The genetic syntax of febrile seizures

The genetics of seizure disorders, including epilepsy, has recently come into the spotlight (see the Nature Outlook on epilepsy). Epilepsy is a complex disease with many different subtypes, both sporadic and familial. While epilepsy is one of the most common neurological disorders, and it has been studied for a very long time, the underlying mechanisms of seizure disorders remain largely elusive. Identifying the genetic causes of different subtypes of the disorder can help to illuminate the gene networks involved and lead to a deeper understanding overall. Importantly, the genetic tools now exist to identify causal mutations for the many different subtypes of seizure disorders.

Febrile seizures, which are induced by fever, affect approximately 2-4% of children worldwide. This type of epileptic seizure is often triggered by infectious disease, but there is strong evidence that it has a genetic basis. A paper recently published in Nature Genetics by Bjarke Feenstra identified two genes associated with vaccine-induced febrile seizures (vaccines, such as MMR, are an extremely rare cause of febrile seizure).

Protein model for STX1B

Protein model for STX1B{credit}Wikipedia{/credit}

Now, a study by Holger Lerche, Camila Esguerra and colleagues identifies variants in the gene STX1B as causing a familial form of febrile seizure disorder. STX1B encodes a protein called syntaxin-1B. Syntaxin-1 is a key component of a protein complex necessary for the release of neurotransmitters from the presynaptic membrane.

The authors first identified two families in Germany with a history of febrile seizures. They used a combination of whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing to identify the gene most likely to harbor pathogenic mutations causing the disorder. Targeted sequencing in an extended cohort identified further variants in STX1B in patients who had experienced febrile seizures.

To validate these findings, the authors tested the function of stx1b in zebrafish, and showed that a reduction in syntaxin-1B led to behavioral defects in the fish, such as lack of touch response, fin fluttering and jerking movements. Recordings of brain activity confirmed that the fish were experiencing epilepsy-like symptoms. You can read a more in-depth summary of the paper in a blog post at Beyond the Ion Channel by one of the study’s co-authors. 

We asked one of the study’s senior authors, Holger Lerche, to tell us a little more about the background of this study:

How did you initially become interested in studying seizure disorders?

I was working during my thesis with mutated ion channels in rare muscle diseases. When I started with my Neurology training, epilepsy emerged as a highly interesting topic in that field as well, and also clinically I became very interested in epilepsy.

How did the two families in this study first come to your attention?

The index case of the first family was referred to me during a cooperation with the Children’s Hospital (at that time at the University of Ulm), when I was looking for familial cases with epilepsy for genetic studies. When I called his grandmother, it turned out to be a large pedigree further increasing when contacting and visiting the different branches of the families. The second family was referred to my colleague Yvonne Weber for similar reasons from another Children’s Hospital in Germany.

STX1B mutations have been associated with other forms of epilepsy. How does the association with febrile seizures further the understanding of this gene’s function?

The function of this gene has been explored very well already by Nobel Laureate Thomas Südhof and his group. The mutations we detected may teach us more about the functional role of different protein domains and their interaction with other proteins in the vesicle release machinery. It is not surprising that mutations in STX1B cause epilepsy, but how febrile seizures develop is still an enigma. Follow-up studies of our discovery may shed light on the unknown temperature-sensitive mechanisms leading to febrile seizures.

Do you think there is the potential for developing drugs targeting STX1B in these patients?

The question is how the loss of function of one allele of STX1B could be compensated. If targeting STX1B to enhance its production or activity is possible, and if this may help these patients, is difficult to predict. However, the zebrafish model can also help us to find therapies which work in a completely different way to compensate for STX1B failure (see answer to next question).

Can you say a little about why you chose zebrafish as a model, and what you learned from this model organism that you wouldn’t have been able to learn otherwise?

We started only recently to collaborate with Camila Esguerra and Alex Crawford who have the zebrafish facilities and expertise. It is a vertebrate, easy to study and very quick to manipulate (much quicker and easier than mice).

Behavioral assays (left) and electrographic recordings of zebrafish brain (right)

Behavioral assays (left) and electrographic recordings of zebrafish brain (right){credit}Courtesy of Alex Crawford and Camila Esguerra{/credit}

To establish a cellular model for functional proof of these mutations would have been more difficult in our case. And the zebrafish is an in vivo model, so we can study behavior and EEG, which is not possible in a cellular assay. Also the temperature effect could be studied very nicely with an effect on EEG in an in vivo system.Last but not least, and most important when thinking of the impact of our work: zebrafish models can be used to find new drugs in medium to high throughput screens using seizure-like behaviour or EEG as read-outs. This allows us to find different kinds of drugs that are able to antagonize the consequences of the STX1B defect on a system-wide level.

Read the full study by Lerche and colleagues here. You can also read more about this work here [press release]. 

Whole brain cellular-level activity mapping in a second

It is now possible to map the activity of nearly all the neurons in a vertebrate brain at cellular resolution in just over a second. What does this mean for neuroscience research and projects like the Brain Activity Map proposal?

In an Article that just went live in Nature Methods, Misha Ahrens and Philipp Keller from HHMI’s Janelia Farm Research Campus used high-speed light sheet microscopy to image the activity of 80% of the neurons in the brain of a fish larva at speeds of a whole brain every 1.3 seconds. This represents—to our knowledge—the first technology that achieves whole brain imaging of a vertebrate brain at cellular resolution with speeds that approximate neural activity patterns and behavior.

