Preferential regeneration and collateral dynamics of motor and sensory neurons after nerve injury in mice

Neuron-specific RNA-sequencing reveals different responses in peripheral neurons after nerve injury

Peripheral neurons are heterogeneous and functionally diverse, but all share the capability to switch to a pro-regenerative state after nerve injury. Despite the assumption that the injury response is similar among neuronal subtypes, functional recovery may differ. Understanding the distinct intrinsic regenerative properties between neurons may help to improve the quality of regeneration, prioritizing the growth of axon subpopulations to their targets. Here, we present a comparative analysis of regeneration across four key peripheral neuron populations: motoneurons, proprioceptors, cutaneous mechanoreceptors, and nociceptors. Using Cre/Ai9 mice that allow fluorescent labeling of neuronal subtypes, we found that nociceptors showed the greater regeneration after a sciatic crush, followed by motoneurons, mechanoreceptors, and, finally, proprioceptors. By breeding these Cre mice with Ribotag mice, we isolated specific translatomes and defined the regenerative response of these neuronal subtypes after axotomy. Only 20% of the regulated genes were common, revealing a diverse response to injury among neurons, which was also supported by the differential influence of neurotrophins among neuron subtypes. Among differentially regulated genes, we proposed MED12 as a specific regulator of the regeneration of proprioceptors. Altogether, we demonstrate that the intrinsic regenerative capacity differs between peripheral neuron subtypes, opening the door to selectively modulate these responses.

T12-L3 Nerve Transfer-Induced Locomotor Recovery in Rats with Thoracolumbar Contusion: Essential Roles of Sensory Input Rerouting and Central Neuroplasticity

Locomotor recovery after spinal cord injury (SCI) remains an unmet challenge. Nerve transfer (NT), the connection of a functional/expendable peripheral nerve to a paralyzed nerve root, has long been clinically applied, aiming to restore motor control. However, outcomes have been inconsistent, suggesting that NT-induced neurological reinstatement may require activation of mechanisms beyond motor axon reinnervation (our hypothesis). We previously reported that to enhance rat locomotion following T13-L1 hemisection, T12-L3 NT must be performed within timeframes optimal for sensory nerve regrowth. Here, T12-L3 NT was performed for adult female rats with subacute (7-9 days) or chronic (8 weeks) mild (SCImi: 10 g × 12.5 mm) or moderate (SCImo: 10 g × 25 mm) T13-L1 thoracolumbar contusion. For chronic injuries, T11-12 implantation of adult hMSCs (1-week before NT), post-NT intramuscular delivery of FGF2, and environmentally enriched/enlarged (EEE) housing were provided. NT, not control procedures, qualitatively improved locomotion in both SCImi groups and animals with subacute SCImo. However, delayed NT did not produce neurological scale upgrading conversion for SCImo rats. Ablation of the T12 ventral/motor or dorsal/sensory root determined that the T12-L3 sensory input played a key role in hindlimb reanimation. Pharmacological, electrophysiological, and trans-synaptic tracing assays revealed that NT strengthened integrity of the propriospinal network, serotonergic neuromodulation, and the neuromuscular junction. Besides key outcomes of thoracolumbar contusion modeling, the data provides the first evidence that mixed NT-induced locomotor efficacy may rely pivotally on sensory rerouting and pro-repair neuroplasticity to reactivate neurocircuits/central pattern generators. The finding describes a novel neurobiology mechanism underlying NT, which can be targeted for development of innovative neurotization therapies.

Sensory and motor fibroblasts have different protein expression patterns and exert different growth promoting effects on sensory and motor neurons

Functional reconstruction after peripheral nerve injury depends on the ability of the regenerated sensory and motor axons to re-innervate the suitable target organs. Therefore, it is essential to explore the cellular mechanisms of peripheral nerve-specific regeneration. In a previous study, we found that sensory and motor fibroblasts can guide Schwann cells to migrate towards the same phenotype. In the present paper, we analyzed the different effects of sensory and motor fibroblasts on sensory or motor neurons. The fibroblasts and neurons co-culture assay showed that compared with motor fibroblasts, sensory fibroblasts promote the neurite outgrowth of sensory neurons on a larger scale, and vice versa. Furthermore, a higher proportion of sensory or motor fibroblasts migrated towards their respective (sensory or motor) neurons. Meanwhile, a comparative proteomic approach was applied to obtain the protein expression profiles of sensory and motor fibroblasts. Among a total of 2597 overlapping proteins identified, we counted 148 differentially expressed items, of those 116 had a significantly higher expression in sensory fibroblasts, and 32 had a significantly greater expression in motor fibroblasts. Functional categorization revealed that differentially expressed proteins were involved in regeneration, axon guidance and cytoskeleton organization, all of which might play a critical role in peripheral nerve-specific regeneration. After nerve crush injury, ITB1 protein expression decreased significantly in motor nerves and increased in sensory nerves. In vitro, ITB1 significantly promoted axonal regeneration of sensory neurons, but had no significant effect on motor neurons. Overall, sensory and motor fibroblasts express different proteins and exert different growth promoting effects on sensory and motor neurons. This comparative proteomic database of sensory and motor fibroblasts could provide future directions for in-depth research on peripheral nerve-specific regeneration. Data are available via ProteomeXchange with identifier PXD034827.