RRID:AB_10694490
DOI: 10.1016/j.immuni.2026.07.007
Resource: (Cell Signaling Technology Cat# 5321, RRID:AB_10694490)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_10694490
RRID:AB_10694490
DOI: 10.1016/j.immuni.2026.07.007
Resource: (Cell Signaling Technology Cat# 5321, RRID:AB_10694490)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_10694490
RRID:AB_2269233
DOI: 10.1016/j.immuni.2026.07.007
Resource: (Cell Signaling Technology Cat# 3743, RRID:AB_2269233)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2269233
RRID:AB_3712898
DOI: 10.1016/j.immuni.2026.07.007
Resource: RRID:AB_3712898
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_3712898
RRID:AB_2734772
DOI: 10.1016/j.immuni.2026.07.007
Resource: (Cell Signaling Technology Cat# 13996, RRID:AB_2734772)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2734772
RRID:AB_2799122
DOI: 10.1016/j.immuni.2026.07.007
Resource: (Cell Signaling Technology Cat# 37849, RRID:AB_2799122)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2799122
RRID:AB_2266768
DOI: 10.1016/j.immuni.2026.07.007
Resource: (Proteintech Cat# 13750-1-AP, RRID:AB_2266768)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2266768
RRID:AB_2783869
DOI: 10.1016/j.immuni.2026.07.007
Resource: (Cell Signaling Technology Cat# 14769, RRID:AB_2783869)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2783869
RRID:AB_2012300
DOI: 10.1016/j.immuni.2026.07.007
Resource: (Santa Cruz Biotechnology Cat# sc-166583, RRID:AB_2012300)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2012300
RRID:AB_2126308
DOI: 10.1016/j.immuni.2026.07.007
Resource: (Santa Cruz Biotechnology Cat# sc-166755, RRID:AB_2126308)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2126308
RRID:AB_2892769
DOI: 10.1016/j.immuni.2026.07.007
Resource: (Sino Biological Cat# 40143-T62, RRID:AB_2892769)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2892769
RRID:AB_10916884
DOI: 10.1016/j.immuni.2026.07.007
Resource: (Santa Cruz Biotechnology Cat# sc-374026, RRID:AB_10916884)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_10916884
RRID:AB_2887501
DOI: 10.1016/j.immuni.2026.07.007
Resource: RRID:AB_2887501
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2887501
RRID:AB_10859893
DOI: 10.1016/j.immuni.2026.07.007
Resource: (Cell Signaling Technology Cat# 8081, RRID:AB_10859893)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_10859893
RRID:AB_628423
DOI: 10.1016/j.immuni.2026.07.007
Resource: (Santa Cruz Biotechnology Cat# sc-8017, RRID:AB_628423)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_628423
RRID:AB_11151213
DOI: 10.1016/j.immuni.2026.07.007
Resource: RRID:AB_11151213
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_11151213
RRID:AB_2941972
DOI: 10.1016/j.immuni.2026.07.007
Resource: (Cell Signaling Technology Cat# 33717, RRID:AB_2941972)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2941972
RRID:AB_330924
DOI: 10.1016/j.immuni.2026.07.007
Resource: (Cell Signaling Technology Cat# 7076, RRID:AB_330924)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_330924
RRID:AB_2728646
DOI: 10.1016/j.immuni.2026.07.007
Resource: (GeneTex Cat# GTX629630, RRID:AB_2728646)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2728646
RRID:AB_259845
DOI: 10.1016/j.immuni.2026.07.007
Resource: (Sigma-Aldrich Cat# G1160, RRID:AB_259845)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_259845
RRID:AB_2099233
DOI: 10.1016/j.immuni.2026.07.007
Resource: (Cell Signaling Technology Cat# 7074, RRID:AB_2099233)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2099233
RRID:SCR_019197
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2026.127283
Resource: University of Chicago Integrated Light Microscopy Core Facility (RRID:SCR_019197)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_019197
RRID:SCR_017760
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2026.127283
Resource: Chicago University Cytometry and Antibody Technology Core Facility (RRID:SCR_017760)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_017760
RRID:SCR_019199
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2026.127283
Resource: University of Chicago Human Tissue Resource Center Core Facility (RRID:SCR_019199)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_019199
AB_92446
DOI: 10.1016/j.crmeth.2026.101457
Resource: (Millipore Cat# AP114, RRID:AB_92446)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_92446
RRID:IMSR_GPT:N000013
DOI: 10.1016/j.chom.2026.06.018
Resource: (IMSR Cat# GPT_N000013,RRID:IMSR_GPT:N000013)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:IMSR_GPT:N000013
RRID:AB_330288
DOI: 10.1016/j.chom.2026.06.018
Resource: (Cell Signaling Technology Cat# 4967, RRID:AB_330288)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_330288
RRID:AB_2296754
DOI: 10.1016/j.chom.2026.06.018
Resource: (Cell Signaling Technology Cat# 9153, RRID:AB_2296754)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2296754
RRID:AB_2133515
DOI: 10.1016/j.chom.2026.06.018
Resource: (Cell Signaling Technology Cat# 9157, RRID:AB_2133515)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2133515
RRID:AB_2799531
DOI: 10.1016/j.chom.2026.06.018
Resource: RRID:AB_2799531
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2799531
RRID:AB_307275
DOI: 10.1016/j.chom.2026.06.018
Resource: (Abcam Cat# ab9485, RRID:AB_307275)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_307275
RRID:AB_2650491
DOI: 10.1016/j.chom.2026.06.018
Resource: (Cell Signaling Technology Cat# 14074, RRID:AB_2650491)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2650491
RRID:AB_2059963
DOI: 10.1016/j.chom.2026.06.018
Resource: (Abcam Cat# ab51243, RRID:AB_2059963)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2059963
RRID:AB_10861551
DOI: 10.1016/j.chom.2026.06.018
Resource: (Abcam Cat# ab109199, RRID:AB_10861551)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_10861551
RRID:AB_3741509
DOI: 10.1016/j.chom.2026.06.018
Resource: RRID:AB_3741509
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_3741509
RRID:AB_2798998
DOI: 10.1016/j.chom.2026.06.018
Resource: (Cell Signaling Technology Cat# 31025, RRID:AB_2798998)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2798998
RRID:AB_2085144
DOI: 10.1016/j.chom.2026.06.018
Resource: (Abcam Cat# ab15191, RRID:AB_2085144)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2085144
RRID:AB_2923502
DOI: 10.1016/j.chom.2026.06.018
Resource: (Abcam Cat# ab200040, RRID:AB_2923502)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2923502
RRID:AB_3741508
DOI: 10.1016/j.chom.2026.06.018
Resource: RRID:AB_3741508
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_3741508
RRID:SCR_014429
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: FreezeFrame (RRID:SCR_014429)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_014429
RRID:SCR_014199
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: Adobe Photoshop (RRID:SCR_014199)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_014199
RRID:SCR_022930
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: Compass for Simple Western (RRID:SCR_022930)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_022930
RRID:SCR_015742
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: Agilent ChemStation Software (RRID:SCR_015742)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_015742
RRID:MMRRC_037801-JAX
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: RRID:MMRRC_037801-JAX
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:MMRRC_037801-JAX
RRID:SCR_002798
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: GraphPad Prism (RRID:SCR_002798)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_002798
RRID:IMSR_JAX:010710
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: RRID:IMSR_JAX:010710
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:IMSR_JAX:010710
RRID:SCR_000441
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: EthoVision XT (RRID:SCR_000441)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_000441
RRID:AB_2769851
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: (ABclonal Cat# AS003, RRID:AB_2769851)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2769851
RRID:AB_2769854
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: (ABclonal Cat# AS014, RRID:AB_2769854)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2769854
RRID:AB_2534073
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: (Thermo Fisher Scientific Cat# A-11005, RRID:AB_2534073)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2534073
RRID:CVCL_0063
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: (RRID:CVCL_0063)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:CVCL_0063
RRID:AB_2534099
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: (Thermo Fisher Scientific Cat# A-11042, RRID:AB_2534099)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2534099
RRID:AB_2890536
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: (Thermo Fisher Scientific Cat# A48255, RRID:AB_2890536)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2890536
RRID:AB_141733
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: (Molecular Probes Cat# A-21434, RRID:AB_141733)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_141733
RRID:AB_2576217
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: (Thermo Fisher Scientific Cat# A-11034, RRID:AB_2576217)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2576217
RRID:AB_94856
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: (Millipore Cat# MAB3418, RRID:AB_94856)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_94856
RRID:AB_528127
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: (DSHB Cat# 1d4b, RRID:AB_2134500)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2134500
RRID:AB_2534091
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: (Thermo Fisher Scientific Cat# A-11032, RRID:AB_2534091)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2534091
RRID:AB_1524535
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: (Abcam Cat# ab76442, RRID:AB_1524535)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_1524535
