptic plasticity (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib48">Zoghbi and Bear, 2012</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib7">Ebert and Greenberg, 2013</xref>). To determine whether a loss of Lrp4 alters the expression of synaptic components, we measured the expression of presynaptic and postsynaptic proteins from adult hippocampal lysates (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6</xref>). Wild-type and <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup> hippocampi expressed similar levels of NMDAR subunits, AMPAR subunits, synaptic scaffolding proteins, and cell-adhesion organizing molecules (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6</xref>). These data indicate that the defects in synaptic transmission and cognition are not caused by a change in expression of key synaptic proteins.</p></sec></sec><sec sec-type="discussion" id="s3"><title>Discussion</title><p>Our study reveals that Lrp4 has a critical role in hippocampal function. Specifically, our results indicate that defects in synaptic transmission and postsynaptic integration may contribute to deficits in long-term plasticity, learning, and memory. Stimulation of CA3 inputs fails to induce LTP in <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup> CA1 neurons. Importantly, direct depolarization of <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup> CA1 neurons during TBS can rescue LTP. Thus, CA3–CA1 synapses in <italic>Lrp4</italic> mutant neurons have the capacity to express LTP. Because direct stimulation by-passes the normal synaptic mechanisms for depolarizing CA1 neurons, the absence of LTP in <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>−/−</italic></sup> CA1 neurons may be due to a failure of SC inputs to adequately depolarize CA1 neurons and remove the Mg<sup>++</sup>-dependent block of NMDA receptors. The reduction in the number of CA3–CA1 synapses on apical dendrites is consistent with this view.</p><p>We do not yet know when and where Lrp4 is required for normal CNS function. Further studies will be required to learn whether Lrp4 is required for neurogenesis, early steps in synapse formation, later stages in synaptic differentiation, and the construction and function of Lrp4-dependent circuits that are important for cognition. It seems likely that the loss of neuronal Lrp4 is responsible for the changes in cognition and synaptic function described here. Consistent with this idea, <italic>Lrp4</italic> is strongly expressed in the dentate gyrus and CA fields of the hippocampus, as well as in the olfactory bulb, and cerebral cortex (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib41">Tian et al., 2006</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib25">Lein et al., 2007</xref>). Moreover, Lrp4 co-fractionates with the postsynaptic density (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib41">Tian et al., 2006</xref>) (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6C</xref>). Further, Lrp4 is expressed on the cell surface of cultured cortical neurons (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib41">Tian et al., 2006</xref>). Nonetheless, it may also be the case that other cell types, including glia, may express Lrp4 and contribute to the cognitive deficits found in muscle-rescued <italic>Lrp4</italic> mutant mice. Because glia are known to regulate the efficiency of synaptic transmission (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib8">Eroglu and Barres, 2010</xref>), a potential defect in glia–neuron signaling could contribute to a failure of synaptic transmission, postsynaptic integration, and/or synapse formation on CA1 apical dendrites.</p><p><italic>Lrp4</italic>-deficient mice rescued for neuromuscular synapses appeared to have a range of cognitive defects. Mice displayed anxiety-like behavior in the open-field test and perseverative behavior in the Morris water maze. Stereotypic and restricted repetitive behaviors are symptoms often observed in patients with autism (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib28">Lord et al., 2000</xref>) and in mouse models of autism spectrum disorders (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib2">Banerjee et al., 2014</xref>). Accordingly, it will be interesting to explore whether <italic>Lrp4</italic>-deficient mice are predisposed to additional autism-like phenotypes such as altered social behavior, hyperactivity, and epilepsy.</p><p>Mutations in <italic>Lrp4</italic> are responsible for Cenani–Lenz syndrome, characterized by bone abnormalities and fusions in hand, limb, and other bones (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib19">Karner et al., 2010</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib27">Li et al., 2010</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib18">Kariminejad et al., 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib21">Khan et al., 2013</xref>). Lrp4 binds, sequesters, and presents negative regulators of Wnt- and BMP-signaling, such as Dickhopf, Sclerostin, and Wise (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib31">Ohazama et al., 2008</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib4">Choi et al., 2009</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1">Ahn et al., 2013</xref>). In certain instances, Cenani–Lenz syndrome is caused by mutations that prevent Lrp4 from interacting with these negative regulators, leading to excessive Wnt and/or BMP signaling (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib26">Leupin et al., 2011</xref>). Mutations in <italic>Lrp4</italic> that reduce Agrin–Lrp4–MuSK signaling, without perturbing Wnt signaling, cause a neuromuscular disease, termed congenital myasthenia (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib32">Ohkawara et al., 2014</xref>). Moreover, auto-antibodies to Lrp4 are responsible for one form of myasthenia gravis (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib15">Higuchi et al., 2011</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib47">Zisimopoulou et al., 2014</xref>). It is currently unclear whether patients with Cenani–Lenz syndrome, <italic>Lrp4</italic> congenital myasthenia, or auto-immune Lrp4 myasthenia gravis have cognitive deficits or neurological complications. Given our data showing that Lrp4 has an important role in cognition in mice, it will be interesting and important to evaluate the neurological status of these patients.</p></sec><sec sec-type="materials|methods" id="s4"><title>Materials and methods</title><sec id="s4-1"><title>Mice</title><p>Mice that are null for <italic>Lrp4</italic>, or carry muscle-specific::<italic>Lrp4</italic> (<italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup><italic>)</italic> or <italic>Thy1::YFP-H</italic> transgenes, have been described previously (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib10">Feng et al., 2000</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib44">Weatherbee et al., 2006</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib13">Gomez and Burden, 2011</xref>). Procedures were approved by the New York University School of Medicine Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (Protocol 140406-01).</p></sec><sec id="s4-2"><title>Open field test</title><p>Mice were placed in an open field box (40 × 40 × 30 cm) for 30 min, and movement was recorded and analyzed with ANY-maze video tracking software (Stoelting, Wood Dale, IL). Open fields were thoroughly washed with water and ethanol between sessions.</p></sec><sec id="s4-3"><title>Fear conditioning test</title><p>Mice were trained and tested in a sound-attenuated cage using the FreezeFrame system (Coulbourn Instruments, Whitehall, PA), and behavior was recorded using low-light video cameras. Stimulus presentation was automated using Actimetrics FreezeFrame software (version 2.2; Coulbourn Instruments). Test cages were equipped with stainless-steel shocking grids, which were connected to a precision feedback current-regulated shocker (Coulbourn Instruments). Mice were allowed to roam for 2 min, without a shock, on a stainless-steel shocking grid connected to a precision feedback current-regulated shocker in ethanol-scented cages (Coulbourn Instruments). Fear conditioning was established by three auditory tone (30 s, 4000 Hz, 80 dB)/foot shock (2 s, 0.5 mA) pairings, separated by 15 s without stimuli. 2 min after conditioning, mice were returned to their home cages. 24 hr after training, the mice were placed in a 1% Pine-Sol-scented cage on non-shocking grids with a different texture than the stainless-steel shocking grids used during training. Following 2 min without an auditory stimulus, mice were presented with the training tone (4000 Hz, 80 dB) for 2 min. The percent of time spent in a frozen stature, before and after training, was measured. All equipments were thoroughly cleaned with detergent and water between sessions.</p></sec><sec id="s4-4"><title>Passive avoidance test</title><p>Mice were trained and tested in a two-chamber passive avoidance cage, in which one chamber was permanently darkened and separated from the lit chamber by a sliding door. The darkened chamber was equipped with a stainless-steel shocking grid connected to a precision feedback current-regulated shocker (Coulbourn Instruments). Equipment control was automated with Graphic State (Coulbourn Instruments). During training, mice were placed in the brightly-illuminated chamber and allowed to move freely for 1 min. Following this period, the door to the dark chamber was opened, and mice were allowed to move into the dark chamber. Latency to enter the dark chamber was recorded. Once the mice had completely entered the dark chamber, the door shut and a 2 s, 0.5 mA shock was delivered. After 10 s in the dark chamber, mice were returned to their home cage. During the test period, 48 hr after training, the training protocol was repeated, but the mice did not receive a foot shock upon entry into the dark chamber. Latency to enter the dark chamber was recorded. All equipment was thoroughly cleaned with detergent and water between sessions.</p></sec><sec id="s4-5"><title>Morris water maze</title><p>Mice were given four trials (60 s/trial; swim-start position randomized) each day to find a hidden platform in a circular pool of water, rendered opaque with white tempera paint, using visual cues placed outside the pool. The trajectories of mice were recorded and analyzed with Ethovision XT software (Noldus, Attleboro, MA). The time required to find the escape platform (escape latency) was measured. At the end of the fifth day, the platform was removed and a 1 min probe trial was conducted to measure the percent of time spent in each quadrant as well as the frequency which mice crossed the former location of the platform. For reversal training, the hidden platform was moved to the opposite quadrant, and mice were given four trials (60 s/trial; swim-start position randomized) for 3 days to locate the new platform position. Escape latencies from four trials each day were recorded. To control for motivation to escape the water, visual acuity, and swimming ability mice were trained on a visible platform for 2 days (60 s/trial; swim-start position randomized).