The Stress-Induced Transcription Factor NR4A1 Adjusts Mitochondrial Function and Synapse Number in Prefrontal Cortex

Abstract

The energetic costs of behavioral chronic stress are unlikely to be sustainable without neuronal plasticity. Mitochondria have the capacity to handle synaptic activity up to a limit before energetic depletion occurs. Protective mechanisms driven by the induction of neuronal genes likely evolved to buffer the consequences of chronic stress on excitatory neurons in prefrontal cortex (PFC), as this circuitry is vulnerable to excitotoxic insults. Little is known about the genes involved in mitochondrial adaptation to the buildup of chronic stress. Using combinations of genetic manipulations and stress for analyzing structural, transcriptional, mitochondrial, and behavioral outcomes, we characterized NR4A1 as a stress-inducible modifier of mitochondrial energetic competence and dendritic spine number in PFC. NR4A1 acted as a transcription factor for changing the expression of target genes previously involved in mitochondrial uncoupling, AMP-activated protein kinase activation, and synaptic growth. Maintenance of NR4A1 activity by chronic stress played a critical role in the regressive synaptic organization in PFC of mouse models of stress (male only). Knockdown, dominant-negative approach, and knockout of Nr4a1 in mice and rats (male only) protected pyramidal neurons against the adverse effects of chronic stress. In human PFC tissues of men and women, high levels of the transcriptionally active NR4A1 correlated with measures of synaptic loss and cognitive impairment. In the context of chronic stress, prolonged expression and activity of NR4A1 may lead to responses of mitochondria and synaptic connectivity that do not match environmental demand, resulting in circuit malfunction between PFC and other brain regions, constituting a pathological feature across disorders.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT The bioenergetic cost of chronic stress is too high to be sustainable by pyramidal prefrontal neurons. Cellular checkpoints have evolved to adjust the responses of mitochondria and synapses to the buildup of chronic stress. NR4A1 plays such a role by controlling the energetic competence of mitochondria with respect to synapse number. As an immediate-early gene, Nr4a1 promotes neuronal plasticity, but sustained expression or activity can be detrimental. NR4A1 expression and activity is sustained by chronic stress in animal models and in human studies of neuropathologies sensitive to the buildup of chronic stress. Therefore, antagonism of NR4A1 is a promising avenue for preventing the regressive synaptic reorganization in cortical systems in the context of chronic stress.

Bridging the Gap between Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor and Glucocorticoid Effects on Brain Networks

“…This could explain differential modulation of GR activity in mesolimbic and corticolimbic networks. Deletion of GR phosphorylation sites in neurons belonging to corticolimbic brain areas interferes with the expression of GR-regulated target genes involved in cytoskeleton dynamics, mitochondrial functions, synapse formation and maintenance (62,68,69). What's more, BDNF-dependent GR phosphorylation sites reside near a caspase-1 site, whose cleavage causes partial loss of GR transcriptional activity in animal models and a disease of glucocorticoid resistance in humans (70,71).…”

Class IIa HDACs regulate learning and memory through dynamic experience-dependent repression of transcription

“…and Npas4 are known to be necessary for synaptic plasticity and memory 16,[54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61] . Moreover, the essential roles of CREB, MEF2 and SRF in memory storage have been proven beyond any doubt 2,14,[62][63][64] .…”

Persistence of learning-induced synapses depends on neurotrophic-priming of glucocorticoid receptors

“…Mice at 3-months of age were subjected to tail suspension test (TST) for 6 min during the stress protocol (once a week between PND 23 and 36) and video recorded trial. Trial data represent an acquired behavioral response in the stress groups but a novel response in the control groups reared in standard living conditions (65).…”