RRID:AB_303298
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: (Abcam Cat# ab2785, RRID:AB_303298)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_303298
RRID:AB_297840
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: (Abcam Cat# ab112, RRID:AB_297840)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_297840
RRID:AB_775981
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: (Abcam Cat# ab18528, RRID:AB_775981)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_775981
RRID:AB_397766
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: (BD Biosciences Cat# 610383, RRID:AB_397766)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_397766
RRID:AB_869973
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: (Abcam Cat# ab51253, RRID:AB_869973)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_869973
RRID:AB_10733646
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: (Proteintech Cat# 21327-1-AP, RRID:AB_10733646)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_10733646
RRID:AB_11182164
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: (Proteintech Cat# 14865-1-AP, RRID:AB_11182164)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_11182164
RRID:AB_2537217
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: (Abcam Cat# ab138501, RRID:AB_2537217)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2537217
RRID:AB_2140649
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: (Proteintech Cat# 11049-1-AP, RRID:AB_2140649)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2140649
RRID:AB_2136290
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: (Proteintech Cat# 12987-1-AP, RRID:AB_2136290)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2136290
RRID:AB_2115315
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: (Proteintech Cat# 12640-1-AP, RRID:AB_2115315)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2115315
RRID:AB_2687938
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: (Proteintech Cat# 66009-1-Ig, RRID:AB_2687938)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2687938
RRID:AB_2881091
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117800
Resource: (Proteintech Cat# 28212-1-AP, RRID:AB_2881091)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2881091
RRID:AB_300766
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117770
Resource: (Abcam Cat# ab13939, RRID:AB_300766)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_300766
RRID:SCR_025361
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117770
Resource: RRID:SCR_025361
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_025361
RRID:AB_2535813
DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2026.07.017
Resource: (Thermo Fisher Scientific Cat# A-21245, RRID:AB_2535813)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_2535813
RRID:AB_10987865
DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2026.07.017
Resource: (Santa Cruz Biotechnology Cat# sc-374536, RRID:AB_10987865)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:AB_10987865
RRID:CVCL_1C54
DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2026.06.016
Resource: (Coriell Cat# GM24149, RRID:CVCL_1C54)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:CVCL_1C54
RRID:CVCL_1C48
DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2026.06.016
Resource: (Coriell Cat# GM24143, RRID:CVCL_1C48)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:CVCL_1C48
CVCL_0023
DOI: 10.1016/j.cbi.2026.112297
Resource: (CCLV Cat# CCLV-RIE 1035, RRID:CVCL_0023)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:CVCL_0023
RRID:CVCL_0045
DOI: 10.1016/j.cbi.2026.112297
Resource: (DSMZ Cat# ACC-305, RRID:CVCL_0045)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:CVCL_0045
CVCL_0007
DOI: 10.1016/j.cbi.2026.112297
Resource: (JCRB Cat# IFO50038, RRID:CVCL_0007)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:CVCL_0007
RRID:CVCL_1288
DOI: 10.1016/j.cbi.2026.112297
Resource: (TKG Cat# TKG 0484, RRID:CVCL_1288)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:CVCL_1288
RRID:CVCL_0027
DOI: 10.1016/j.cbi.2026.112297
Resource: (TKG Cat# TKG 0205, RRID:CVCL_0027)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:CVCL_0027
RRID:CVCL_0030
DOI: 10.1016/j.cbi.2026.112297
Resource: (ICLC Cat# HTL95023, RRID:CVCL_0030)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:CVCL_0030
RRID:CVCL_0013
DOI: 10.1016/j.cbi.2026.112297
Resource: (RRID:CVCL_0013)
Curator: @scibot
SciCrunch record: RRID:CVCL_0013
🔍-when.is.the.moon.not.visible.during.the.day@google
💻/asus/🧊/me/📓/2026/8/🔍/-/when.is.the.moon.not.visible.during.the.day/@/google/
https://bafybeiemodygeb6h7kxzrzcnkiof5u3q77kuqyorg4arz62wle7imlcrrq.ipfs.dweb.link🔍/-/when.is.the.moon.not.visible.during.the.day/@/google/
🔍/-/when+is+the+moon+not+visible+during+the+day/@/google/
https://bafybeiemodygeb6h7kxzrzcnkiof5u3q77kuqyorg4arz62wle7imlcrrq.ipfs.dweb.link
Le price walking désigne une augmentation progressive par rapport au coût attendu, fondée sur la faible probabilité de départ du client.
Si j'ai bien suivi, cette pratique est interdite au UK ?
(At the end of 2025, BP withdrew its involvement in one of the blue hydrogen facilities at the Teesside site. A data centre is planned for the site instead.) Net Zero Teesside, a gas-CCS power plant in the East Coast Cluster run by BP and Equinor, has been unsuccessfully challenged in court over its emissions savings. The challenge was based on the idea that potential upstream emissions could significantly exceed any emissions cuts from CCS use.
Replacing blue hydrogen with a datcentre
Between the CCC’s sixth and seventh carbon budget advice, its recommendations for power and industry CCS capacity dropped from 46MtCO2 to 41MtCO2
Getting to 40 million tonnes by 2030 when it’s already halfway through 2026 seems implausible. Does that chart show 40million really show 40 million tonnes per year, or is it cumulative?
If your deployment also requires STS or EKS Authentication endpoints (for example, for IRSA or EKS Pod Identity), create those separately before running the bootstrap script.
This gives no steps, no AWS CLI command, and no link for how to actually create those endpoints.
Atleast a reference link could be included if that makes sense from the scope of this guide
But if you care about these things (you clearly do since you read this far), please support the creators that are fighting against this future. Buy DRM-free stuff. Donate to an organization that preserves games & game-related content. Donate to emulator developers. Support your friendly neighbourhood indie devs. Make some noise online. We don't want physical media, we want digital ownership rights! Don't confuse the argument!
Arguing that focusing on physical games vs digital games misses the significance of ownership rights, specifically noting that one can fully own a DRM-free digital game.
Playbook: Elasticsearch 6.8 to OpenSearch 3.5 on EKS (existing VPC)
How about a playbook for ES 7.x to OpenSearch 3.x
This is see more frequently in the field
https://bafybeiauoba2v3e2hihuim4bc7jth2aivk53k4atka7mudo26y7oaqqnxe.ipfs.inbrowser.link/%F0%9F%97%AB/IPIP.Communication.App/session/1/@/youtube/ss360.mp4
[x] (https://bafybeiauoba2v3e2hihuim4bc7jth2aivk53k4atka7mudo26y7oaqqnxe.ipfs.dweb.link/%F0%9F%97%AB/IPIP.Communication.App/session/1/@/youtube/ss360.mp4)
Additional debugging information
It would also be useful to get and attach info about "which --version/image tags are actually running"
I faced this issue
he workflow submit command automatically
Is there any suggestion to stop/delete the workflow instead of repeated "workflow submit"
The *Bund für deutsche Schrift* was founded to preserve and promote the traditional German scripts—Fraktur for printing and Sütterlin or Kurrent for handwriting—at a time when they had largely disappeared from everyday use. During the 1980s the association commissioned a limited number of Fraktur-equipped Erika typewriters from VEB Robotron so that members could continue producing authentic Fraktur documents using modern mechanical equipment.
Clinical and molecular characteristics of childhood-onset Stargardt disease
PMID: 25312043
Gene: ABCA4
Disease: childhood-onset Stargardt disease
STGD87 2588G→C Q1750X Yes
Case#: STGD87, 10-14yo at onset, German
DiseaseAssertion: STGD
FamilyInfo: segregation in family
CasePresentingHPOs:
CaseHPOFreeText: "The diagnosis of STGD was based on the demonstration of bilateral impairment of central vision and the appearance of perimacular and/or peripheral yellow-white flecks, with or without atrophy of the central retinal-pigment epithelium and a normal or only mildly abnormal flash electroretinogram when recorded in early stages of the disease."
CaseNotHPOs:
CaseNotHPOFreeText:
GenotypingMethod: denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis, dHPLC, and SSCP analysis, PCR amplification of individual coding exons and flanking intron sequences, direct DNA sequencing
PreviouslyPublished: n/a
Variant: Q1750X; 2588G→C in trans "Correct segregation of disease alleles was demonstrated in all 39 cases in which family samples were available for study"
ClinVar: 7879
CAID: CA119128
SupplementalData: n/a
Case#: Female, 6 years old, presenting with vision loss and behavioral changes.
Disease Assertion: After testing she was diagnosed with Stargardt disease
FamilyInfo: No family history of vision loss in childhood
CasePresentingHPOs: HP:0000572, HP:0000708, HP:0007988, HP:0008001, HP:0030609
CaseHPOFreeText: Showed changes in behavior through increased reliance on parents, and "Over the past six months, she had become increasingly emotional, anxious, frustrated, with difficulty concentrating on simple tasks". Additionally, beyond just the visual loss, she presented with 20/200 OU on her visual acuity test, as well as 1/14 Ishihara color plates with either eye. She also would overlook the top of objects, showed retinal arteriolar narrowing, had degeneration in the ellipsoid zone, and multiple hyperreflective granular deposits.