</p></sec><sec id="s4-6"><title>Electrophysiology</title><p>Coronal hippocampal slices (350 μm) were prepared from one hemisphere of age-matched mice (P21–P34) anesthetized with intraperitoneal injection of ketamine/xylazine (ketamine, 100 mg/kg; xylazine, 10 mg/kg). Slices were cut with a vibratome (VT1200S, Leica, Buffalo Grove, IL) and placed in ice-cold oxygenated (95% O<sub>2</sub>/5% CO<sub>2</sub>) dissection buffer, which was (in mM): 75 sucrose, 87 NaCl, 2.5 KCl, 1.25 NaH<sub>2</sub>PO<sub>4</sub>, 0.5 CaCl<sub>2</sub>, 7 MgCl<sub>2</sub>, 25 NaHCO<sub>3</sub>, 1.2 ascorbic acid, and 10 dextrose, pH 7.4. After approximately 30 min, the solution was gradually warmed to room temperature. Slices were then transferred to artificial cerebrospinal fluid (ACSF), which was (in mM): 124 NaCl, 2.5 KCl, 1.25 NaH<sub>2</sub>PO<sub>4</sub>, 2.5 CaCl<sub>2</sub>, 2 MgSO<sub>4</sub>, 26 NaHCO<sub>3</sub>, 10 dextrose, and 4 sucrose, and incubated at room temperature for at least 30 min to allow for recovery. Slices were then transferred to the recording chamber and perfused (2.0–2.5 ml/min) with oxygenated ACSF at 32°C with a TC-344B in-line solution heater and controller (Warner Instruments, Hamden, CT). Somatic whole-cell recordings were made from CA1 pyramidal hippocampal neurons, which were voltage clamped with an Axoclamp 2B amplifier (Molecular Devices, Sunnyvale, CA) and imaged using infrared-differential interference contrast video microscopy, digitized by Digidata 1440a (Molecular Devices). Patch pipettes (4–8 MΩ) were filled with (in mM): 125 Cs-gluconate, 2 CsCl, 5 TEA, 4 ATP, 0.3 GTP, 10 phosphocreatine, 10 HEPES, 0.5 EGTA, and 3.5 QX-314. Data were filtered at 2 kHz, digitized at 10 kHz, and analyzed with Clampfit 10 (Molecular Devices). SC afferents were stimulated with a small glass bipolar electrode (S88 Stimulator, Grass Instruments, Warwick, RI). Paired-pulse facilitation was induced with two stimuli of equal intensity presented at variable interstimulus intervals, ranging from 10 ms to 1 s, and quantified as the ratio of second to first EPSC. Once a baseline for synaptic transmission was stable for 10 min, LTP was induced with a TBS. TBS consisted of four trains, separated by 20 s intervals. Each train was comprised of ten bursts at 5 Hz, and each burst included 4 stimuli at 100 Hz. During TBS, CA1 neurons were held either at the resting potential (−70 mV) or depolarized to 0 mV. We computed the magnitude of LTP as the average synaptic strength 10–20 min after pairing, normalized by the average synaptic strength before pairing (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib9">Feldman, 2000</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib11">Froemke et al., 2005</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib12">Gambino et al., 2014</xref>). During TBS, we integrated four consecutive EPSCs and termed this value the TBS-evoked EPSC; for each cell, all TBS-evoked EPSCs were averaged, and the mean value was determined (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3I</xref>). We measured inhibitory postsynaptic currents by voltage-clamping CA1 neurons to 0 mV, near the reversal potential for excitation.</p></sec><sec id="s4-7"><title>Statistics</title><p>Data are presented as mean ± SEM. p values are derived from unpaired, two-tailed Student's <italic>t-</italic>tests or two-way analysis of variance (ns = not significant, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, ****p < 0.0001).</p></sec><sec id="s4-8"><title>Protein fractionation and Western blotting</title><p>Hippocampi were isolated in cold PBS, flash frozen in liquid nitrogen, and stored at −80°C. Brain lysates, synaptosomes, and PSD fractions were prepared as described previously (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib34">Phillips et al., 2001</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib17">Jordan et al., 2004</xref>). An equal amount of protein (10 μg) from each fraction was separated by SDS-PAGE. The following antibodies were diluted in TBST (0.2% Tween-20), with 2% BSA: Lrp4 (1:2500; Neuromab, N207/27, Davis, CA), Synaptophysin (1:20,000; Life Technologies, Grand Island, NY), PSD95 (1:1000; Neuromab, K28/43), GluA1 (1:1000; Millipore, Billerica, MA), GluA2/3 (1:500; Millipore), pan-Shank (1:1000; Santa Cruz Biotechnology, C-20, Dallas, TX), NR1 (1:1000; Neuromab, N308/48), GABA<sub>A</sub>R γ2 (1:1000; PhosphoSolutions, Aurora, CO), NeuN (1:1000; Millipore), Gephryin (1:1000; SYnaptic Systems, Goettingen, Germany), actin (1:2000; Sigma, AC74, St. Louis, MO), N-cadherin (1:1000; BD Transduction Laboratories, 610920, San Jose, CA), PTPR σ (1:500; Protein Tech Group, Chicago, IL), GFAP (1:1000; Sigma), β-tubulin III (1:6000; SYnaptic SYstems). The following antibodies were gifts from P. Scheiffele: Neuroligin 1 (1:2000), Neuroligin 2 (1:2000), Neuroligin 3A (1:2000), and pan-Neuroligin (1:3000).</p></sec><sec id="s4-9"><title>Immunohistochemistry</title><p>Deeply anesthetized (ketamine, 100 mg/kg; xylazine, 10 mg/kg, i.p.) mice were transcardially perfused briefly with phosphate buffer saline (PBS) followed by 4% paraformaldehyde in PBS. Coronal slices (40 μm) were blocked and permeabilized in PBS with 2% normal goat serum and 0.2% Triton X-100, followed by overnight incubation at 4°C with primary antibodies. The sections were subsequently washed in PBS and incubated with secondary antibody.</p></sec><sec id="s4-10"><title>Hippocampal cell culture</title><p>Dissociated primary hippocampal neuron cultures were prepared from embryonic day 18 mouse embryos, as described previously (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib33">Osten et al., 1998</xref>). Neurons were plated at a density of 1 × 10<sup>6</sup> cells in poly-L-lysine coated 60-mm tissue culture dishes and grown in Neurobasal Medium, supplemented with B-27 (Life Technologies). 3 days after plating cells, 2 μM Ara-C was added to the medium to minimize growth of dividing cells. The medium, including Ara-C, was replaced once per week.</p></sec></sec></body><back><ack id="ack"><title>Acknowledgements</title><p>We thank J Dasen and RW Tsien for helpful comments on the manuscript, W Gan, T Franke, C Hoeffer, L Perez-Cuesta, C Lai, and C Wincott for assistance with the behavioral studies and spine imaging, P Scheiffele for kindly providing antibodies, and RW Tsien for suggesting experiments. The authors declare no competing financial interests. AMG. is currently at the Biozentrum, Basel, Switzerland.</p></ack><sec sec-type="additional-information"><title>Additional information</title><fn-group content-type="competing-interest"><title>Competing interests</title><fn fn-type="conflict" id="conf1"><p>The authors declare that no competing interests exist.</p></fn></fn-group><fn-group content-type="author-contribution"><title>Author contributions</title><fn fn-type="con" id="con1"><p>AMG, Conception and design, Acquisition of data, Analysis and interpretation of data, Drafting or revising the article</p></fn><fn fn-type="con" id="con2"><p>RCF, Conception and design, Analysis and interpretation of data, Drafting or revising the article</p></fn><fn fn-type="con" id="con3"><p>SJB, Conception and design, Analysis and interpretation of data, Drafting or revising the article</p></fn></fn-group><fn-group content-type="ethics-information"><title>Ethics</title><fn fn-type="other"><p>Animal experimentation: All procedures were approved by the New York University School of Medicine Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (Protocol 140406-01).</p></fn></fn-group></sec><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="bib1"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ahn</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Sims</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Logue</surname><given-names>JM</given-names></name><name><surname>Weatherbee</surname><given-names>SD</given-names></name><name><surname>Krumlauf</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name></person-group><year>2013</year><article-title>Lrp4 and Wise interplay controls the formation and patterning of mammary and other skin appendage placodes by modulating Wnt signaling</article-title><source>Development</source><volume>140</volume><fpage>583</fpage><lpage>593</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1242/dev.085118</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib2"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Banerjee</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Riordan</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Bhat</surname><given-names>MA</given-names></name></person-group><year>2014</year><article-title>Genetic aspects of autism spectrum disorders: insights from animal models</article-title><source>Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience</source><volume>8</volume><fpage>58</fpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fncel.2014.00058</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib3"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Burden</surname><given-names>SJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Yumoto</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>W</given-names></name></person-group><year>2013</year><article-title>The role of MuSK in synapse formation and neuromuscular disease</article-title><source>Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology</source><volume>5</volume><fpage>a009167</fpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1101/cshperspect.a009167</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib4"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Choi</surname><given-names>HY</given-names></name><name><surname>Dieckmann</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Herz</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Niemeier</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name></person-group><year>2009</year><article-title>Lrp4, a novel receptor for Dickkopf 1 and sclerostin, is expressed by osteoblasts and regulates bone growth and turnover in vivo</article-title><source>PLOS