The regeneration-associated gene (RAG) expression program is activated in injured peripheral neurons after axotomy and enables long-distance axon re-growth. Over 1000 genes are regulated, and many transcription factors are upregulated or activated as part of this response. However, a detailed picture of how RAG expression is regulated is lacking. In particular the transcriptional targets and specific functions of the various transcription factors are unclear. Jun was the first regeneration-associated transcription factor identified and the first shown to be functionally important. Here we fully define the role of Jun in the RAG expression program in regenerating facial motor neurons. At 1, 4, and 14 days after axotomy, Jun upregulates 11%, 23% and 44% of the RAG program, respectively. Jun functions relevant to regeneration include cytoskeleton production, metabolic functions and cell activation, and the down-regulation of neurotransmission machinery. In silico analysis of promoter regions of Jun targets identifies stronger over-representation of AP1-like sites than CRE-like sites, although CRE sites were also over-represented in regions flanking AP1 sites. Strikingly, in motor neurons lacking Jun, an alternative SRF-dependent gene expression program is initiated after axotomy. The promoters of these newly expressed genes exhibit over-representation of CRE sites in regions near to SRF target sites. This alternative gene expression program includes plasticity-associated transcription factors, and leads to an aberrant early increase in synapse density on motor neurons. Jun thus has the important function in the early phase after axotomy of pushing the injured neuron away from a plasticity response and towards a regenerative phenotype.

Accumulation of misfolded proteins in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER), defined as ER stress, results in activation of the unfolded protein response (UPR). UPR activation is commonly observed in neurodegenerative diseases. ER stress can trigger unconventional secretion mediated by Golgi reassembly and stacking proteins (GRASP) relocalization in cell lines. Here we study the regulation of GRASP55 by the UPR upon pharmacological induction of ER stress in primary mouse neurons. We demonstrate that UPR activation induces mRNA and protein expression of GRASP55, but not GRASP65, in cortical neurons. UPR activation does not result in relocalization of GRASP55. UPR-induced GRASP55 expression is reduced by inhibition of the PERK pathway of the UPR and abolished by inhibition of the endonuclease activity of the UPR transducer IRE1. Expression of the IRE1 target XBP1s in the absence of ER stress is not sufficient to increase GRASP55 expression. Knockdown of GRASP55 affects neither induction nor recovery of the UPR. We conclude that the UPR regulates the unconventional secretion factor GRASP55 via a mechanism that requires the IRE1 and the PERK pathway of the UPR in neurons.

Proteostasis is essential for cellular survival and particularly important for highly specialised post‐mitotic cells such as neurons. Transient reduction in protein synthesis by protein kinase R‐like endoplasmic reticulum (ER) kinase (PERK)‐mediated phosphorylation of eukaryotic translation initiation factor 2α (p‐eIF2α) is a major proteostatic survival response during ER stress. Paradoxically, neurons are remarkably tolerant to PERK dysfunction, which suggests the existence of cell type‐specific mechanisms that secure proteostatic stress resilience. Here, we demonstrate that PERK‐deficient neurons, unlike other cell types, fully retain the capacity to control translation during ER stress. We observe rescaling of the ATF4 response, while the reduction in protein synthesis is fully retained. We identify two molecular pathways that jointly drive translational control in PERK‐deficient neurons. Haem‐regulated inhibitor (HRI) mediates p‐eIF2α and the ATF4 response and is complemented by the tRNA cleaving RNase angiogenin (ANG) to reduce protein synthesis. Overall, our study elucidates an intricate back‐up mechanism to ascertain translational control during ER stress in neurons that provides a mechanistic explanation for the thus far unresolved observation of neuronal resilience to proteostatic stress.