CaseNotHPOs: HP:0000648, HP:0000486, HP:0000639, HP:0000613, HP:0001336, HP:0011145 (just seizures in general, this was the closest I could find)
CaseNotHPOFreeText: Beyond the HPOs above, she also demonstrated a lack of seizures and had no other neurologic dysfunction. Additionally, she demonstrated brisk pupillary responses without paradoxical pupillary constriction to darkness. She also had normal results for the slip lamp biomicroscopy and tonometry.
CasePreviousTesting: Previously tested for myoclonus, seizures, and neurologic dysfunction with no history of any (did not describe the testing methods for such).
Genotyping Method: Although the genetic testing came up negative in relation to neuronal ceroid lipofuscinosis and the mutations associated, Stargardt disease was confirmed through whole genome sequencing. This revealed "compound heterozygosity for 2 pathogenic variants in the ABCA4 gene (c.3007 C > T p.Q1003X and c768 G > T PV256 = )".
Previously Published: n/a
Variant: NM_000350.3(ABCA4):c.3007C>T (p.Gln1003Ter) & NM_000350.3(ABCA4):c.768G>T (p.Val256=)
ClinVarID: 4538557 & 99505
CAID: n/a
gnomAD: For the first ID the data for this one was absent from gnomAD (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/clinvar/variation/4538557/?term=%22NM_000350.3(ABCA4)%3Ac.3007C%3ET+(p.Gln1003Ter)%22%5BVARNAME%5D). While the other ID had the minor allele frequency of 0.00009 (highest compared to others available) (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/clinvar/variation/99505/?term=%22NM_000350.3(ABCA4)%3Ac.768G%3ET%22%5BVARNAME%5D+AND+%22(p.Val256%3D)%22%5BVARNAME%5D)
Supplemental Data: Introduction was section in this article that discusses symptoms present as well as the re-diagnosis of Stargardt after the initial incorrect diagnosis of Batten disease. Additionally, Fig.1, Fig.2, and Fig.3 showed some of the phenotypes that appeared with this patient's condition.
A total of 42 unrelated patients (28 men and 14 women) were included in this study. Two patients (A002 and A035) were from consanguineous families (Figure 1). The detailed clinical findings are presented in Data S1.
Case#: Liu Proband A034, Chinese, female
DiseaseAssertion: Stargardt
FamilyInfo: Mother has the Pro68Leu variant, but the father was not genotyped to know the phase of the second variant. Proband's daughter also has the Pro68Leu variant, but is unaffected.
CasePresentingHPOs:
CaseHPOFreeText: no individual details provided
CaseNotHPOs:
CaseNotHPOFreeText: patients with other ocular diseases, such as choroidal neovascularization, glaucoma, and diabetic retinopathy, or were undergoing treatments/therapeutic trials were excluded.
GenotypingMethod: Either eye gene-enriched (from 36 to 450 target genes) panel-based next-generation sequencing (NGS). Sanger bi-directional sequencing was conducted to confirm the rare candidate variants (allele frequency: less than 1.0% of the general population) and to perform the co-segregation analysis
PreviouslyPublished: n/a
Variant: c.203C>T p.(Pro68Leu); c.3883_3884del p.(Glu1295Lysfs*126)
ClinVar: 99113
CAID: CA226972
SupplementalData: S1 only provides group demographics for the different clinical classifications (fundus grade, FAF type, etc)
Inherited retinal disease in Norway – a characterization of current clinical and genetic knowledge
PMID: 31429209
Gene: ABCA4
Disease: STGD
11 M 53 c.5461–10T>C ND
Case#: Patient 11, male, age 53
DiseaseAssertion: STGD
FamilyInfo: diagnosis of autosomal recessive STGD based on the pedigree and clinical phenotype of fleck deposits with or without genetic testing
CasePresentingHPOs: HP:0000608, HP:0000007, HP:0030610, HP:0030500
CaseHPOFreeText: Macular degeneration. autosomal recessive, Photoreceptor outer segment loss on macular OCT, Yellow/white lesions of the macula
CaseNotHPOs: n/a
CaseNotHPOFreeText: n/a
Genotyping Method: n/a
PreviouslyPublished: n/a
Variant: NM_000350.3:c.5461-10T>C
ClinVar: NM_000350.3(ABCA4):c.5461-10T>C
CAID: CA220687
SupplementalData: composite mask analysis shown in figure 3 for patient 11, show large areas of matched degeneration and isolated IS/OS loss
14 F 42 c.4222T >C c.4918C>T
Case#: Patient 14, female, age 42
DiseaseAssertion: STGD
FamilyInfo: diagnosis of autosomal recessive STGD based on the pedigree and clinical phenotype of fleck deposits with or without genetic testing
CasePresentingHPOs: HP:0000608, HP:0000007, HP:0030610, HP:0030500
CaseHPOFreeText: Macular degeneration. autosomal recessive, Photoreceptor outer segment loss on macular OCT, Yellow/white lesions of the macula
CaseNotHPOs: n/a
CaseNotHPOFreeText: n/a
Genotyping Method: n/a
PreviouslyPublished: n/a
Variant: Allele 1: NM_000350.3:c.4222T>C Allele 2: NM_000350.3:c.4918C>T
ClinVar:Allele 1: NM_000350.3(ABCA4):c.4222T>C (p.Trp1408Arg) Allele 2: NM_000350.3(ABCA4):c.4918C>T (p.Arg1640Trp)
CAID:Allele 1: CA227166 Allele 2: CA227253
SupplementalData: composite mask analysis shown in figure 3 for patient 14, show diffusely intact IS/OS and RPE with central area of mixed types of degeneration. Both patient 2 and 14 show foveal preservation of IS/OS and RPE
Mutations in ABCA4 result in accumulation of lipofuscin before slowing of the retinoid cycle: a reappraisal of the human disease sequence
PMID: 14709597
Gene: ABCA4
Disease: ABCA4-related retinopathy
Comprehensive analysis of Stargardt macular dystrophy patients reveals new genotype-phenotype correlations and unexpected diagnostic revisions
PMID: 25474345
Gene: ABCA4
Disease: Stargardt
Table S9. List of unique causative variants detected in 858 STGD probands mmc8.xlsx (19.3KB, xlsx) Table S11. STGD1 cases with at least two (likely) causal ABCA4 variants mmc9.xlsx (39.6KB, xlsx)
Case#: DNAID 072888/Pat258, female
DiseaseAssertion: STGD1
FamilyInfo: n/a
CasePresentingHPOs:
CaseHPOFreeText: "In classic STGD1, loss of central vision starts around the second decade of life, but both early- and late-onset subtypes have been extensively described." No patient-specific details provided
CaseNotHPOs:
CaseNotHPOFreeText:
GenotypingMethod: smMIPs sequencing of the complete ABCA4 locus
PreviouslyPublished: n/a
Variant: c.6416G>C (p.Arg2139Pro); c.3323G>A (p.Arg1108His)
CAID: CA10611614
SupplementalData: tables s9 and s11
The locations of ABCA4 homozygous and hypomorphic missense mutations characterized in the present study are shown in Fig 1. These mutations are distributed throughout ABCA4 with 4 in ECD1 (p.Asn96Asp, p.Asn96His, p.Arg212Cys, p.Arg602Trp), 4 in ECD2 (p.Leu1430Pro, p.Gly1439Asp, p.Pro1486Leu, p.Ala1598Asp), 6 within or close to NBD1 (p.Gly863Ala, p.Asn965Ser, p.Thr1019Met, p.Glu1087Lys, p.Arg1108Cys, p.Arg1129Leu), and 6 within NBD2 (p.Leu1940Pro, p.Gly1977Ser, p.Leu2027Phe, p.Arg2030Gln, p.Arg2107His, p.Cys2137Tyr). The p.Asn1868Ile mutation is present in a loop connecting the V-shaped α-helical hairpin with membrane spanning segment 12 (TM12). Several mutations occur in well-defined motifs crucial for the binding and hydrolysis of ATP. The p.Asn965Ser and p.Glu1087Lys mutations occur in the Walker A (Gly-His-Asn-Gly-Ala-Gly-Lys-Thr) and Walker B (Val-Ile-Leu-Asp-Glu) motifs of NBD1, respectively, and the p.Gly1977Ser mutation is present in the Walker A (Gly-Val-Asn-Gly-Ala-Gly-Lys-Thr) motif of NBD2. The p.Arg2030Gln variant reported to display a mild disease phenotype in compound heterozygous STGD1 patients has been included in our analysis although this variant has yet to be found in a homozygous state.
A ClinVar entry claimed this variant showed "impaired substrate binding capacity and limited substrate release after ATP binding," but it is not found in the text or figures and there is no supplementary data.