ONE</source><volume>4</volume><fpage>e7930</fpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1371/journal.pone.0007930</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib5"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Collingridge</surname><given-names>GL</given-names></name><name><surname>Herron</surname><given-names>CE</given-names></name><name><surname>Lester</surname><given-names>RA</given-names></name></person-group><year>1988</year><article-title>Synaptic activation of N-methyl-D-aspartate receptors in the Schaffer collateral-commissural pathway of rat hippocampus</article-title><source>The Journal of Physiology</source><volume>399</volume><fpage>283</fpage><lpage>300</lpage></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib6"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>De Felipe</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Marco</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Fairén</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Jones</surname><given-names>EG</given-names></name></person-group><year>1997</year><article-title>Inhibitory synaptogenesis in mouse somatosensory cortex</article-title><source>Cerebral Cortex</source><volume>7</volume><fpage>619</fpage><lpage>634</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/cercor/7.7.619</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib7"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ebert</surname><given-names>DH</given-names></name><name><surname>Greenberg</surname><given-names>ME</given-names></name></person-group><year>2013</year><article-title>Activity-dependent neuronal signalling and autism spectrum disorder</article-title><source>Nature</source><volume>493</volume><fpage>327</fpage><lpage>337</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/nature11860</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib8"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Eroglu</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Barres</surname><given-names>BA</given-names></name></person-group><year>2010</year><article-title>Regulation of synaptic connectivity by glia</article-title><source>Nature</source><volume>468</volume><fpage>223</fpage><lpage>231</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/nature09612</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib9"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Feldman</surname><given-names>DE</given-names></name></person-group><year>2000</year><article-title>Timing-based LTP and LTD at vertical inputs to layer II/III pyramidal cells in rat barrel cortex</article-title><source>Neuron</source><volume>27</volume><fpage>45</fpage><lpage>56</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S0896-6273(00)00008-8</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib10"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Feng</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name><name><surname>Mellor</surname><given-names>RH</given-names></name><name><surname>Bernstein</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Keller-Peck</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Nguyen</surname><given-names>QT</given-names></name><name><surname>Wallace</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Nerbonne</surname><given-names>JM</given-names></name><name><surname>Lichtman</surname><given-names>JW</given-names></name><name><surname>Sanes</surname><given-names>JR</given-names></name></person-group><year>2000</year><article-title>Imaging neuronal subsets in transgenic mice expressing multiple spectral variants of GFP</article-title><source>Neuron</source><volume>28</volume><fpage>41</fpage><lpage>51</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S0896-6273(00)00084-2</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib11"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Froemke</surname><given-names>RC</given-names></name><name><surname>Poo</surname><given-names>MM</given-names></name><name><surname>Dan</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name></person-group><year>2005</year><article-title>Spike-timing-dependent synaptic plasticity depends on dendritic location</article-title><source>Nature</source><volume>434</volume><fpage>221</fpage><lpage>225</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/nature03366</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib12"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gambino</surname><given-names>F</given-names></name><name><surname>Pagès</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Kehayas</surname><given-names>V</given-names></name><name><surname>Baptista</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><name><surname>Tatti</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Carleton</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Holtmaat</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name></person-group><year>2014</year><article-title>Sensory-evoked LTP driven by dendritic plateau potentials in vivo</article-title><source>Nature</source><volume>515</volume><fpage>116</fpage><lpage>119</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/nature13664</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib13"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gomez</surname><given-names>AM</given-names></name><name><surname>Burden</surname><given-names>SJ</given-names></name></person-group><year>2011</year><article-title>The extracellular region of Lrp4 is sufficient to mediate neuromuscular synapse formation</article-title><source>Developmental Dynamics</source><volume>240</volume><fpage>2626</fpage><lpage>2633</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1002/dvdy.22772</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib14"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Guy</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Hendrich</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name><name><surname>Holmes</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Martin</surname><given-names>JE</given-names></name><name><surname>Bird</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name></person-group><year>2001</year><article-title>A mouse Mecp2-null mutation causes neurological symptoms that mimic Rett syndrome</article-title><source>Nature Genetics</source><volume>27</volume><fpage>322</fpage><lpage>326</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/85899</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib15"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Higuchi</surname><given-names>O</given-names></name><name><surname>Hamuro</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Motomura</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Yamanashi</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name></person-group><year>2011</year><article-title>Autoantibodies to low-density lipoprotein receptor-related protein 4 in myasthenia gravis</article-title><source>Annals of Neurology</source><volume>69</volume><fpage>418</fpage><lpage>422</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1002/ana.22312</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib16"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Johnson</surname><given-names>EB</given-names></name><name><surname>Hammer</surname><given-names>RE</given-names></name><name><surname>Herz</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group><year>2005</year><article-title>Abnormal development of the apical ectodermal ridge and polysyndactyly in Megf7-deficient mice</article-title><source>Human Molecular Genetics</source><volume>14</volume><fpage>3523</fpage><lpage>3538</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/hmg/ddi381</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib17"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Jordan</surname><given-names>BA</given-names></name><name><surname>Fernholz</surname><given-names>BD</given-names></name><name><surname>Boussac</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Xu</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Grigorean</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name><name><surname>Ziff</surname><given-names>EB</given-names></name><name><surname>Neubert</surname><given-names>TA</given-names></name></person-group><year>2004</year><article-title>Identification and verification of novel rodent postsynaptic density proteins</article-title><source>Molecular & Cellular Proteomics</source><volume>3</volume><fpage>857</fpage><lpage>871</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1074/mcp.M400045-MCP200</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib18"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kariminejad</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Stollfuß</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name><name><surname>Li</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Bögershausen</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Boss</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name><name><surname>Hennekam</surname><given-names>RC</given-names></name><name><surname>Wollnik</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name></person-group><year>2013</year><article-title>Severe Cenani-Lenz syndrome caused by loss of LRP4 function</article-title><source>American Journal of Medical Genetics. Part A</source><volume>161A</volume><fpage>1475</fpage><lpage>1479</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1002/ajmg.a.35920</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib19"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Karner</surname><given-names>CM</given-names></name><name><surname>Dietrich</surname><given-names>MF</given-names></name><name><surname>Johnson</surname><given-names>EB</given-names></name><name><surname>Kappesser</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Tennert</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Percin</surname><given-names>F</given-names></name><name><surname>Wollnik</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name><name><surname>Carroll</surname><given-names>TJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Herz</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group><year>2010</year><article-title>Lrp4 regulates initiation of ureteric budding and is crucial for kidney formation–a mouse model for Cenani-Lenz syndrome</article-title><source>PLOS ONE</source><volume>5</volume><fpage>e10418</fpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1371/journal.pone.0010418</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib20"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Katz</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name><name><surname>Miledi</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name></person-group><year>1968</year><article-title>The role of calcium in neuromuscular facilitation</article-title><source>The Journal of