NL1 Deletion Results in a Decrease in Neurexin Levels
To determine if NL1 deletion causes changes in other synaptic proteins, we examined protein levels of 26 pre and postsynaptic proteins in brains of NL1 KO and littermate control mice by Western blot (). For the majority of proteins examined, these experiments revealed only subtle changes in the gross levels of synaptic markers as a result of NL1 deletion. In particular, it should be noted that no significant change was observed in NMDA-receptor subunit protein levels, which is of interest given the decreased NMDA/AMPA ratio observed in NL1 KO mice (
Chubykin et al., 2007;
Kim et al., 2008b). However, NL1 KO mice exhibited a 30% increase in the expression of NL3 as well as a 20% decrease in both α and β neurexin levels (). NL1 KO mice also exhibited a significant increase in the expression of synapsin 1a as well as decreases of approximately 15-20% in the levels of several presynaptic proteins: liprin, CSP, and munc-18 (). Given the direct interactions between NL1 and neurexins as well as the link between neurexin-1 copy number and human cases of autism, the reduction of neurexin levels in NL1 KO mice further increases their potential relevance to autism.
| Table 1Synaptic protein composition in NL1 KO brain |
NL1 KO Mice Do Not Exhibit Global Behavioral Deficits
Because NL1 is a ubiquitously expressed, excitatory synaptic cell adhesion molecule, one might expect widespread central nervous system dysfunction; on the contrary, NL1 KO mice showed normal anxiety-like behavior, locomotor activity, motor coordination/learning, auditory startle responses, and sensitivity to sensory stimuli. Anxiety-like behaviors were normal on three anxiety tests: elevated plus maze (
Supplemental Figures 1A & B), dark/light box (
Supplemental Figures 1C & D), and open field (
Supplemental Figures 1E & F). Indeed, these tests of anxiety were repeated later in a naïve cohort of 21 littermate pairs in a completely different testing order (elevated plus maze, dark/light box, followed by open field) with the same lack of effect observed (not shown). Locomotor activity was also normal in NL1 KO mice when tested under four different conditions. First, locomotor activity in an open field arena was normal in NL1 KO mice (
Supplemental Figures. 2A & B). This was also true of locomotor activity in the dark/light apparatus (
Supplemental Figure 2D), with only a small decrease in distance moved in the elevated plus maze [
Supplemental Figure 2C, 2-way ANOVA; Main effect of Genotype (between-subjects factor): F(1,42)=4.09, p<0.049, Main effect of Sex (between-subjects factor): F(1,42)=0.70, p=0.41, Genotype × Sex interaction F(1,42)=0.42, p=0.52]. NL1 KO mice also exhibited normal locomotor activity and habituated at a similar rate compared to controls in a 2 h novel-cage locomotor task (
Supplemental Figure 2E). See for the complete statistical analyses of all behavioral tests.
| Table 2Additional Statistical Analyses for Behavioral Tests |
On the accelerating rotarod, NL1 KO mice showed normal motor coordination and motor learning as measured over 27 trials (
Supplemental Figure 2F). Compared to their WT littermates, NL1 KO mice also exhibited normal prepulse inhibition (
Supplemental Figure 2G) as well as a normal baseline startle amplitude in response to an acoustic tone (
Supplemental Figure 2H).
NL1 KO mice also exhibited normal fear learning and memory. During a test for contextual fear memory, both genotypes spent a similar percent of time freezing [NL1 KO (n=23): 54.91% +/− 3.52%; WT (n=23): 63.60% +/− 3.81%, mean +/− SEM; 2-way ANOVA, Main effect of Genotype (between-subjects factor): F(1,42)=2.71, p=0.11, Main effect of Sex (between-subjects factor): F(1,42)=0.42, p=0.52, Genotype × Sex interaction F(1,42)=0.01, p=0.91]; NL1 KO and WT mice also exhibited comparable levels of cue-dependent fear memory [NL1 KO (n=23): 32.50% +/− 5.10%; WT (n=23): 39.64% +/− 4.17% mean +/− SEM; 2-way ANOVA, Main effect of Genotype (between-subjects factor): F(1,42)=0.90, p=0.35, Main effect of Sex (between-subjects factor): F(1,42)=0.09, p=0.76, Genotype × Sex interaction F(1,42)=0.69, p=0.41].