STARGARDT DISEASE : Beyond Flecks and Atrophy
PMID: 28099317
Gene: ABCA4
Disease: Stargardt disease
The proband
Case#:case 1 II:4
DiseaseAssertion: Stargardt disease (STGD1)
FamilyInfo: mother has identical phenotype as proband, dad and sister asymptomatic, brother was symptomatic at 8 years old, other brother symptomatic at 15 years old.
CasePresentingHPOs: HP:0000007
CaseHPOFreeText: at age 50, with central visual imparement in right eye, 20/40 right, 20/20 left, linear and branching hyperautofluorescent subretinal deposits and extrafoveal RPE atrophy in both eyes,
CaseNotHPOs: n/a
CaseNotHPOFreeText: n/a
Genotyping Method:
PreviouslyPublished: n/a
Variant: c.6031_6044delins18M/p.(Ile2003LeufsTer41)
ClinVar: not found
CAID: not found
SupplementalData:
Correlating the Expression and Functional Activity of ABCA4 Disease Variants With the Phenotype of Patients With Stargardt Disease
PMID: 29847635
Gene: ABCA4
Disease: Stargardt Disease
616; 41c.2453G>A; c.5824G>Cp. G818E (D); p. E1942Q (B;N)46c.6384A>Gp.H2128R (D)Compound heterozygous
Case#: Sporadic Case #16, Mexican
DiseaseAssertion: Stargardt
FamilyInfo: n/a
CasePresentingHPOs:
CaseHPOFreeText: STGD diagnosis based on: "onset of symptoms in childhood or early adulthood (before 20 years of age), bilateral central vision loss (central and peripheral visual field computerized testing), a retinal “beaten-bronze” foveal appearance and/or yellow-whitish flecks from the posterior pole to the mid periphery, normal caliber of the retinal vessels, no pigmented bone spicules in the retinal periphery, a normal to subnormal electroretinogram, and a typical dark choroid in fluorescein angiography."
CaseNotHPOs:
CaseNotHPOFreeText:
PreviouslyPublished: n/a
Variant: allele 1: c.2453G>A (p. G818E); c.5824G>C (p. E1942Q) allele 2: c.6384A>G (p.H2128R) direct sequencing of exons of ABCA4
ClinVar: 867010
CAID: CA957117
SupplementalData: n/a
MD-1001 STGD1 44 c.6089G>A p.(Arg2030Gln) 47 c.6410G>A p.(Cys2137Tyr) - - - - - - - This study
This variant is found in compound heterozygosity with c.6089G>A p.(Arg2030Gln) in family MD-1001 in this study. No phenotype information provided. Not eligible for PP4 due to age of onset not being provided.
Intersection of Stargardt Dystrophy and AIDS: A Case Report
PMID:39991341
Gene: ABCA4
Disease: Stargardt
Supplementary data. bjophthalmol-2018-312064supp004.pdf
This variant is found on pg 16 in proband 14075. Compound heterozygous for c.6817-2A>C. MEH institute (UK). Said to have Stargardt based on the following criteria: "(1) patients (at least 6 years old) with at least two ABCA4 variants or one ABCA4 variant associated with a typical STGD1 phenotype and (2) presence of a well-defined atrophic lesion with/without flecks at the most recent visit of at least 300 µm in diameter (the total area of all lesions <12 mm2)." No additional details provided
Pt-75Mc.4539 + 2028C > Tp.[= ,Arg1514Leufs*36]c.2453G > Ap.(Gly818Glu)
Case#: Pt 7, male, 60yo at report, onset between 6-49yo, Irish
DiseaseAssertion: Stargardt
FamilyInfo: family 5
CasePresentingHPOs:
CaseHPOFreeText: VA: OD=6/36 OS=6/120, FAF and OCT in figure 2, FAF WRT vascular arcades=beyond, beaten bronze appearance, yellow flecks centrally, peripapillary sparing, central retinal thickness: OD=100 microns OS=117 microns, optical coherence tomography (OCT) atrophy horizontal width: OD=6000 microns OS=5446 microns
CaseNotHPOs:
CaseNotHPOFreeText: bulls eye pattern, flecks peripherally
GenotypingMethod: Target capture NGS of the exons and known pathogenic intronic regions of ABCA4, whole-gene single molecule molecular inversion probe (smMIP) based sequencing of ABCA4 as well as 40 kb of flanking sequence, direct Sanger sequencing, or WGS
PreviouslyPublished: n/a
Variant: c.4539 + 2028C > T p.[= ,Arg1514Leufs*36]; c.2453G> A p.(Gly818Glu)
ClinVar: 99135; 236116
CAID: CA227000; CA10576057
SupplementalData: n/a
Patients and Methods The protocol of the study adhered to the provisions of the Declaration of Helsinki. After informed consent was obtained, blood samples were taken and molecular analysis on the ABCA4 gene was performed as described by Maugeri et al. 14 The charts of patients with ABCA4 mutations who originally had received diagnoses of isolated or autosomal recessive CRD were reviewed. All patients originated from the University Medical Centre Nijmegen (Nijmegen, The Netherlands) and the University of Heidelberg (Heidelberg, Germany). In this study the diagnosis of CRD was based on the following criteria: initial symptoms of blurred central vision without a history of night blindness, impairment of color vision, and fundoscopic evidence of maculopathy without or with mild peripheral retinopathy. 3 4 5 7 8 In patients with recordable ERGs a cone–rod pattern of degeneration had to be present (i.e., the photopic b-wave impairment had to be greater than or equal to the scotopic b-wave amplitude impairment). Patients 9250 and 13163, who had nonrecordable ERGs, were included because their histories and clinical features were similar to those of other patients with cone–rod degeneration and they were believed to represent advanced cases of CRD. In addition to an ophthalmic examination, Goldmann kinetic perimetry routinely was performed using III-4-e and I-4-e isopters. Color vision was tested with the Ishihara and Panel D15 tests, except in patients 9369, 9378, and 10125, who were tested under conditions described earlier. 18 Because these patients were examined in two different clinics and ERGs were recorded over a long period, the methods, instrumentation, and analysis techniques of the electroretinography varied. The ERGs in patients 9369, 9378, 10125, and 11872 were performed as described by Thijssen et al. 19 The ERG method used in patients 9370, 9553, 9633, and 13163 was described by Alexandridis and Krastel. 20 The ERGs of the remaining patients (9250, 9371, and 9650) are of a more recent date and were performed according to International Society for Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision (ISCEV) standards. 21 Fundus photographs were taken in most patients and some of the patients (9650, 9369, 9378, and 10125) also underwent fluorescein angiography. Results The characteristics of 12 patients with ABCA4-associated retinal dystrophy resembling CRD are summarized in Table 1 . Most did not have affected family members, and therefore their retinal dystrophies could not be classified as autosomal dominant, autosomal recessive or X-linked. Four patients reported a brother or sister with subnormal vision. In view of the reputedly normal visual acuity of the parents and the molecular defects, the inheritance pattern of the gene defects in these patients (individuals 9303, 9369, 9553, and 13163) was classified as autosomal recessive. The visual acuity of the patients did not exceed 20/200 and, on average, was much lower. With the exception of patient 9553, the age of onset was at or before the age of 12, and in each of the patients, blurred vision was the initial symptom. Night blindness did not occur except in patients 9378 and 10125, in the final stages of retinal degeneration. Evidence of maculopathy in the form of bull’s eye maculopathy or pigmentary changes was present in all the patients reported in this study (Fig. 1A) . The functional equivalent of the mainly centrally located retinal disease was a central scotoma, varying from 8° to more than 40°. In all but one patient, the scotoma was absolute. Only in patient 9378 was the central scotoma relative and surrounded by absolute scotomas. Fundoscopic evidence of early peripheral involvement of the retina was mild, and only in the later stages of the disease did peripheral changes characteristic of RP, such as narrowing of retinal vessels and bone spicula, occur in patients 9369 (Fig. 1B) and 10125. Similarly, mild constriction of the visual fields occurred only in two patients (9650 and 10125) and only in the advanced state. Color vision was tested in 10 patients. Six demonstrated a red–green defect, and in two of these (patients 11872 and 10125), it was accompanied by a blue-yellow defect. In the remaining four patients, color vision was so severely disturbed that the exact type of impairment could not be assessed. The ERG recordings demonstrated degeneration of both rods and cones. When ERG responses could be elicited, the cones appeared to be affected as much as the rod photoreceptors and, in most of the patients, even more severely. The ERG responses in five patients progressively deteriorated until no photopic and scotopic responses could be recorded. In these patients, with exception of patients 9250 and 13163, ERG recordings of an earlier date were used in Table 1 . This applies to patient 9369, in whom an ERG was recorded at age 12 (all ERG responses had been nondetectable since the age of 21), patient 9378 at age 33 (all ERG responses at age 46 were nondetectable), and patient 10125 at age 8 (in 1998, at age 28, the ERG responses were no longer detectable). Recent ERG findings were not available for patients 9650 and 9371. Their ERGs were recorded in 1989 and 1985, respectively. The remaining ERG data were derived from ERG recordings performed in the