Physiology</source><volume>195</volume><fpage>481</fpage><lpage>492</lpage></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib21"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Khan</surname><given-names>TN</given-names></name><name><surname>Klar</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Ali</surname><given-names>Z</given-names></name><name><surname>Khan</surname><given-names>F</given-names></name><name><surname>Baig</surname><given-names>SM</given-names></name><name><surname>Dahl</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name></person-group><year>2013</year><article-title>Cenani-Lenz syndrome restricted to limb and kidney anomalies associated with a novel LRP4 missense mutation</article-title><source>European Journal of Medical Genetics</source><volume>56</volume><fpage>371</fpage><lpage>374</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.ejmg.2013.04.007</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib22"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kim</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Stiegler</surname><given-names>AL</given-names></name><name><surname>Cameron</surname><given-names>TO</given-names></name><name><surname>Hallock</surname><given-names>PT</given-names></name><name><surname>Gomez</surname><given-names>AM</given-names></name><name><surname>Huang</surname><given-names>JH</given-names></name><name><surname>Hubbard</surname><given-names>SR</given-names></name><name><surname>Dustin</surname><given-names>ML</given-names></name><name><surname>Burden</surname><given-names>SJ</given-names></name></person-group><year>2008</year><article-title>Lrp4 is a receptor for Agrin and forms a complex with MuSK</article-title><source>Cell</source><volume>135</volume><fpage>334</fpage><lpage>342</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.cell.2008.10.002</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib23"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Lai</surname><given-names>KO</given-names></name><name><surname>Ip</surname><given-names>NY</given-names></name></person-group><year>2013</year><article-title>Structural plasticity of dendritic spines: the underlying mechanisms and its dysregulation in brain disorders</article-title><source>Biochimica Et Biophysica Acta</source><volume>1832</volume><fpage>2257</fpage><lpage>2263</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.bbadis.2013.08.012</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib24"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>LeDoux</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group><year>2003</year><article-title>The emotional brain, fear, and the amygdala</article-title><source>Cellular and Molecular Neurobiology</source><volume>23</volume><fpage>727</fpage><lpage>738</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1023/A:1025048802629</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib25"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Lein</surname><given-names>ES</given-names></name><name><surname>Hawrylycz</surname><given-names>MJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Ao</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Ayres</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Bensinger</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Bernard</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Boe</surname><given-names>AF</given-names></name><name><surname>Boguski</surname><given-names>MS</given-names></name><name><surname>Brockway</surname><given-names>KS</given-names></name><name><surname>Byrnes</surname><given-names>EJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Chen</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name><name><surname>Chen</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name><name><surname>Chen</surname><given-names>TM</given-names></name><name><surname>Chin</surname><given-names>MC</given-names></name><name><surname>Chong</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Crook</surname><given-names>BE</given-names></name><name><surname>Czaplinska</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Dang</surname><given-names>CN</given-names></name><name><surname>Datta</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Dee</surname><given-names>NR</given-names></name><name><surname>Desaki</surname><given-names>AL</given-names></name><name><surname>Desta</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>Diep</surname><given-names>E</given-names></name><name><surname>Dolbeare</surname><given-names>TA</given-names></name><name><surname>Donelan</surname><given-names>MJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Dong</surname><given-names>HW</given-names></name><name><surname>Dougherty</surname><given-names>JG</given-names></name><name><surname>Duncan</surname><given-names>BJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Ebbert</surname><given-names>AJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Eichele</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name><name><surname>Estin</surname><given-names>LK</given-names></name><name><surname>Faber</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Facer</surname><given-names>BA</given-names></name><name><surname>Fields</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Fischer</surname><given-names>SR</given-names></name><name><surname>Fliss</surname><given-names>TP</given-names></name><name><surname>Frensley</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Gates</surname><given-names>SN</given-names></name><name><surname>Glattfelder</surname><given-names>KJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Halverson</surname><given-names>KR</given-names></name><name><surname>Hart</surname><given-names>MR</given-names></name><name><surname>Hohmann</surname><given-names>JG</given-names></name><name><surname>Howell</surname><given-names>MP</given-names></name><name><surname>Jeung</surname><given-names>DP</given-names></name><name><surname>Johnson</surname><given-names>RA</given-names></name><name><surname>Karr</surname><given-names>PT</given-names></name><name><surname>Kawal</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Kidney</surname><given-names>JM</given-names></name><name><surname>Knapik</surname><given-names>RH</given-names></name><name><surname>Kuan</surname><given-names>CL</given-names></name><name><surname>Lake</surname><given-names>JH</given-names></name><name><surname>Laramee</surname><given-names>AR</given-names></name><name><surname>Larsen</surname><given-names>KD</given-names></name><name><surname>Lau</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Lemon</surname><given-names>TA</given-names></name><name><surname>Liang</surname><given-names>AJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Luong</surname><given-names>LT</given-names></name><name><surname>Michaels</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Morgan</surname><given-names>JJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Morgan</surname><given-names>RJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Mortrud</surname><given-names>MT</given-names></name><name><surname>Mosqueda</surname><given-names>NF</given-names></name><name><surname>Ng</surname><given-names>LL</given-names></name><name><surname>Ng</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Orta</surname><given-names>GJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Overly</surname><given-names>CC</given-names></name><name><surname>Pak</surname><given-names>TH</given-names></name><name><surname>Parry</surname><given-names>SE</given-names></name><name><surname>Pathak</surname><given-names>SD</given-names></name><name><surname>Pearson</surname><given-names>OC</given-names></name><name><surname>Puchalski</surname><given-names>RB</given-names></name><name><surname>Riley</surname><given-names>ZL</given-names></name><name><surname>Rockett</surname><given-names>HR</given-names></name><name><surname>Rowland</surname><given-names>SA</given-names></name><name><surname>Royall</surname><given-names>JJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Ruiz</surname><given-names>MJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Sarno</surname><given-names>NR</given-names></name><name><surname>Schaffnit</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name><name><surname>Shapovalova</surname><given-names>NV</given-names></name><name><surname>Sivisay</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>Slaughterbeck</surname><given-names>CR</given-names></name><name><surname>Smith</surname><given-names>SC</given-names></name><name><surname>Smith</surname><given-names>KA</given-names></name><name><surname>Smith</surname><given-names>BI</given-names></name><name><surname>Sodt</surname><given-names>AJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Stewart</surname><given-names>NN</given-names></name><name><surname>Stumpf</surname><given-names>KR</given-names></name><name><surname>Sunkin</surname><given-names>SM</given-names></name><name><surname>Sutram</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Tam</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Teemer</surname><given-names>CD</given-names></name><name><surname>Thaller</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Thompson</surname><given-names>CL</given-names></name><name><surname>Varnam</surname><given-names>LR</given-names></name><name><surname>Visel</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Whitlock</surname><given-names>RM</given-names></name><name><surname>Wohnoutka</surname><given-names>PE</given-names></name><name><surname>Wolkey</surname><given-names>CK</given-names></name><name><surname>Wong</surname><given-names>VY</given-names></name><name><surname>Wood</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Yaylaoglu</surname><given-names>MB</given-names></name><name><surname>Young</surname><given-names>RC</given-names></name><name><surname>Youngstrom</surname><given-names>BL</given-names></name><name><surname>Yuan</surname><given-names>XF</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name><name><surname>Zwingman</surname><given-names>TA</given-names></name><name><surname>Jones</surname><given-names>AR</given-names></name></person-group><year>2007</year><article-title>Genome-wide atlas of gene expression in the adult mouse