Morris M, Knudsen GM, Maeda S, Trinidad JC, Ioanoviciu A, Burlingame AL, Mucke L.
Tau post-translational modifications in wild-type and human amyloid precursor protein transgenic mice.
Nat Neurosci. 2015 Aug;18(8):1183-9. Epub 2015 Jul 20
PubMed.
This is a comprehensive body of work that has identified new sites of tau post-translational modification in wild-type and APP transgenic mice. The new sites include tau methylation, di-methylation, acetylation, and ubiquitination (inferred from GlyGly-modified lysine), as summarized in Figure 1b. This wide-ranging approach to investigating tau modification brings up the interesting point that ubiquitination could provide a highly sensitive system for regulation of tau function through competition at lysine residues, as suggested previously.
It is notable that O-GlcNAc modification of tau was barely detectable in the mice, even following lectin enrichment. This result is consistent with our own unpublished data, as we were unable to detect this modification in postmortem control or Alzheimer human brain tissue by mass spectrometry.
The observation of differential phosphorylation of tau in the postsynaptic density (PSD) of wild-type mice is interesting, since this could, as the authors suggest, affect the regulation or function of tau in this location. The authors found an increase in the amount of doubly phosphorylated tau 386-404 in the PSD and a decrease in the triply phosphorylated tau peptide, relative to unfractionated brain lysate. The potential sites for phosphorylation in this peptide include residues T386, Y394, S396, S400, T403, and S404. Since there is apparently no difference in tau phosphorylation in the PSD of wild-type and APP transgenic mice, and PSD immunoreactivity with PHF1 antibody (S396/S404) is unchanged, regulated phosphorylation/dephosphorylation of at least one of the serine/threonine/tyrosine residues T386, Y394, S400, T403 in this C-terminal region of tau could be critical for PSD localization.
An important take-home message from this study is that differential post-translational modification of tau is likely to direct its binding to other proteins and to be responsible for regulating tau subcellular localization. However, it remains to be seen which tau modifications, either individually or in combination, might be involved in the pathogenesis of neurodegenerative disease.
This is a heroic effort to characterize post-translational modifications of tau in the J20 human APP mouse. Two things are really notable to me:
1. The presence of the mutated human APP gene does not alter tau modification—whether that be phosphorylation, acetylation, methylation, or other. There are no differences between the J20 mice and the wild-type. This is despite the fact that at the age examined, the J20 "show synaptic, network, and behavioral abnormalities." These abnormalities are evidently not due to post-translational modification of tau, unless this is highly regional or a very minor component of the total tau present. Even this latter "escape clause" appears to be ruled out by the authors' regional and subcellular fraction analyses. And yet, if tau levels are reduced, J20 mice are protected from the synaptic, network and behavioral abnormalities.
2. Although not mentioned in the paper, the authors provide no evidence for changes in the phosphorylation of tyrosine in tau, especially tyrosine 18, and I am sure that they looked long and hard for this. Several reports from Mucke's group and from other labs have implicated the tyrosine kinase fyn in responses to Aβ, and fyn phosphorylates tyrosine 18 of tau. This phosphorylation does not seem to have been detected in either wild type or J20 mice.
Much of the talk about tau modification has been as much wishful thinking as anything. Especially with immunocytochemistry, it is possible to detect changes in tau phosphorylation that might be entirely insignificant in quantitative terms. We really need the kind of rigorous analysis the authors have done here. This is a great paper and will be discussed at much length in tau circles.
Comments
King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience
This is a comprehensive body of work that has identified new sites of tau post-translational modification in wild-type and APP transgenic mice. The new sites include tau methylation, di-methylation, acetylation, and ubiquitination (inferred from GlyGly-modified lysine), as summarized in Figure 1b. This wide-ranging approach to investigating tau modification brings up the interesting point that ubiquitination could provide a highly sensitive system for regulation of tau function through competition at lysine residues, as suggested previously.
It is notable that O-GlcNAc modification of tau was barely detectable in the mice, even following lectin enrichment. This result is consistent with our own unpublished data, as we were unable to detect this modification in postmortem control or Alzheimer human brain tissue by mass spectrometry.
The observation of differential phosphorylation of tau in the postsynaptic density (PSD) of wild-type mice is interesting, since this could, as the authors suggest, affect the regulation or function of tau in this location. The authors found an increase in the amount of doubly phosphorylated tau 386-404 in the PSD and a decrease in the triply phosphorylated tau peptide, relative to unfractionated brain lysate. The potential sites for phosphorylation in this peptide include residues T386, Y394, S396, S400, T403, and S404. Since there is apparently no difference in tau phosphorylation in the PSD of wild-type and APP transgenic mice, and PSD immunoreactivity with PHF1 antibody (S396/S404) is unchanged, regulated phosphorylation/dephosphorylation of at least one of the serine/threonine/tyrosine residues T386, Y394, S400, T403 in this C-terminal region of tau could be critical for PSD localization.
An important take-home message from this study is that differential post-translational modification of tau is likely to direct its binding to other proteins and to be responsible for regulating tau subcellular localization. However, it remains to be seen which tau modifications, either individually or in combination, might be involved in the pathogenesis of neurodegenerative disease.
View all comments by Diane HangerDeceased
This is a heroic effort to characterize post-translational modifications of tau in the J20 human APP mouse. Two things are really notable to me:
1. The presence of the mutated human APP gene does not alter tau modification—whether that be phosphorylation, acetylation, methylation, or other. There are no differences between the J20 mice and the wild-type. This is despite the fact that at the age examined, the J20 "show synaptic, network, and behavioral abnormalities." These abnormalities are evidently not due to post-translational modification of tau, unless this is highly regional or a very minor component of the total tau present. Even this latter "escape clause" appears to be ruled out by the authors' regional and subcellular fraction analyses. And yet, if tau levels are reduced, J20 mice are protected from the synaptic, network and behavioral abnormalities.
2. Although not mentioned in the paper, the authors provide no evidence for changes in the phosphorylation of tyrosine in tau, especially tyrosine 18, and I am sure that they looked long and hard for this. Several reports from Mucke's group and from other labs have implicated the tyrosine kinase fyn in responses to Aβ, and fyn phosphorylates tyrosine 18 of tau. This phosphorylation does not seem to have been detected in either wild type or J20 mice.
Much of the talk about tau modification has been as much wishful thinking as anything. Especially with immunocytochemistry, it is possible to detect changes in tau phosphorylation that might be entirely insignificant in quantitative terms. We really need the kind of rigorous analysis the authors have done here. This is a great paper and will be discussed at much length in tau circles.
View all comments by Peter DaviesNew York Institute for Basic Research in Developmental Disabilities