past 4 years. Of patient 9371 only the ERG data in the left eye were available. Two patients warrant a more detailed description, due to the unusual course of their retinal dystrophies. Patient 9378, at the age of 12, had blurred vision with fundoscopic evidence of irregular chorioretinal atrophy in the posterior pole. At that time, there were no peripheral abnormalities on ophthalmoscopy, and there was no history of night blindness. The ERG demonstrated an equal reduction of both cone- and rod-mediated responses. Later in life, however, fundoscopic changes developed that were characteristic of RP, and the patient reported a decrease in night vision. With fluorescein angiography partly confluent patches of chorioretinal atrophy were visible (Fig. 1C) . The clinical picture of patient 10125 differed from that of the other patients, despite the mutation in the ABCA4 gene. Initially, disease in this patient was diagnosed as STGD because of the bull’s eye maculopathy, the granular pigment alterations in the macular area, and the pisciform flecks surrounding the posterior pole. At age 8 his visual acuity had decreased to 20/200 in both eyes. When he was referred to our clinic in 1998 at the age of 28, peripheral degeneration in the form of narrow retinal vessels and deposition of peripheral bone spicula had developed, in addition to the earlier described disease of the central retina. A fluorescein angiogram showed typical findings: a central small hypofluorescent spot enclosed by an ellipsoid—a markedly hyperfluorescent area that in turn was surrounded by hyperfluorescent dots against a dark background, most likely caused by obscuration of choroidal background fluorescence (Fig. 1D) . Early ERG recordings were not available, and the ERG tracings recorded at age 28 represent the final stage of the degenerative process, with absence of both cone and rod responses. This retinal dystrophy seemed to have evolved from STGD into more widespread retinal degeneration, resulting in loss of function of both rods and cones. Discussion Progressive CRD is a clinically heterogeneous retinal disorder, but typical findings include reduced visual acuity, impairment of the central visual field, color vision deficits, and fundoscopic evidence of maculopathy, with no or few midperipheral retinal pigment deposits. 3 4 7 8 There is some dispute about typical ERG findings in CRD. Some state that the diagnosis of CRD must be based on the reduction or absence of cone responses in the presence of quantitatively less reduction in rod responses, whereas others state that an equal impairment of both photoreceptor systems, if accompanied by the characteristic features, suffices to justify the diagnosis of CRD. 3 7 8 22 Several propositions have been made in the past to classify cone–rod disorders. Some classification systems have focused on individual case reports and were based on nosologic aspects; others have made a distinction according to the various patterns of inheritance. 3 6 23 24 In recent studies, Szlyk et al. 7 and Yagasaki et al. 8 made use of full-field ERGs, dark adaptometry, and modified perimetric techniques to identify functionally distinct subtypes of CRD. Finally, over the past few years, a molecular genetic classification of CRD has emerged. At the moment, four genes and three loci have been implicated in autosomal dominant CRD, whereas one X-linked locus has been described. 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Thus far, two loci and one gene (ABCA4) have been associated with autosomal recessive CRD. 12 33 34 The genetic heterogeneity seen in CRD is matched by the range of the clinical findings attributed by various investigators to this type of retinal dystrophy. Whatever the classification system used, some patients display retinal disorders that cannot be classified satisfactorily. Often, these retinal degenerations involve overlapping features. Krill et al. 5 reported that 9 of 45 patients with cone degenerations showed typical features associated with fundus flavimaculatus. Heckenlively 2 described 76 patients with cone–rod patterns on the ERG in whom retinal disease otherwise met the standard definition of RP (progressive peripheral visual field loss with ring scotoma). Alternatively, as seen in patient 10125 in this study, patients with STGD have been described who had progressive peripheral retinal degeneration with severe abnormalities in the ERG and electro-oculogram (EOG) later in life—a condition that has been described by Fishman 4 as secondary progressive cone–rod dysfunction. The association of CRD and a dark choroid has also been described previously. 35 36 The atypical pattern of retinal degeneration with confluent patches of chorioretinal atrophy in patient 9378 resembles that in another previously described unrelated patient with CRD-like disease caused by mutations in ABCA4. 37 In the molecular genetic study by Maugeri et al., 14 in which 11 of the 12 patients with autosomal recessive CRD described in this study were analyzed, ABCA4 mutations were found in 13 of 20 unrelated patients, strongly suggesting that ABCA4 mutations are the major cause of this disorder. If this is true, the genetic heterogeneity in autosomal recessive CRD, compared with, for example, classic RP, is surprisingly low. Because autosomal recessive inheritance is believed to be the most frequent mode of inheritance of monogenic chorioretinal disorders, it is very possible that a large fraction of the patients with CRD who have been clinically studied previously carry ABCA4 mutations. In that case, the explanation for the high variability of the clinical findings in autosomal recessive CRD would not be genetic heterogeneity but rather the genotype–phenotype model for ABCA4. According to this model, there is an inverse relationship between the presumed residual ABCA4 function as an N-retinylidene-PE flippase and the severity of the disorder. 12 37 38 As a consequence, a continuum of phenotypes is to be expected, ranging from STGD to CRD to RP. Although this is probably a simplified representation of reality and needs corroboration by detailed biochemical studies of individual mutations, as described previously, this model explains why mutations in the ABCA4 gene could give rise to phenotypes that do not satisfy the standard classification of retinal dystrophies. 39 Two patients in this study may reflect borderline CRD phenotypes. Patient 9553 carries a combination of a mild (2588G>C) and severe ABCA4 mutation, which, according to the genotype–phenotype model described earlier, should be associated with STGD. We have previously discussed that most likely, one of the pathologic mutations has not yet been identified in this patient. 14 However, the age of onset in this patient (25 years) is relatively high, and although other features such as visual acuity, perimetry, and ERG findings are typical of CRD, this may indicate a relatively mild subtype. Another more convincing example of blending of ABCA4-associated phenotypes is patient 10125. The molecular findings in this patient have not yet been described elsewhere. He carries a severe splice site mutation (IVS30+1G→T) in combination with a nucleotide change leading to a stop codon at Gln1029. A patient with RP who was homozygous for the IVS30+1G→T mutation has been described, 12 whereas the Q1029X mutation has not been described. Both mutations can be considered to be null alleles. According to the proposed ABCA4 model, the clinical phenotype in patient 10125 should be RP. Instead, this patient exhibits a typical retinal dystrophy, which gradually progresses from STGD to a more widespread degeneration of photoreceptors in a cone–rod pattern later in life. At present, both rod and cone ERG responses are not detectable, indicative of a final stage similar to that in many patients with RP. Functional studies are necessary to clarify whether these specific ABCA4 mutations are responsible for the particular progression of the retinal degeneration in this patient, or whether other as yet unknown modifying factors play a role. In this study we have described 12 unrelated patients with retinal dystrophy resembling CRD caused by mutations in the ABCA4 gene. In a previous study we described the ophthalmic features in five siblings with CRD-like retinal dystrophy who were carrying ABCA4 mutations. 37 From the clinical data of these patients and previous molecular studies in patients with autosomal recessive CRD, two important conclusions can be drawn. 