Sensitivity to painful sensory stimuli was measured in two different tests. In a test of footshock sensitivity, a series of footshocks were delivered through a metal grid floor at increasing currents. Both WT and NL1 KO mice required similar current thresholds to elicit flinching and jumping behaviors (). Compared to their WT littermates, NL1 KO mice required a higher current threshold to elicit audible vocalizations [, 2-way ANOVA (n=11 pairs), Main effect of Genotype (between-subjects factor): F(1,18)=6.47, p<0.0.020, Main effect of Sex (between-subjects factor): F(1,18)=9.29, p<0.0069, Genotype × Sex interaction: F(1,18)=1.78, p=0.20], suggesting that, if anything, NL1 KO mice are slightly less sensitive to footshock. In a second test, mice were placed on a hot plate at 52°C, and NL1 KO mice exhibited a shorter latency to lick or shake their hind paw compared to WT mice, suggesting that they are slightly more sensitive to heat [NL1 KO (n=21): 11.79 sec +/− 0.81 sec; WT (n=21): 14.33 sec +/− 0.80 sec, mean +/− SEM; 2-way ANOVA, Main effect of Genotype (between-subjects factor): F(1,38)=4.90, p<0.04, Main effect of Sex (between-subjects factor): F(1,38)=2.26, p=0.14, Genotype × Sex interaction: F(1,38)=1.09, p=0.30]. Although NL1 deletion appears to have mixed effects on nociception depending on the specific stimulus modality, the balance of the data suggest that, in general, NL1 deletion does not cause nonspecific, global behavioral dysfunction. See for the complete statistical analyses of all behavioral tests.
NL1 KO Mice Exhibit Minimal Deficits in Social Behavior
Because NL1 and neurexin 1 mutations in humans have been linked to autism spectrum disorders (
Jamain et al., 2003;
Chih et al., 2004;
Comoletti et al., 2004;
Laumonnier et al., 2004;
Feng et al., 2006;
Szatmari et al., 2007) and because there is a significant decrease in neurexin levels in NL1 KO mice, we tested NL1 KO mice in several tests of social behavior. NL1 KO mice exhibited a social interaction abnormality in only one of several tasks, showing decreased interaction with a caged, adult target mouse [; Planned comparison (contrast analysis) of the effect of Genotype within the Social Target only: F(1,42)=4.64, p<0.04; Initial 3-way Mixed ANOVA (n= 23 pairs), Main effect of Genotype (between-subjects factor): F(1,42)=4.76, p<0.04; Main effect of Sex (between-subjects factor): F(1,42)=0.001, p=0.97; Main effect of Target (within-subjects factor): F(1,42)=1.00, p=0.76; Genotype × Sex interaction: F(1,42)=1.17, p=.29; Genotype × Target interaction: F(1,42)=0.80, p=0.38; Sex × Target interaction: F(1,42)=0.79, p=0.38; Genotype × Sex × Target interaction: F(1,42)=0.30, p=0.59] in a task that has been validated as a measure of social approach/avoidance in several previous publications (
Berton et al., 2006;
Kwon et al., 2006;
Tsankova et al., 2006;
Krishnan et al., 2007;
Tabuchi et al., 2007;
Lutter et al., 2008). It is important to note that interaction with an inanimate, empty cage in the same apparatus, under the same conditions, was normal [, Planned comparison (contrast analysis) of the effect of Genotype within the Inanimate Target only: F(1,42)=2.43, p=0.13], indicating specificity for social interaction. In addition, the total distance moved during the test of interaction with a social target was similar between genotypes [Trial with a social interaction target; NL1 KO: 2035.52 +/− 129.71 cm, WT: 2490.96 +/− 96.50 cm; Trial with an inanimate interaction target; NL1 KO: 1581.90 +/− 100.18 cm, WT: 1573.97 +/− 78.26 cm, mean +/− SEM; 3-way Mixed ANOVA (n= 23 pairs), Main effect of Genotype (between-subjects factor): F(1,42)=2.74, p=0.11; Main effect of Sex (between-subjects factor): F(1,42)=0.10, p=0.76; Main effect of Target (within-subjects factor): F(1,42)=112.26, p<.000001; Genotype × Sex interaction: F(1,42)=0.12, p=0.73; Genotype × Target interaction: F(1,42)=10.36, p<0.003; Sex × Target interaction: F(1,42)=2.70, p=0.11; Genotype × Sex × Target interaction: F(1,42)=4.97, p<0.04].