brain</article-title><source>Nature</source><volume>445</volume><fpage>168</fpage><lpage>176</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/nature05453</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib26"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Leupin</surname><given-names>O</given-names></name><name><surname>Piters</surname><given-names>E</given-names></name><name><surname>Halleux</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Hu</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Kramer</surname><given-names>I</given-names></name><name><surname>Morvan</surname><given-names>F</given-names></name><name><surname>Bouwmeester</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>Schirle</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Bueno-Lozano</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Fuentes</surname><given-names>FJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Itin</surname><given-names>PH</given-names></name><name><surname>Boudin</surname><given-names>E</given-names></name><name><surname>de Freitas</surname><given-names>F</given-names></name><name><surname>Jennes</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name><name><surname>Brannetti</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name><name><surname>Charara</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Ebersbach</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Geisse</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Lu</surname><given-names>CX</given-names></name><name><surname>Bauer</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Van Hul</surname><given-names>W</given-names></name><name><surname>Kneissel</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name></person-group><year>2011</year><article-title>Bone overgrowth-associated mutations in the LRP4 gene impair sclerostin facilitator function</article-title><source>The Journal of Biological Chemistry</source><volume>286</volume><fpage>19489</fpage><lpage>19500</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1074/jbc.M110.190330</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib27"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Li</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Pawlik</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name><name><surname>Elcioglu</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Aglan</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Kayserili</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Yigit</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name><name><surname>Percin</surname><given-names>F</given-names></name><name><surname>Goodman</surname><given-names>F</given-names></name><name><surname>Nürnberg</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name><name><surname>Cenani</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Urquhart</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Chung</surname><given-names>BD</given-names></name><name><surname>Ismail</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Amr</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name><name><surname>Aslanger</surname><given-names>AD</given-names></name><name><surname>Becker</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Netzer</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Scambler</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Eyaid</surname><given-names>W</given-names></name><name><surname>Hamamy</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Clayton-Smith</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Hennekam</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Nürnberg</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Herz</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Temtamy</surname><given-names>SA</given-names></name><name><surname>Wollnik</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name></person-group><year>2010</year><article-title>LRP4 mutations alter Wnt/beta-catenin signaling and cause limb and kidney malformations in Cenani-Lenz syndrome</article-title><source>American Journal of Human Genetics</source><volume>86</volume><fpage>696</fpage><lpage>706</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.ajhg.2010.03.004</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib28"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Lord</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Cook</surname><given-names>EH</given-names></name><name><surname>Leventhal</surname><given-names>BL</given-names></name><name><surname>Amaral</surname><given-names>DG</given-names></name></person-group><year>2000</year><article-title>Autism spectrum disorders</article-title><source>Neuron</source><volume>28</volume><fpage>355</fpage><lpage>363</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S0896-6273(00)00115-X</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib29"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Malenka</surname><given-names>RC</given-names></name><name><surname>Bear</surname><given-names>MF</given-names></name></person-group><year>2004</year><article-title>LTP and LTD: an embarrassment of riches</article-title><source>Neuron</source><volume>44</volume><fpage>5</fpage><lpage>21</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.neuron.2004.09.012</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib30"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Nowak</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name><name><surname>Bregestovski</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Ascher</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Herbet</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Prochiantz</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name></person-group><year>1984</year><article-title>Magnesium gates glutamate-activated channels in mouse central neurones</article-title><source>Nature</source><volume>307</volume><fpage>462</fpage><lpage>465</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/307462a0</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib31"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ohazama</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Johnson</surname><given-names>EB</given-names></name><name><surname>Ota</surname><given-names>MS</given-names></name><name><surname>Choi</surname><given-names>HY</given-names></name><name><surname>Porntaveetus</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>Oommen</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Itoh</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Eto</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name><name><surname>Gritli-Linde</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Herz</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Sharpe</surname><given-names>PT</given-names></name></person-group><year>2008</year><article-title>Lrp4 modulates extracellular integration of cell signaling pathways in development</article-title><source>PLOS ONE</source><volume>3</volume><fpage>e4092</fpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1371/journal.pone.0004092</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib32"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ohkawara</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name><name><surname>Cabrera-Serrano</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Nakata</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>Milone</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Asai</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Ito</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name><name><surname>Ito</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Masuda</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Ito</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Engel</surname><given-names>AG</given-names></name><name><surname>Ohno</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name></person-group><year>2014</year><article-title>LRP4 third beta-propeller domain mutations cause novel congenital myasthenia by compromising agrin-mediated MuSK signaling in a position-specific manner</article-title><source>Human Molecular Genetics</source><volume>23</volume><fpage>1856</fpage><lpage>1868</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/hmg/ddt578</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib33"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Osten</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Srivastava</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Inman</surname><given-names>GJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Vilim</surname><given-names>FS</given-names></name><name><surname>Khatri</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name><name><surname>Lee</surname><given-names>LM</given-names></name><name><surname>States</surname><given-names>BA</given-names></name><name><surname>Einheber</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Milner</surname><given-names>TA</given-names></name><name><surname>Hanson</surname><given-names>PI</given-names></name><name><surname>Ziff</surname><given-names>EB</given-names></name></person-group><year>1998</year><article-title>The AMPA receptor GluR2 C terminus can mediate a reversible, ATP-dependent interaction with NSF and alpha- and beta-SNAPs</article-title><source>Neuron</source><volume>21</volume><fpage>99</fpage><lpage>110</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S0896-6273(00)80518-8</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib34"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Phillips</surname><given-names>GR</given-names></name><name><surname>Huang</surname><given-names>JK</given-names></name><name><surname>Wang</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Tanaka</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Shapiro</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>W</given-names></name><name><surname>Shan</surname><given-names>WS</given-names></name><name><surname>Arndt</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name><name><surname>Frank</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Gordon</surname><given-names>RE</given-names></name><name><surname>Gawinowicz</surname><given-names>MA</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhao</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Colman</surname><given-names>DR</given-names></name></person-group><year>2001</year><article-title>The presynaptic particle web: ultrastructure, composition, dissolution, and reconstitution</article-title><source>Neuron</source><volume>32</volume><fpage>63</fpage><lpage>77</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S0896-6273(01)00450-0</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib35"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Pitler</surname><given-names>TA</given-names></name><name><surname>Alger</surname><given-names>BE</given-names></name></person-group><year>1994</year><article-title>Depolarization-induced suppression of GABAergic inhibition in rat hippocampal pyramidal cells: G protein involvement in a presynaptic