12 14 First, the genetic basis of autosomal recessive CRD is less heterogeneous than was thought, based on the variability in clinical features, because mutations in the ABCA4 gene seems to be the major pathologic cause. Second, given the wide clinical spectrum of CRD-like phenotypes associated with ABCA4 mutations, detailed clinical subclassifications are difficult and may not be very useful. Supported by the British Retinitis Pigmentosa Society, the Rotterdamse Vereniging Blindenbelangen, the Algemene Nederlandse Vereniging ter Voorkoming van Blindheid, the Stichting Blindenhulp, the Stichting de Drie Lichten, the Gelderse Blindenvereniging and the Landelijke Stichting voor Blinden en Slechtzienden and the Stichting voor Ooglijders. Submitted for publication June 15, 2001; revised December 21, 2001; accepted January 2, 2002. Commercial relationships policy: N. The publication costs of this article were defrayed in part by page charge payment. This article must therefore be marked “advertisement” in accordance with 18 U.S.C. §1734 solely to indicate this fact. Corresponding author: B. Jeroen Klevering, Department of Ophthalmology, University Medical Centre Nijmegen, PO Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands; b.klevering@ohk.azn.nl. Table 1. View Table Patients with Cone–Rod Degeneration and ABCA4 MutationsTable 1. Patients with Cone–Rod Degeneration and ABCA4 Mutations Patient Sex Current Age (ys) ABCA4 Mutations* Visual Acuity Age of Onset (ys) Fundoscopy Color Vision Perimetry ERG Cone (μV), † ERG Rod (μV), † OD OS OD OS OD OS 9250 M 30 1622T→C; 3113C→T 194G→A CF CF 6 Pigment clumping in the macula NP Large central scotoma over 40° ND, ‡ ND, ‡ 9303 M 21 1622T→C; 3113C→T 20/400 20/400 7 Granular pigmentary changes in the macula Diffusely disturbed Central scotoma of 20° Severely decreased, § Severely decreased, § 9369 F 40 6601-6602deIAG LP LP 8 Irregular hypopigmentation, mainly in the posterior pole. In later stages: attenuated vessels and bone spicula temporal to the macula Red-green defect Central scotoma varying from 10–30° 65 (65%) 80 (80%), ∥ 140 (90%) 160 (nl), ∥ 9370 M 15 1622T→C; 3113C→T 20/200 20/200 7 Granular aspect of the macula NP Concentric central scotoma of 8° 10 (13%) 9 (13%), ¶ 29 (29%) 29 (23%), ¶ 9371 M 38 1622T→C; 3113C→T 1622T→C;3113C→T 20/400 20/400 10 Bull’s eye maculopathy Red-green defect Concentric central scotoma of 20° NP 29 (16%), ‡ NP 54 (30%), ‡ 9378 F 50 768G→T CF CF 12 Bull’s eye maculopathy, narrow vessels in periphery with mild granular changes of the pigment epithelium and confluent patches of chorioretinal atrophy Severely disturbed Large, absolute, paracentral scotomas, relative scotoma centrally 20 (20%) 30 (30%), ∥ 70 (47%) 90 (60%), ∥ 9553 F 45 2588G→C IVS35del-2→+2del4 20/400 20/400 25 Bull’s eye maculopathy. Peripheral diffuse motting of RPE Severely disturbed Large central scotoma over 40° 14 (14%) 19 (19%), ¶ 41 (41%) 24 (24%), ¶ 9633 M 22 1622T→C; 3113C→T 4469G→A 20/400 20/200 12 Atrophy of retinal pigment epithelium in posterior pole. Early stages of bull’s eye maculopathy Red-green defect Central scotoma of 20° 12 (16%) 12 (16%), ¶ 61 (62%) 39 (39%), ¶ 9650 F 20 3364G→A 20/400 20/400 5 Central granular aspect Red-green defect Large central scotoma of 30° and relative constriction of III-4 70 (39%) 106 (59%), ‡ 272 (nl) 115 (76%), ‡ 10125 M 30 IVS30+1G→T 3085C→T 20/200 20/200 8 Central hypopigmentation with dark surrounding, resembling bull’s eye. Later in life: peripheral changes characteristic of RP Severe red-green defect; mild blue-yellow defect Central scotoma of 10–15° with mild peripheral restriction 75 (75%) 80 (80%), ∥ 130 (87%) 140 (93%), ∥ 11872 M 30 634C→T 20/200 20/200 10 Bull’s eye pattern Severely disturbed; blue-yellow more than red-green Central scotoma of 25° 23 (23%) 35 (35%), ∥ 110 (73%) 95 (63%), ∥ 13163 M 15 1622T→C;3113C→T IVS36+1G→A 20/400 20/200 6 Granular aspect of retinal pigment epithelium in macula. Slightly pale optic disc Severely disturbed Central scotoma of 10–15,° no peripheral involvement ND, ¶ ND, ¶ CF, count fingers; LP, light perception; ND, not detectable; NP, not performed. * Allele 1, first line; allele 2, second line. † Between parentheses: percentage of the ERG value compared to the lower limit of the normality; normal ERG values are indicated nl. ‡ Minimal values for ERG recordings: 150 μV for the photopic ERG, 180 μV for the scotopic ERG. § ERG performed with skin electrodes. ∥ Minimal values for ERG recordings: 100 μV for the photopic ERG, 150 μV for the scotopic ERG. ¶ Minimal values for ERG recordings: 99 μV for the photopic ERG, 75 μV for the scotopic ERG. Figure 1. View OriginalDownload Slide (A–D) Fundus photographs and fluorescein angiograms in eyes of patients with (atypical) CRD. (A) Patient 11872 with bull’s eye maculopathy. (B) Patient 9369, demonstrating CRD in the later stages with attenuation of the retinal arterioles and irregular pigmentation temporal to the macula. (C) Fluorescein angiograms in patient 9378 showing confluent patches of chorioretinal atrophy. (D) Patient 10125 with central hypofluorescence enclosed by an ellipsoid hyperfluorescent area. In the surrounding area, hyperfluorescent flecks are visible, and the choroidal background fluorescence seems blocked, as seen in STGD.
Case#: Klevering Patient 9369, female, Netherlands, 40yo at report, 8yo at onset
DiseaseAssertion: cone-rod degenerations/ ABCA4-associated retinal dystrophy resembling CRD
FamilyInfo: "In view of the reputedly normal visual acuity of the parents and the molecular defects, the inheritance pattern of the gene defects in these patients (individuals 9303, 9369, 9553, and 13163) was classified as autosomal recessive."
CasePresentingHPOs:
CaseHPOFreeText: Visual acuity: light perception OU. Fundoscopy: Irregular hypopigmentation, mainly in the posterior pole. In later stages: attenuated vessels and bone spicula temporal to the macula. Red-green defect of color vision. Perimetry: Central scotoma varying from 10–30°. ERG Cone (μV): OD-80 (80%), OS-140 (90%) from 12 yo (all ERG responses had been non-detectable since the age of 21). ERG Rod (μV): 160 (nl). Fundus photographs and fluorescein angiograms show CRD in the later stages with attenuation of the retinal arterioles and irregular pigmentation temporal to the macula. Narrowing of retinal vessels and bone spicula (Fig 1B). Fundus description (PMID: 10958761): atrophy of the RPE around the optic disk, bone spicules along arteries and venules in the mid-periphery, and attenuated arterioles (Fig 1D)
CaseNotHPOs:
CaseNotHPOFreeText:
GenotypingMethod: single-strand conformation polymorphism (SSCP) and direct-sequencing techniques to look for mutations in the 50 exons and flanking intron sequences of the ABCA4 gene
PreviouslyPublished: Maugeri et al (PMID: 10958761)
Variant: c.6601_6602delAG
CAID: CA227421
SupplementalData: n/a
Wikipedia tells me that "In finance, a unicorn is a privately held startup company with a current valuation of US$1 billion or more." Consider glossing this someplace in the abstract - the meta-science community likely has to search for this kind of info.
Une procédure peut enfin réduire l’indemnisation sans produire de refus explicite.
C'est aussi le cas pour la fausse déclaration non intentionnelle : le règlement du sinistre sera réduit au prorata du rapport entre la prime payée et celle qui aurait dû être payée si le risque avait été correctement déclaré
Les avances et les paiements partiels ont pour fonction de limiter cette asymétrie.
Une autre configuration, c'est quand tu dois subir l'assurance d'autrui Je ne sais pas si tu abordes ce point, mais en France il existe aussi l'assurance décennale, qui couvre pendant dix ans les travaux réalisés par un artisan ou un constructeur. Elle fonctionne en tandem avec un autre mécanisme, l'assurance dommages-ouvrage (obligatoire sous certains aspects), qui indemnise rapidement le maître d'ouvrage (sans attendre qu'une responsabilité soit établie), puis se retourne ensuite contre l'assureur décennal du professionnel responsable. Si tu n'as pas souscrit de DO, tu es tributaire de la bonne volonté de l'assureur d'un artisan qui a pu cessé d'exister depuis des années !
Pour l’assuré, le même délai peut signifier un logement inhabitable, un véhicule nécessaire au travail, une activité interrompue ou des soins reportés.
Ca peut être d'autant plus complexe que certaines garanties sont portés par plusieurs assureurs dans un même contrat. Quand ma voiture est accidentée, c'est l'assistance qui va organiser mon remorquage et mon rapatriement, mais c'est l'assureur principal qui va payer pour les travaux du véhicule. Si je suis blessé, la GPC peut être portée par un troisième assureur, et pourra éventuellement être complété par ma GAV et mon quatrième assureur.
L’assuré verse une prime pendant des mois ou des années. Il devient créancier d’une indemnité seulement si un événement prévu par le contrat survient et si sa demande est reconnue.
J'y pense maintenant, mais il y aussi l'aspect volet responsabilité civile qui est aussi intéressante à envisager dans la réflexion globale. Dans mon interaction avec la société, je profite aussi de cette confiance que, normalement, tout le monde est assuré contre les dommages qu'on pourrait m'occasionner.
Note: This response was posted by the corresponding author to Review Commons. The content has not been altered except for formatting.
Learn more at Review Commons
We thank you and the reviewers for the thoughtful and constructive evaluation of our manuscript, “Metabolic Rewiring by α-Synuclein Enables Mitohormetic Protection.” We appreciate the reviewers’ recognition that the study addresses an important and relatively underexplored aspect of αSyn biology, namely the physiological contribution of αSyn to cellular metabolism and adaptation to mitochondrial stress.