This isolated, task-specific abnormality in social behavior is not likely due to altered olfactory ability as time spent interacting with a “social smell” was normal in NL1 KO mice [NL1 KO: 52.17 +/− 4.03 sec; WT: 53.07 +/− 3.81 sec, mean +/− SEM; 2-way ANOVA (n=22 pairs), Main effect of Genotype (between-subjects factor): F(1,40)=0.30, p=0.59, Main effect of Sex (between-subjects factor): F(1,40)=4.11, p<0.049, Genotype × Sex interaction: F(1,40)=2.01, p=0.16]. Importantly, gross olfactory abilities were also normal in NL1 KO mice as measured by latency to find a buried treat in a neutral home cage [NL1 KO: 340.20 +/− 53.30 sec; WT: 387.90 +/− 37.62 sec, mean +/− SEM; 2-way ANOVA (n=10 pairs), Main effect of Genotype (between-subjects factor): F(1,16)=0.65, p=0.43, Main effect of Sex (between-subjects factor): F(1,16)=2.58, p=0.13, Genotype × Sex interaction: F(1,16)=0.13, p=0.72].
In three other social tasks, however, no differences were observed. In a test for social versus inanimate interaction, there was no difference between WT and NL1 KO in time spent interacting with either the social target or the inanimate cage, nor was there a significant preference for the social versus inanimate target for either genotype (). In a test for familiar vs. novel social interaction, there was also no significant difference between NL1 KO and WT littermates in time spent interacting with either the novel or the familiar social target (). Unlike WT mice, NL1 KO mice did not show a statistically significant preference for the novel social target compared to the familiar, though a similar trend was apparent [; Planned comparison (contrast analysis) of Novel vs. Familiar Target within WT: F(1,42)=8.42, p<0.006, and NL1 KO: F(1,42)=2.89, p=0.10]. Likewise, no differences in social interaction or social learning were observed in a task of reciprocal social interaction with a juvenile conspecific (). Interestingly, though not a strictly social behavior, NL1 KO mice displayed impaired nest building skills compared to WT [; Initial 3-way Mixed ANOVA (n=11 pairs); Main effect of Genotype (between-subjects factor): F(1,18)=4.74, p<0.044, Main effect of Sex (between-subjects factor): F(1,18)=0.93, p=0.35, Main effect of Time (within-subjects factor): F(2,36)=15.70, p<0.000013, Genotype × Sex interaction: F(1,18)=0.17, p=0.69, Genotype × Time interaction: F(2.36)=2.03, p=0.15, Sex × Time interaction: F(2,36)=1.81, p=0.18, Genotype × Sex × Time interaction: F(2,36)=3.80, p<0.032; Planned comparisons (contrast analysis) comparing Genotypes at 30 Minutes: F(1,18)=4.26, p=0.054; 60 Minutes: F(1,18)=2.47, p=0.13; and 90 Minutes: F(1,18)=6.49, p<0.021].
NL1 KO Mice Exhibit Deficits in Spatial Memory
Because mental retardation is associated with many cases of ASDs (
American Psychiatric Association, 2000) and some ASD patients with neurexin mutations exhibit low IQs (
Kim et al., 2008a), we tested learning and memory in NL1 KO mice using the Morris water maze task. NL1 KO mice exhibited significant abnormalities in spatial learning and memory. Despite a normal learning curve as measured using latency to reach the platform during training (), NL1 KO mice exhibited a slight learning deficit using distance traveled prior to reaching the hidden platform, an analysis that eliminates swim speed as a concern [; 3-way Mixed ANOVA (n=23 pairs); Main effect of Genotype (between-subjects factor): F(1,42)=7.52, p< 0.0089, Main effect of Sex (between-subjects factor): F(1,42)=0.26, p=0.61, Main effect of Day (within-subjects factor): F(10,420)=20.95, p<0.000001, Genotype × Sex interaction: F(1,42)=0.011, p=0.92, Genotype × Day interaction: F(10,420)=0.78, p=0.65, Sex × Day interaction: F(10,420)=93, p=0.50, Genotype × Sex × Day interaction: F(10,420)=0.50, p=0.89]. In fact, NL1 KO mice showed a slight increase in average swim speed compared to WT [; 3-way Mixed ANOVA (n=23 pairs); Main effect of Genotype (between-subjects factor): F(1,42)=4.59, p<0.038, Main effect of Sex (between-subjects factor): F(1,42)=2.21, p=0.14, Main effect of Day (within-subjects factor): F(10,420)=5.76, p<0.000001, Genotype × Sex interaction: F(1,42)=0.0058, p=0.94, Genotype × Day