mechanism</article-title><source>Neuron</source><volume>13</volume><fpage>1447</fpage><lpage>1455</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/0896-6273(94)90430-8</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib36"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sala</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Piëch</surname><given-names>V</given-names></name><name><surname>Wilson</surname><given-names>NR</given-names></name><name><surname>Passafaro</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name><name><surname>Sheng</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name></person-group><year>2001</year><article-title>Regulation of dendritic spine morphology and synaptic function by Shank and Homer</article-title><source>Neuron</source><volume>31</volume><fpage>115</fpage><lpage>130</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S0896-6273(01)00339-7</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib37"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Shen</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Lu</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name><name><surname>Figueiredo</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><name><surname>Bean</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Jung</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Wu</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Barik</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Yin</surname><given-names>DM</given-names></name><name><surname>Xiong</surname><given-names>WC</given-names></name><name><surname>Mei</surname><given-names>L</given-names></name></person-group><year>2013</year><article-title>Antibodies against low-density lipoprotein receptor-related protein 4 induce myasthenia gravis</article-title><source>The Journal of Clinical Investigation</source><volume>123</volume><fpage>5190</fpage><lpage>5202</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1172/JCI66039</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib38"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Spruston</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name></person-group><year>2008</year><article-title>Pyramidal neurons: dendritic structure and synaptic integration</article-title><source>Nature Reviews. Neuroscience</source><volume>9</volume><fpage>206</fpage><lpage>221</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/nrn2286</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib39"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sudhof</surname><given-names>TC</given-names></name></person-group><year>2008</year><article-title>Neuroligins and neurexins link synaptic function to cognitive disease</article-title><source>Nature</source><volume>455</volume><fpage>903</fpage><lpage>911</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/nature07456</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib40"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Tada</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>Sheng</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name></person-group><year>2006</year><article-title>Molecular mechanisms of dendritic spine morphogenesis</article-title><source>Current Opinion in Neurobiology</source><volume>16</volume><fpage>95</fpage><lpage>101</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.conb.2005.12.001</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib41"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Tian</surname><given-names>QB</given-names></name><name><surname>Suzuki</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>Yamauchi</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>Sakagami</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Yoshimura</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Miyazawa</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Nakayama</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name><name><surname>Saitoh</surname><given-names>F</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>JP</given-names></name><name><surname>Lu</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Kondo</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Endo</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name></person-group><year>2006</year><article-title>Interaction of LDL receptor-related protein 4 (LRP4) with postsynaptic scaffold proteins via its C-terminal PDZ domain-binding motif, and its regulation by Ca/calmodulin-dependent protein kinase II</article-title><source>The European Journal of Neuroscience</source><volume>23</volume><fpage>2864</fpage><lpage>2876</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1460-9568.2006.04846.x</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib42"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Tsivgoulis</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name><name><surname>Dervenoulas</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name><name><surname>Tzartos</surname><given-names>SJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Zompola</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Papageorgiou</surname><given-names>SG</given-names></name><name><surname>Voumvourakis</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name></person-group><year>2014</year><article-title>Double seropositive myasthenia gravis with achetylocholine receptor and lipoprotein receptor-related protein 4 antibodies</article-title><source>Muscle & Nerve</source><volume>49</volume><fpage>930</fpage><lpage>931</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1002/mus.24166</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib43"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Visel</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Thaller</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Eichele</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name></person-group><year>2004</year><article-title>GenePaint.org: an atlas of gene expression patterns in the mouse embryo</article-title><source>Nucleic Acids Research</source><volume>32</volume><fpage>D552</fpage><lpage>D556</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/nar/gkh029</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib44"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Weatherbee</surname><given-names>SD</given-names></name><name><surname>Anderson</surname><given-names>KV</given-names></name><name><surname>Niswander</surname><given-names>LA</given-names></name></person-group><year>2006</year><article-title>LDL-receptor-related protein 4 is crucial for formation of the neuromuscular junction</article-title><source>Development</source><volume>133</volume><fpage>4993</fpage><lpage>5000</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1242/dev.02696</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib45"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Wilson</surname><given-names>RI</given-names></name><name><surname>Kunos</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name><name><surname>Nicoll</surname><given-names>RA</given-names></name></person-group><year>2001</year><article-title>Presynaptic specificity of endocannabinoid signaling in the hippocampus</article-title><source>Neuron</source><volume>31</volume><fpage>453</fpage><lpage>462</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S0896-6273(01)00372-5</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib46"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Yumoto</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Kim</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Burden</surname><given-names>SJ</given-names></name></person-group><year>2012</year><article-title>Lrp4 is a retrograde signal for presynaptic differentiation at neuromuscular synapses</article-title><source>Nature</source><volume>489</volume><fpage>438</fpage><lpage>442</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/nature11348</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib47"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zisimopoulou</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Evangelakou</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Tzartos</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Lazaridis</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name><name><surname>Zouvelou</surname><given-names>V</given-names></name><name><surname>Mantegazza</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Antozzi</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Andreetta</surname><given-names>F</given-names></name><name><surname>Evoli</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Deymeer</surname><given-names>F</given-names></name><name><surname>Saruhan-Direskeneli</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name><name><surname>Durmus</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Brenner</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>Vaknin</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Berrih-Aknin</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Frenkian Cuvelier</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Stojkovic</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>DeBaets</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Losen</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Martinez-Martinez</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Kleopa</surname><given-names>KA</given-names></name><name><surname>Zamba-Papanicolaou</surname><given-names>E</given-names></name><name><surname>Kyriakides</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>Kostera-Pruszczyk</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Szczudlik</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Szyluk</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name><name><surname>Lavrnic</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><name><surname>Basta</surname><given-names>I</given-names></name><name><surname>Peric</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Tallaksen</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Maniaol</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Tzartos</surname><given-names>SJ</given-names></name></person-group><year>2014</year><article-title>A comprehensive analysis of the epidemiology and clinical characteristics of anti-LRP4 in myasthenia gravis</article-title><source>Journal of Autoimmunity</source><volume>52</volume><fpage>139</fpage><lpage>145</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jaut.2013.12.004</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib48"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zoghbi</surname><given-names>HY</given-names></name><name><surname>Bear</surname><given-names>MF</given-names></name></person-group><year>2012</year><article-title>Synaptic dysfunction in neurodevelopmental disorders associated with autism and