In response to the reviewers’ comments, we have substantially revised the manuscript, added new experimental data, and clarified several points of interpretation. Importantly, we now include: (i) comparison of αSyn expression in the HEK293T αSyn-expressing clones with endogenous αSyn levels in mouse brain lysates; (ii) additional analysis of αSyn-immunoreactive high-molecular-weight species following chronic mild-dose rotenone treatment; (iii) a non-crosslinked co-immunoprecipitation control; (iv) PRX6-Flag as a negative control for the LDHA-Flag pull-down; (v) proximity ligation assay data in HEK293T cells; (vi) mitochondrial DNA and mitochondrial membrane potential measurements; (vii) Seahorse analysis of ECAR reserve capacity and OCR following acute and chronic mild-dose rotenone treatment.
We also revised the wording throughout the manuscript to avoid overinterpretation. In particular, we now refer to LDHA as an αSyn-associated protein and to the PLA data as evidence for close proximity, rather than as definitive proof of direct binding. We also clarify that the growth advantage observed under chronic rotenone represents adaptation to chronic mild mitochondrial stress, not protection from acute severe toxicity.
In addition, we made a substantial effort to address the relevance of our findings for PD and could successfully demonstrate, using proximity ligation assay, that endogenous αSyn associates with endogenous LDHA in cultured mouse primary hippocampal neurons. The fact that endogenous aSyn and LDHA associate with each other also in neurons argues that this association is likely to be relevant to PD. On the other hand, showing that overexpression of aSyn protects neurons from mitochondrial stress was more challenging, and so far, we could not find an experimental setting to demonstrate this. None-the-less, we laid the foundation for a longer-term approach, and we are in the process of expanding C57BL6 SNCA+/+ and SNCA−/− mouse colonies. These mice, and cultured primary neurons prepared from them, will be the ultimate approach to address the relevance of our findings to PD.
We were also asked to contextualize our findings against contradictory literature, and thus added the following paragraph to the Discussion: “How do our findings contextualize against contradictory literature? For example, Lee et al reported that αSyn overexpression exacerbates rotenone-induced ATP loss, suggesting that αSyn indirectly sensitizes mitochondria to complex I inhibition by endogenous/exogenous stressors in cells [41]. Our findings challenge this view that αSyn is intrinsically toxic. We demonstrate that αSyn promotes mitohormesis: mild energetic stress induces adaptive bioenergetic remodeling. Based on our findings we propose that αSyn acts as a stress-response protein recruited during increased energetic demand to maintain bioenergetic homeostasis. This response preserves cellular function, whereas repeated demand may exhaust the program, leading to mitochondrial dysfunction, ATP loss, pathological αSyn conversion and cell death.”
Reviewer 1
Comment 1. Overexpression of α-synuclein does not seem to affect cell growth, but is its level in the range that might occur in living organisms?
Response: We thank the reviewer for raising this important point. To address it, we added a new Western blot comparison between αSyn expression in HEK293T αSyn-expressing clones and endogenous αSyn levels in mouse brain lysates. This analysis is now shown in Supplementary Fig. 1B. As expected, αSyn expression in the HEK293T stable clones is higher than in the endogenous tissue reference. We now explicitly state this in the Results section and have adjusted the interpretation accordingly. Importantly, despite this elevated expression, αSyn stable overexpression did not affect basal cell growth or transgene stability under standard culture conditions. Thus, while this model is not intended to reproduce endogenous neuronal αSyn levels, it provides a controlled gain-of-function system to uncover αSyn-dependent metabolic effects.
Changes made:
We added Supplementary Fig. 1B and revised the Results section to state that αSyn expression in HEK293T clones is higher than in mouse brain lysates. We also added the corresponding Methods section describing preparation of whole-brain lysates.
Comment 2. Protein-protein interactions of α-synuclein are shown under treatment with supramaximal complex I inhibition. To show relevance of the interaction in resistance to prolonged and mild complex I inhibition, it would be important to show the protein complexes under those conditions.
Response: We agree with the reviewer that it is important to distinguish between the effects of acute high-dose rotenone and chronic mild-dose rotenone. We therefore analyzed αSyn-immunoreactive high-molecular-weight species after chronic mild-dose (40nM) rotenone treatment. These data are now included in Supplementary Fig. 4. Interestingly, chronic mild-dose rotenone did not increase the intensity of the αSyn-immunoreactive HMW species. This suggests that increased formation of these HMW species is not required for the adaptive growth resilience observed after chronic mild-dose rotenone treatment. We have revised the Results section to discuss this point more explicitly. We also note that chronic treatment may alter the composition, localization, or functional state of αSyn-associated complexes, even if the overall abundance of DSG-captured HMW species is not increased.
Changes made:
We added Supplementary Fig. 4 and revised the Results section to clarify that acute and chronic high-/low-dose rotenone has distinct effects on αSyn-immunoreactive HMW species.
Comment 3. Would it be possible to test the physiological relevance of α-synuclein by silencing/knockout strategy?
Response: We agree that loss-of-function or endogenous models are important to support physiological relevance. We made a large effort to identify a cell line in which we could detect endogenous aSyn, to knock it out, and were not successful. We could detect endogenous aSyn only in mouse brain lysates (shown in Supplementary Fig. 1B), and therefore we are in the process of expanding C57BL6 SNCA+/+ and SNCA−/− mouse colonies. These mice, and cultured primary neurons prepared from them, will be the ultimate approach to test the physiological relevance of αSyn.
Comment 4. Table 1 is difficult to understand and is not explained well by the legend.
Response: We thank the reviewer for pointing this out. We have rewritten the legend to Table 1 to explain the LC-MS/MS analysis, the meaning of the columns, and the interpretation of peptide-spectrum matches, unique peptides, and protein coverage.
Changes made:
We revised the Table 1 legend to improve clarity.
Comment 5. Fig. 2A scale bar 20uM has to be changed to 20µm.
Response: We thank the reviewer for noting this error. The scale bar label has been corrected to 20 µm.
Changes made:
We corrected the scale bar label in Fig. 2A and checked additional figure panels for similar unit-formatting issues.
Reviewer 2
Comment 1. For one, the proposed interaction of LDHA and αSyn was only studied by coimmunoprecipitation of tagged and crosslinked proteins after massive transient overexpression in HEK cells. As HEK cells only express very low and negligible amounts of endogenous αSyn this overexpression probably results in vast amounts of mislocalized αSyn. No attempts are described to verify this interaction in a more relevant cellular model with endogenous proteins. I would ask for native co-immunoprecipitation with and without crosslinking and proximity ligation assays from at least something like SH-SY5Y cells which express endogenous αSyn.
Response: We agree with the reviewer, and below is a description of the new experiments we performed and data added to the revised manuscript:
Changes made:
We added PRX6-Flag control data in Fig. 1C, non-crosslinked co-IP in Supplementary Fig. 2B, PLA in Supplementary Fig. 2C and Supplementary Fig. 3, and revised the wording throughout the manuscript.
Comment 2. αSyn was expressed with an IRES-GFP but the control contained only GFP which is not ideal. It is unclear why rotenone results in increased levels of αSyn. Less degradation, increased expression? At least a qPCR could help.
Response: We agree that the vector design should be considered when interpreting the data. The αSyn construct expresses αSyn-IRES-GFP, whereas the control expresses GFP from the corresponding empty IRES-GFP vector. We emphasize that the major metabolic comparisons were performed across multiple independent αSyn-expressing and vector-control clones, reducing the likelihood that the observed effects reflect a single clonal artifact.
Regarding the 2nd part: “It is unclear why rotenone results in increased…
Response: We thank the reviewer for this important point. We have revised the text to clarify that we do not interpret the increased αSyn signal after chronic mild-dose rotenone as evidence for transcriptional induction or altered degradation. Because the αSyn construct is linked to IRES-GFP, the shift toward higher GFP intensity after chronic low-dose rotenone strongly suggests enrichment or selective expansion of cells with higher transgene expression, rather than necessarily increased expression within each individual cell. This interpretation is supported by both fluorescence microscopy and flow cytometry showing enrichment of high-GFP cells specifically in the αSyn-expressing population.
We agree that qPCR could distinguish between transcriptional upregulation and selection of high-expressing cells. However, because the FACS data already show a population shift in GFP intensity, and because the main conclusion is selection or enrichment of high αSyn-expressing cells under chronic mild mitochondrial stress, we have revised the wording to avoid claiming a specific mechanism of increased αSyn expression.
Changes made:
We revised the Results and the Fig. 2 legend to describe enrichment of high-GFP and high-αSyn-expressing cells, rather than implying transcriptional induction.
Comment 3. For the claim that αSyn overexpression shifts metabolism toward increased glycolysis and OXPHOS, important controls are missing. What about cell numbers, mitochondrial mass, mitochondrial membrane potential, etc. Were these experiments done with or without rotenone preconditioning?