interaction: F(10,420)=0.52, p=0.88, Sex × Day interaction: F(10,420)=0.50, p=0.89, Genotype × Sex × Day interaction: F(10,420)=0.60, p=0.82], likely explaining why their latency to reach the platform learning curve appeared normal. During these training trials, NL1 KO mice did not spend more time near the wall of the maze (thigmotaxis) compared to WT (). On a spatial memory test 24 hr after the end of Morris water maze training (probe trial), WT mice spent significantly more time in the target quadrant than all other quadrants [, Planned comparisons (contrast analysis), Target vs. Opposite: F(1,42)=27.21, p<0.000006; Target vs. Adjacent Left: F(1,42)=21.15, p<0.00004; Target vs. Adjacent Right: F(1,42)=5.99, p<0.02], while NL1 KO mice showed no significant preference for the target quadrant compared to any other quadrant [Planned comparisons (contrast analysis), Target vs. Opposite: F(1,42)=2.10, p=0.15; Target vs. Adjacent Left: F(1,42)=2.06, p=0.16; Target vs. Adjacent Right: F(1,42)=1.05, p=0.31]. The NL1 KO mice performed at near chance levels (), indicating a spatial memory deficit. Furthermore, NL1 KO mice spent significantly less time in the target quadrant and more time in the opposite quadrant than WT [; Planned comparisons (contrast analysis); Target Quadrant: F(1,42)=4.67, p <0.037, Opposite Quadrant: F(1,42)=8.67, p<0.006, Adjacent Left Quadrant: F(1,42)=1.89, p = 0.17, Adjacent Right Quadrant: F(1,42)=0.69, p=0.41]. It is important to note that NL1 KO mice learned the visible platform task as well as controls (
Supplemental Figure 2I), indicating that basic neurological function (swimming, vision, etc.) was intact.
NL1 KO Mice Exhibit Deficits in Hippocampal LTP
Because NL1 KO mice exhibit a decrease in hippocampus-dependent spatial memory and a decrease in the NMDA/AMPA ratio in area CA1 of the hippocampus (
Chubykin et al., 2007), we predicted that NL1 KO mice would exhibit a decrease in long-term potentiation (LTP) in area CA1 of the hippocampus. Indeed theta burst stimulation (5 bursts of 4 pulses at 100Hz with an interburst interval of 0.2 sec) resulted in a significantly reduced magnitude of LTP in area CA1 of the hippocampus in slices from NL1 KO mice compared to WT littermate controls [; LTP 50-60 minutes after TBS induction (fEPSP expressed as the fraction of control), NL1 KO (n=6): 1.49 +/− 0.09, WT (n=6): 1.88 +/− 0.13, mean +/− SEM; t-test, p<0.031]. This decrease in LTP magnitude was not accompanied by any alteration in basal synaptic transmission as input-output curves () and paired pulse facilitation () were normal. Based on the previously observed deficits in NMDAR transmission in NL1 KO mice (
Chubykin et al., 2007;
Kim et al., 2008b), it is reasonable to assume that the LTP phenotype is most likely caused by a deficit in LTP induction.
NL1 KO mice exhibit a decrease in the NMDA/AMPA ratio in the hippocampus (
Chubykin et al., 2007), which could be due to either a change in post-synaptic receptor function or a change in the number of NMDA- or AMPA-containing (i.e. silent or non-silent) synapses. Therefore, we examined the effect of NL1 loss on synaptic density
in vivo. We found no significant alterations in total synapse density (
Supplemental Figure 3), excitatory synapse density (-), or inhibitory synapse density in the hippocampus (-). Furthermore, no changes were observed in the size of immunopositive puncta with any targeted antigen (-,
Supplemental Figure 3). Also, as mentioned above, whole brain immunoblots detected no significant changes in the expression levels of multiple NMDAR subunits in NL1 KO mice (). The findings that NL1 KO mice exhibit no change in the number of excitatory immunopositive puncta and no change in the expression levels of NMDAR subunits suggest that the decreased hippocampal NMDA/AMPA ratio observed in NL1 KO mice (
Chubykin et al., 2007) may be due to altered excitatory post-synaptic receptor function rather than changes in synapse or NMDAR number. However, the current results cannot rule out more subtle effects of NL1 deletion on excitatory or inhibitory synapse number, synaptic NMDAR numbers, or on specific subtypes of inhibitory or excitatory synapses.