Click on the image to view the video.

Brain activity imaging of a whole zebrafish brain at single-cell resolution. Click on image to view video [20 MB].

Interestingly, the paper comes out at a time when much is being discussed and written about mapping brain activity at the cellular level. This is one of the main proposals of the Brain Activity Map—a project that is being discussed at the White House and could be NIH’s next ‘big science’ project for the next 10-15 years. [Just for clarity, the authors of this work are not formally associated with the BAM proposal].

The details of BAM’s exact goals and a clear roadmap and timeline to achieve them have yet to be presented, but from what its proponents have described in a recent Science paper the main aspiration of the project is to improve our understanding of how whole neuronal circuits work at the cellular level. The project seeks to monitor the activity of whole circuits as well as manipulate them to study their functional role. To reach these goals, first and foremost one must have technology capable of measuring the activity of individual neurons throughout the entire brain in a way that can discriminate individual circuits. The most obvious way to do this is by imaging the activity as it is occurring.

With improvements in the speed and resolution of existing microscopy setups and in the probes for monitoring activity, exhaustive imaging of neuronal function across a small transparent organism was bound to be possible—as this study has now shown.

The study has also made interesting discoveries. The authors saw correlated activity patterns measured at the cellular level that spanned large areas of the brain—pointing to the existence of broadly distributed functional circuits. The next steps will be to determine the causal role that these circuits play in behavior—something that will require improvements in the methods for 3D optogenetics. Obtaining the detailed anatomical map of these circuits will also be key to understand the brain’s organization at its deepest level.

These are some of the types of experiments described in the BAM proposal and they are clearly within reach in the next 10 years–whether through a centralized initiative or through normal lab competition and peer review. While it is expected that in mice, too, functional circuits will span large brain areas, performing these types of experiments in mice will require more methodological imagination. It will not be possible to place a living mouse brain within the microscope system used by Ahrens and Keller to image the zebrafish brain. The mouse brain is significantly bigger, is largely impenetrable to visible light and is surrounded by a skull. Realistically, we may not see methods that enable whole brain activity mapping in mammals at the cellular level for quite a while.

But there is much worth learning about brain function in smaller organisms such as the zebrafish and drosophila, and microscopy systems such as this will be capable of providing important fundamental insights into brain function that are relevant to our understanding of the human brain.

Whether it will be through BAM or not, the neuroscience community has important challenges to tackle ahead. At Nature Methods, we have been actively involved in supporting technology development in the neurosciences from the very beginning and we look forward with enthusiasm to doing so during this exciting period in neuroscience research.

Update: We just published an Editorial on this topic in our May issue.

One fish, two fish and 400,000 zebrafish

Hundreds of translucent creatures that biomedical researchers rely on for genetic insights settled into new digs today as researchers opened a newly refurbished and expanded animal repository called the European Zebrafish Resource Center. Housed at the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) in southwest Germany, the center can maintain 400,000 live fish at maximum capacity in more than 3,000 tanks, and will include lab space for on-site zebrafish in vitro fertilization. Uwe Strähle, a geneticist at KIT, told Nature Medicine by phone after the ribbon-cutting ceremony that European zebrafish researchers eager to preserve their hard-won transgenic and mutant lines may begin submitting eggs to the center. Currently the center houses 300 transgenic lines but Strähle expected the collection to expand to hold thousands of lines in the next five years.

“Some mutant forms of zebrafish cannot be replicated so it is important to preserve those lines for future research,” Strähle explained. And as if capacity wasn’t enough, the center’s equipment might make any zebrafish investigator glassy-eyed with excitement. Located a few floors above the core aquarium room that will hold only frequently requested lines are brand-new PCR machines and freezers capable of storing 80,000 sperm samples in cryopreservation.

But Strähle thinks researchers will benefit most from the center’s screening lab, stocked with—among other neat toys—a single plane illumination microscopy machine that can be used to create 4-D images of the animals, including their traits. He envisions researchers visiting the screening lab to take advantage of the tools available to add or knock out genes and breed zebrafish lines needed for their future research.

In the past, European zebrafish researchers exchanged fish with US labs like the Zebrafish International Resource Center maintained by the University of Oregon, but the costs of sending little fish across the ocean kept going up. Zebrafish research in Europe can now make a big splash on its home turf.

Photo courtesy of Martin Lober, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology

 

“There is no spoon…”: Paralyzed fish navigates virtual environment while we watch its brain

Overlaid on the micrograph of the fish is a slice of its brain measured with a laser scanning microscope, in which single neurons are visible.{credit}(courtesy of Ahrens et al.){/credit}

Sometimes an experiment will just reach off the page and slap you in the face, demanding attention. This happens to me every so often and I must admit, our latest paper from the lab of Florien Engert induced such an experience. There have been several cool, technical tours-de-force (is that proper grammar??) over the last few years involving different creatures navigating in a virtual environment while neuronal activity was monitored. These include a mouse running on a spherical treadmill, as well as a fly marching along a similar treadmill-style ball. But in these examples, having the subject head-fixed (for the stability of recordings in the brain, either with electrodes or through imaging) was moderately non-intrusive since walking motions were independent of the head. The same can’t be said for the subject in this latest example of a virtual reality navigator: a wriggling, swimming fish. Therefore, a more creative solution had to be sought and in a paper published online yesterday, Ahrens, Engert and colleagues decided that paralysis was the way to go in order to follow the neural activity of this navigating fish. Continue reading