intellectual disabilities</article-title><source>Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology</source><volume>4</volume><fpage>a009886</fpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1101/cshperspect.a009886</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib49"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zucker</surname><given-names>RS</given-names></name><name><surname>Regehr</surname><given-names>WG</given-names></name></person-group><year>2002</year><article-title>Short-term synaptic plasticity</article-title><source>Annual Review of Physiology</source><volume>64</volume><fpage>355</fpage><lpage>405</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1146/annurev.physiol.64.092501.114547</pub-id></element-citation></ref></ref-list></back><sub-article article-type="article-commentary" id="SA1"><front-stub><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.7554/eLife.04287.011</article-id><title-group><article-title>Decision letter</article-title></title-group><contrib-group content-type="section"><contrib contrib-type="editor"><name><surname>Rosenmund</surname><given-names>Christian</given-names></name><role>Reviewing editor</role><aff><institution>Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin</institution>, <country>Germany</country></aff></contrib></contrib-group></front-stub><body><boxed-text><p>eLife posts the editorial decision letter and author response on a selection of the published articles (subject to the approval of the authors). An edited version of the letter sent to the authors after peer review is shown, indicating the substantive concerns or comments; minor concerns are not usually shown. Reviewers have the opportunity to discuss the decision before the letter is sent (see <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://elifesciences.org/review-process">review process</ext-link>). Similarly, the author response typically shows only responses to the major concerns raised by the reviewers.</p></boxed-text><p>Thank you for submitting your work entitled “Synaptic Plasticity and Cognitive Function Are Disrupted in the Absence of Lrp4” for consideration by <italic>eLife</italic>. Your article has been favorably evaluated by a Senior editor, a Reviewing editor, and two reviewers. There are just a few issues that need to be addressed before acceptance. Related to the point 1 of reviewer 1, we do not expect you to provide data on a forebrain specific KO, unless you have already obtained data from this model.</p><p><italic>Reviewer</italic> <italic>1:</italic></p><p>The study by Gomez et al. reports that knockout of Lrp4 in all tissues in mice except skeletal muscle (where it is required for survival), causes impairment in hippocampal-dependent learning and memory behavioral tasks, LTP at the Schaffer collateral, and a reduction in spine density in CA1 primary apical dendrites.</p><p>1) Although the behavioral tasks are carefully controlled for motor deficits, the Lrp4m mice have fusiform digits and appendage defects, and reduced body weight, which makes the reader wonder whether defects outside the hippocampus might account for some of the behavioral phenotypes. Did the authors consider a forebrain-specific knockout? I'm not suggesting this as a revision experiment, but it would be helpful if the authors comment on other effects knockout of Lrp4 might have (e.g. ability to swim in a straight line, vision, hearing, gait and muscle power). It would be even more convincing if one of the behavioral or electrophysiological (or spine number) effects could be rescued by hippocampal expression of Lrp4.</p><p>2) In <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1H</xref>; time spent in the center quadrant in the open field test, it doesn't look like a significant difference between wild-type and Lrp4 mutant mice from the data scatter or error bars. Are these really significantly different?</p><p>3) In <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5</xref> G, and H; wild-type mice have approximately -20 pA pre TBS amplitude, and ko approximately -30 pA. Although these can't be compared directly, it makes one wonder if there is a difference in evoked synaptic transmission/ input-output curves for fiber volley. This is important to test because the decrease in mEPSC frequency and spine density suggest a decrease in synapse number in the Lrp4m mutants.</p><p>4) Also in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5</xref>, panel G and H, post TBS, the red bar in wt is approximately -55 (compared to -20 pre TBS), and in ko is -40 (compared to -30 pre TBS), but the % baseline values in L don't seem to reflect these values. Can the authors describe how they normalized panels G and H to generate panel L? Likewise, in panel J there's a change from -70 to -160 (black bar compared to red bar) in wt and in panel K from -70 to -120 in ko, which may be significantly different. But in the comparison in panel M, both overlap at approximately 160% potentiation?</p><p>5) Do the authors propose two different effects of Lrp4? In synapse formation and plasticity? Or do they think the mEPSC frequency decrease and spine number decrease are related to the LTP deficit? To test synapse formation in more detail they could quantify number of synapses (i.e. pre and post-synaptic sites marked with synaptophysin or PSD-95; in slices or in hippocampal cultures) in wild-type and Lrp4m. This would also distinguish between the mEPSC frequency being caused by a change in synapse number or release probability.</p><p>6) A possible cause of the LTP deficit in Lrp4m kos, on the other hand, could be a decrease in the strength of excitatory synapses in knockouts. In the Discussion the authors state that inhibition may have been strengthened in Lrp4 kos. What is the basis for this statement? There was a significant decrease in GABA in the kos (which is not commented on). It would be useful to measure inhibition, and possible changes in GABA at synapses in addition to test for possible changes in excitation/ inhibition ratio, which could explain the LTP phenotype. In addition, it would be helpful to know if Lrp4 is expressed in all neurons or in particular subsets of neurons in the hippocampus where it might change feedback or feed-forward inhibition, for example, or if it acts more generally at all synapses.</p><p><italic>Reviewer</italic> <italic>2:</italic></p><p>This is a very well designed study documenting importance of LRP4 in central nervous system and especially for long-term plasticity, learning and memory. The findings are based on well-designed behavioral function tests, direct recordings from hippocampal neurons, and examination of dendritic ultrastructure. The altered synaptic plasticity is attributed to decreased dendritic spine density and reduced mEPSC frequency. I only have two comments, one of which is minor.</p><p>1) Avoid abbreviations in the Abstract (e.g., spell out LTP)</p><p>2) LRP4-seropositive myasthenic patients are unlikely to develop neurological deficits in central nervous system because autoantibodies do not cross the blood-brain barrier unless it is inflamed or otherwise damaged. This interpretation should be omitted in the Abstract and the Discussion.</p></body></sub-article><sub-article article-type="reply" id="SA2"><front-stub><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.7554/eLife.04287.012</article-id><title-group><article-title>Author response</article-title></title-group></front-stub><body><p>Reviewer 1:</p><p><italic>The study by Gomez et al. reports that knockout of Lrp4 in all tissues in mice except skeletal muscle (where it is required for survival), causes impairment in hippocampal-dependent learning and memory behavioral tasks, LTP at the Schaffer collateral, and a reduction in spine density in CA1 primary apical dendrites</italic>.</p><p><italic>1) Although the behavioral tasks are carefully controlled for motor deficits, the Lrp4m mice have fusiform digits and appendage defects, and reduced body weight, which makes the reader wonder whether defects outside the hippocampus might account for some of the behavioral phenotypes. Did the authors consider a forebrain-specific knockout? I'm not suggesting this as a revision experiment, but it would be helpful if the authors comment on other effects knockout of Lrp4 might have (e.g. ability to swim in a straight line, vision, hearing, gait and muscle power). It would be even more convincing if one of the behavioral or electrophysiological (or spine number) effects could be rescued by hippocampal expression of Lrp4</italic>.</p><p>Due to the bone abnormalities of <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>-/-</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice, their gait was visibly distinct from control mice. Nonetheless, in the open-field test, <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>-/-</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice performed as well as control mice in distance traveled and maximum speed (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1 E-G</xref>). Moreover, in the Morris water maze, <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>-/-</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice swam directly toward the visible platform at a speed that was comparable to control mice (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3C, D</xref>), indicating that neither vision nor muscle power were noticeably impaired. Together, these data support the idea that their defects in learning in behavior are unlikely due to a motor deficit.</p><p>Although we did not test directly for audition, <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>-/-</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice learned to associate a tone with a foot shock, albeit less well than control mice (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1A</xref>). These findings indicate that <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>-/-</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice sensed the auditory tone.</p><p><italic>2) In</italic> <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1"><italic>Figure 1H</italic></xref><italic>; time spent in the center quadrant in the open field test, it doesn't look like a significant difference between wild-type and Lrp4 mutant mice from the data scatter or error bars. Are these really</italic> <italic>significantly different?</italic></p><p>We mistakenly illustrated the standard deviation rather than the standard error from the mean values in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1H</xref>. We have corrected this error and indicated the p value (**p<0.01) for the difference between the mean values in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1H</xref>.