NL1 KO Mice Exhibit Increased Repetitive Grooming Behavior
Because NL and neurexin 1 mutations in humans have been linked to autism spectrum disorders (
Jamain et al., 2003;
Chih et al., 2004;
Comoletti et al., 2004;
Laumonnier et al., 2004;
Feng et al., 2006;
Szatmari et al., 2007), we characterized grooming behavior in NL1 KO mice, a behavior that might reflect the repetitive, stereotyped behavior core symptom domain of autism (
Moy et al., 2006;
Crawley, 2007). NL1 KO mice spent more than double the amount of time spontaneously grooming compared to WT mice [NL1 KO (n=22): 56.15 sec +/− 11.32 sec, WT (n=22): 25.15 sec +/− 7.57 sec, mean +/− SEM; 2-way ANOVA; Main effect of Genotype (between-subjects factor): F(1,40)=5.87, p<0.020, Main effect of Sex (between-subjects factor): F(1,40)=2.0, p=0.17, Genotype × Sex interaction: F(1,40)=0.63, p=0.43]. In a marble burying task, which has been described as a task relevant to anxiety and to obsessive-compulsive/repetitive behavior (
Broekkamp et al., 1986;
Njung'e and Handley, 1991;
Borsini et al., 2002;
Deacon, 2006;
Thomas et al., 2009), there was no difference between NL1 KO and WT mice [NL1 KO mice: mean number of marbles buried +/− SEM = 5.5 +/− 1.37; WT mice: 8.86 +/− 1.54; 2-way ANOVA (n=22 pairs); Main effect of Genotype (between-subjects factor): F(1,40)=2.51, p=0.12, Main effect of Sex (between-subjects factor): F(1,40)=0.01, p=0.93, Genotype × Sex interaction: F(1,40)=0.03, p=0.86].
NL1 KO Mice Exhibit a Reduced NMDA/AMPA Ratio in the Dorsal Striatum
Although a decrease in the NMDA/AMPA ratio has been observed in the hippocampus of NL1 KO mice (
Chubykin et al., 2007), it is unlikely that this is responsible for the increased grooming behavior observed in NL1 KO mice (see above) as the hippocampus is not known to be involved with mammalian grooming behavior. Because the dorsal striatum has been repeatedly implicated in rodent grooming behavior (
Cromwell and Berridge, 1996;
Aldridge et al., 2004;
Welch et al., 2007), we hypothesized that NL1 KO mice might exhibit similar alterations in synaptic transmission in the dorsal striatum.
Whole-cell patch-clamp recordings of striatal medium spiny neurons were performed to determine the NMDA/AMPA ratio in corticostriatal synapses. Baseline values for access resistance (14.2±0.7 MΩ, wild-type; 13.6±0.8 MΩ, NL1 KO), cell membrane resistance (340±54 MΩ, wild-type; 312±58 MΩ, NL1 KO) and cell capacitance (167.2±11 pF, wild-type; 169.3±10 pF, NL1 KO) did not differ between the groups. The NMDA/AMPA ratio was assessed by two measurements: the peak of the evoked (e) EPSCs at −80 mV, to detect the AMPAR currents; and the current amplitude, 50 ms after spike onset and at + 40 mV, to detect the NMDAR currents. AMPAR eEPSC amplitude was 471±61 pA, for wild-type and 470±62 pA, for NL1 KO (t-test, P=0.995). Consistent with our hypothesis, the NMDA/AMPA ratio in the striatum of NL1 KO mice was significantly reduced by ~30% (, NMDA/AMPA ratio, NL1 KO (n=22): 0.77 +/− 0.07, WT (n=23): 1.00 +/− 0.08, mean +/− SEM; t-test, p<0.01).
Systemic D-Cycloserine Rescues the Increased Repetitive Behavior in NL1 KO Mice
We next examined whether a drug that is known to enhance NMDA receptor function and NMDA receptor-dependent behaviors in vivo could acutely reverse the increased grooming behavior in NL1 KO mice. Given that NL1 KO mice exhibited a decrease in the NMDA/AMPA ratio in the dorsal striatum, we hypothesized that altering NMDA receptor function pharmacologically would rescue the abnormal grooming behavior in NL1 KO mice. To test this, we systemically administered either the NMDA receptor co-agonist D-cycloserine (DCS) or vehicle 30 minutes prior to measuring grooming behavior. Consistent with our previous findings (see above), NL1 KO mice treated with vehicle displayed increased grooming compared to WT mice treated with vehicle (, Veh; Post-hoc Tukey Test, KO+Veh vs. WT+Veh: p<0.005). However, 20 mg/kg of DCS given 30 minutes prior to testing rescued the increased grooming in NL1 KO mice (, DCS, Post-hoc Tukey Test, KO+DCS vs. WT+DCS: p=0.78).