</p><p><italic>3) In</italic> <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5"><italic>Figure 5</italic></xref> <italic>G, and H; wild-type mice have approximately -20 pA pre TBS amplitude, and ko approximately -30 pA. Although these can't be compared directly, it makes one wonder if there is a difference in evoked synaptic transmission/ input-output curves for fiber volley. This is important to test because the decrease in mEPSC frequency and spine density suggest a decrease in synapse number in the Lrp4m mutants</italic>.</p><p>There is considerable variability in the baseline EPSC amplitudes even in slices from wild-type animals. There was not a significant difference in the baseline EPSC amplitudes between wild-type and mutant mice (wild-type, 52.6 ± 9.7 pA, n=21; <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>-/-</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup><italic>,</italic> 44.9 ± 4.9 pA, n=27, p=0.44). There was not a significant correlation between the magnitude of LTP and initial synaptic strength (wild-type, R<sup>2</sup>=0.05, n=21, p=0.35; <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>-/-</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic> <sup><italic>m</italic></sup>, R<sup>2</sup>=0.09, n=21, p=0.13). This information has been added to the legend for <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5</xref>.</p><p>In the new <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6</xref>, we now show EPSC strengths from wild-type and mutant mice as a function of extracellular stimulation intensity.</p><p><italic>4) Also in</italic> <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5"><italic>Figure 5</italic></xref><italic>, panel G and H, post TBS, the red bar in wt is approximately -55 (compared to -20 pre TBS), and in ko is -40 (compared to -30 pre TBS), but the % baseline values in L don't seem to reflect these values. Can the authors describe how they normalized panels G and H to generate panel L? Likewise, in panel J there's a change from -70 to -160 (black bar compared to red bar) in wt and in panel K from -70 to -120 in ko, which may be significantly different. But in the comparison in panel M, both overlap at</italic> <italic>approximately 160% potentiation?</italic></p><p>For Figure 5N, we computed the magnitude of LTP as the average synaptic strength 10-20 minutes after pairing, normalized by the average synaptic strength before pairing (Feldman, Neuron 2000; Froemke et al., Nature 2005; Gambino et al., Nature 2014). We have modified the Materials and methods section to include this description. It is apparent from Figure 5N that there is some cell-to-cell variability in the amount of LTP induced for individual recordings (e.g., some EPSCs are more than doubled in amplitude, while other EPSCs are only modestly affected), as is typical for these types of experiments.</p><p>As in our response to question #3 above, although these particular examples expressed 228% (wild-type cell in Figure 5J) and 160% LTP (KO cell in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5K</xref>), on average both groups had comparable magnitudes of LTP when theta-burst stimulation was paired with postsynaptic depolarization (wild-type, 166.3 ± 19.3 %; KO, 157.5 ± 22.4%).</p><p><italic>5) Do the authors propose two different effects of Lrp4? In synapse formation and plasticity? Or do they think the mEPSC frequency decrease and spine number decrease are related to the LTP deficit? To test synapse formation in more detail they could quantify number of synapses (i.e. pre and post-synaptic sites marked with synaptophysin or PSD-95; in slices or in hippocampal cultures) in wild-type and Lrp4m. This would also distinguish between the mEPSC frequency being caused by a change in synapse number or release probability</italic>.</p><p>We have proposed that the change in mEPSC frequency and failure to induce LTP may be due, at least in part, to the decrease in number of inputs to the apical dendrites of CA1 neurons. We visualized dendritic spines on CA1 neurons using <italic>Thy-1 GFP</italic> mice in which neurons are sparsely labeled. Although double-staining for synaptophysin and PSD-95 would be an alternative approach for measuring synapse number, we believe that the reduction in the number of spines on apical dendrites indicates that the number of synapses in this region is reduced.</p><p><italic>6) A possible cause of the LTP deficit in Lrp4m kos, on the other hand, could be a decrease in the strength of excitatory synapses in knockouts. In the Discussion the authors state that inhibition may have been strengthened in Lrp4 kos. What is the basis for this statement? There was a significant decrease in GABA in the kos (which is not commented on). It would be useful to measure inhibition, and possible changes in GABA at synapses in addition to test for possible changes in excitation/ inhibition ratio, which could explain the LTP phenotype. In addition, it would be helpful to know if Lrp4 is expressed in all neurons or in particular subsets of neurons in the hippocampus where it might change feedback or feed-forward inhibition, for example, or if it acts more generally at all synapses</italic>.</p><p>We had not carried out experiments or supplied data to demonstrate that inhibition was altered in <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>-/-</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice. In the Discussion we raised this possibility because enhanced inhibition and depolarization-induced suppression of inhibition (DSI) could have explained a lack of LTP and restoration of LTP by depolarizing CA1 neurons (Pitler and Alger, 1994; Wilson et al., 2001).</p><p>During the past month, we carried out experiments to directly test this idea, and the new data are presented in a new <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6</xref> and discussed in the revised text.</p><p>“However, we also considered the possibility that in the absence of Lrp4, inhibition on CA1 neurons may have been strengthened, and depolarization-induced suppression of inhibition (DSI) may have removed the enhanced inhibition, unmasking LTP (Pitler and Alger, 1994; Wilson et al., 2001). We therefore directly measured inhibition to determine whether it was strengthened in <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>-/-</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6</xref>). Contrary to this notion, we found that inhibition was modestly reduced at low stimulation intensities and unchanged at higher stimulation intensities in <italic>Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>-/-</italic></sup><italic>; Lrp4</italic><sup><italic>m</italic></sup> mice (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6G</xref>). Because excitation was reduced while inhibition remained largely unaffected (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5 fig6">Figures 5, 6</xref>), the E/I ratio at CA1 synapses was diminished (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6H</xref>). Together, these data are inconsistent with the idea that enhanced inhibition is responsible for a failure to elicit LTP and instead favor the idea that a failure of presynaptic input to adequately depolarize CA1 neurons underlies the LTP deficit.”</p><p>In situ hybridization studies of <italic>lrp4</italic> in the adult rodent brain (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib41">Tian et al., 2006</xref>; Allen Brain Atlas) show that <italic>lrp4</italic> is expressed in the granule cell layer of the dentate gyrus and in each of the CA fields of the hippocampus.</p><p>Reviewer 2:</p><p><italic>This is a very well designed study documenting importance of LRP4 in central nervous system and especially for long-term plasticity, learning and memory. The findings are based on well-designed behavioral function tests, direct recordings from hippocampal neurons, and examination of dendritic ultrastructure. The altered synaptic plasticity is attributed to decreased dendritic spine density and reduced mEPSC frequency. I only have two comments, one of which is minor</italic>.</p><p><italic>1) Avoid abbreviations in the</italic> <italic>Abstract (e.g., spell out LTP)</italic></p><p>We have replaced LTP with long-term potentiation.</p><p><italic>2) LRP4-seropositive myasthenic patients are unlikely to develop neurological deficits in central nervous system because autoantibodies do not cross the blood-brain barrier unless it is inflamed or otherwise damaged. This interpretation should be omitted in the Abstract and the Discussion</italic>.</p><p>For the reasons outlined below, we prefer to keep this interpretation in our manuscript.</p><p>In several autoimmune diseases that ultimately attack targets in the CNS, there is no evidence for initial attack on the brain, but on a peripheral target, such as a tumor. Paraneoplastic diseases are clear examples of antibodies crossing the blood-brain barrier (BBB), although the disease and antibodies are elicited in the periphery (Leypoldt et al. 2014 Autoimmune encephalopathies. Ann NY Acad Sci doi: 10.1111/nyas.12553, Epub ahead of print). For example, Dalmau’s studies have shown that autoimmune encephalitis can arise from production of antibodies to a variety of neuronal cell surface proteins, including the NMDA receptor, LG1 and Caspr2 (Armangue et al. 2014 Autoimmune encephalitis as differential diagnosis of infectious encephalitis. Curr Opin Neurol 27:361; Rosenfeld et al. 2012 Paraneoplastic syndromes and autoimmune encephalitis: Five new things. Neurol Clin Pract 2:215 Graus and Dalmau 2012 Paraneoplastic neurological syndromes. Curr Opin Neurol 25:795). Antibodies to the NMDA receptor are commonly provoked by an ovarian teratoma, and antibodies to LG1 and Caspr2 are often triggered by a thymoma (see reviews cited above).</p><p>Antibodies to these neuronal cell surface proteins are present in the cerebral spinal fluid (CSF), suggesting that the antibodies are responsible, at least in part, for the encephalitis. Similarly, patients with Lambert-Eaton myasthenia and antibodies to P/Q calcium channels develop cerebellar ataxia, indicating that the antibodies cross the BBB. Although IgG levels are normally 100 to 200-fold lower in the CSF than in the blood, it seems likely that the low level of antibody that normally crosses the BBB and enters the CSF can initiate a response, possibly triggering a further breakdown in the BBB (Graus et al. J. 2010. Antibodies and neuronal autoimmune disorders of the CNS. Neurol. 257:509). For these reasons, we believe that it is possible that antibodies to Lrp4 in patients with Lrp4 myasthenia gravis may cause neurological deficits.</p></body></sub-article></article> |