Response: We agree that these controls are essential. ECAR and OCR measurements were normalized to cell number per well, as described in the Methods. In addition, we added new analyses of mitochondrial DNA content and mitochondrial membrane potential. These data are presented in the Supplementary Fig. 5C and 5D and show no differences between vector and αSyn-expressing clones in mitochondrial DNA content or mitochondrial membrane potential, either under basal conditions or after chronic 40nM rotenone treatment. These data support the conclusion that the observed metabolic differences are not simply explained by increased mitochondrial number or altered mitochondrial membrane potential.
In the revised manuscript, we show that αSyn-expressing clones exhibit higher LDHA activity and increased lactate secretion both under basal conditions and after chronic low/mild-dose (40nM) rotenone treatment. We also added Seahorse analysis under acute and chronic mild-dose rotenone conditions. These data show that chronic mild-dose rotenone treatment abolished mitochondrial respiration in both aSyn- and vector clones (Supp Fig 6). In glycolysis, aSyn clones showed a larger increase in glycolytic capacity as compared to vector clones following chronic mild-dose rotenone treatment (Fig 4A, B).
Importantly, we also detected differences between the aSyn- and vector clones in glycolytic reserve, which is the value obtained by the subtraction of the glycolysis capacity (max glycolysis) from the basal rate of glycolysis [34]. aSyn–expressing clones preserve high glycolytic reserve following either acute or chronic mild-dose rotenone treatment, whereas similar treatments abolish the glycolytic reserve in vector clones (Fig 4C). These results are consistent with the idea that the presence of aSyn enables cells to continue to proliferate by maintaining the glycolytic energy reserve when mitochondria energy production is abolished.
Changes made:
We added Supplementary Fig. 5C, Supplementary Fig. 5D, Fig. 4A and Supplementary Fig. 6, and revised the Seahorse Methods section.
Comment 4. MitoSOX measures mitochondrial hydrogen peroxide and not mitoROS.
Response: We agree that the readout should be described with greater precision. According to Thermo Fisher/Invitrogen, MitoSOX-Red is a mitochondrial superoxide indicator. They describe it as a mitochondria-targeted dye whose oxidation is by mitochondrial superoxide, O₂•⁻. MitoSOX-Red fluorescence is commonly used as a mitochondrial superoxide-sensitive signal, but it should not be interpreted as a comprehensive measurement of all mitochondrial reactive oxygen species. To avoid overinterpretation, we revised the relevant text to describe the signal more cautiously as MitoSOX-Red fluorescence or mitochondrial superoxide-sensitive ROS signal, where appropriate, rather than as a broad measure of total mitoROS.
Changes made:
We revised the Results, Methods, and figure legend terminology to define the MitoSOX-Red assay more precisely and to avoid overgeneralization.
Reviewer 3
Major comment 1. Figure 1C: The co-IP lacks important controls, such as cells expressing an empty vector or a FLAG-tagged non-interacting control protein (e.g., cytosolic GFP-FLAG). Also, IP alone does not sufficiently support a direct interaction between αSyn and LDHA. While co-association in a complex is evident, additional data are needed to confirm direct binding, e.g., AlphaFold-based structural predictions to model potential binding interfaces.
Response: We agree with the reviewer, and below is a description of the new experiments we performed and data added to the revised manuscript:
Changes made:
We added PRX6-Flag control data in Fig. 1C, non-crosslinked co-IP in Supplementary Fig. 2B, PLA in Supplementary Fig. 2C and Supplementary Fig. 3, and revised the wording throughout the manuscript.
Major comment 2. Figure 2D shows that preconditioned αSyn-expressing cells exhibit a growth advantage under rotenone treatment, but broader metabolic consequences are absent. How does low-dose rotenone preconditioning impact glycolysis versus OXPHOS? What about lactate secretion or other metabolic readouts? Also, could the authors contextualize these findings against contradictory literature in their Discussion? For example, an old study (doi: 10.1074/jbc.M105326200) reports that both wild-type and mutant αSyn expression exacerbate rotenone-induced mitochondrial membrane potential loss, suggesting αSyn indirectly sensitizes mitochondria to complex I inhibition by endogenous/exogenous stressors in cells.
Response: We agree with the reviewer that it is important to connect the growth phenotype to metabolic adaptation. In the revised manuscript, we show that αSyn-expressing clones exhibit higher LDHA activity and increased lactate secretion both under basal conditions and after chronic mild-dose (40nM) rotenone treatment. We also added Seahorse analysis under acute and chronic mild-dose rotenone conditions. These data show that chronic mild-dose rotenone treatment abolished mitochondrial respiration in both aSyn- and vector clones (Supp Fig 6). In glycolysis, aSyn clones showed a larger increase in glycolytic capacity as compared to vector clones following chronic mild-dose rotenone treatment (Fig 4A, B).
Importantly, we also detected differences between the aSyn- and vector clones in glycolytic reserve, which is the value obtained by the subtraction of the glycolysis capacity (max glycolysis) from the basal rate of glycolysis [34]. aSyn–expressing clones preserve high glycolytic reserve following either acute or chronic mild-dose rotenone treatment, whereas similar treatments abolish the glycolytic reserve in vector clones (Fig 4C). These results are consistent with the idea that the presence of aSyn enables cells to continue to proliferate by maintaining the glycolytic energy reserve when mitochondria energy production is abolished.
Changes made:
We revised the Results to integrate LDHA activity, lactate secretion, ECAR, glycolytic reserve, and OCR after acute/chronic mild-dose rotenone treatment. Please see the revised Fig. 4 and Supplementary Fig. 6.
Regarding the reviewer’s request to contextualize our findings against contradictory literature in the Discussion.
Response: We thank the reviewer for this important suggestion. We have added this reference to the Discussion (Ref 41 in the revised manuscript) and wrote the following paragraph on p. 16: “How do our findings contextualize against contradictory literature? For example, Lee et al reported that aSyn overexpression exacerbates rotenone-induced ATP loss, suggesting that αSyn indirectly sensitizes mitochondria to complex I inhibition by endogenous/exogenous stressors in cells [41]. Our findings challenge this view that αSyn is intrinsically toxic. We demonstrate that aSyn promotes mitohormesis: mild energetic stress induces adaptive bioenergetic remodeling. Based on our findings we propose that αSyn acts as a stress-response protein recruited during increased energetic demand to maintain bioenergetic homeostasis. This response preserves cellular function, whereas repeated demand may exhaust the program, leading to mitochondrial dysfunction, ATP loss, pathological αSyn conversion and cell death.”
Major comment 3. Figure 4. αSyn clones display elevated basal respiration and maximal respiratory capacity. This phenotype is underexplored and should be integrated earlier rather than sidelined until the Discussion.
Response: We agree with the reviewer. We revised the Results to more explicitly discuss the observation that αSyn-expressing clones exhibit increased OCR in addition to increased ECAR. We now frame this as evidence that αSyn increases metabolic flexibility and energetic capacity, rather than acting only through a simple shift from OXPHOS to glycolysis. We also added mitochondrial DNA and membrane potential measurements to show that increased respiration is not explained by major changes in mitochondrial DNA content or mitochondria membrane potential. Finally, we added OCR analysis after acute and chronic rotenone exposure, showing that mitochondrial respiration is suppressed by rotenone in both vector and αSyn-expressing clones, supporting the idea that the adaptive advantage under chronic rotenone depends on preserved glycolytic reserve rather than maintained mitochondrial respiration.
Changes made:
We revised the Results and Discussion, added Supplementary Fig. 5C, Supplementary Fig. 5D, and Supplementary Fig. 6, and updated the Seahorse Methods section.
Major comment 4. Considering the relevance of the proposed mechanism for PD, how and would the observed effects hold in neurons? And how certain readouts, e.g. the proliferative advantage observed upon mitohormesis, would apply to post-mitotic neurons? To this end, it would be critical to recapitulate some of the effects in more relevant systems, e.g. patient-derived iPSCs with SNCA multiplications/mutations, αSyn-silenced primary neurons, or through reanalysis of publicly available PD patient datasets.
Response: We thank the reviewer for raising this important point. In the past six months, we have setup cultures of neurons to begin to address the relevance of our findings for PD.
As mentioned above, we initially asked whether the association between endogenous LDHA and endogenous aSyn occurs in intact primary neurons. For this purpose, we cultured primary hippocampal neurons derived from ICR )SNCA+/+) mice and from C57BL6JHUK (SNCA−/−) mice (Ref 32 in revised manuscript). We first validated aSyn expression in ICR (SNCA+/+) brain lysates, and its absence from C57BL6JHUK (SNCA−/−) brain lysates, by Western blot analysis using anti-aSyn Abs (Supp Fig 3A). Mouse primary hippocampal neurons prepared from both mouse strains were cultured, and proximity ligation assay (PLA) was performed 12 days-post culture using anti-LDHA and anti-aSyn Abs. This analysis revealed a strong PLA signal in multiple ICR-SNCA+/+ primary neurons, which was largely absent from C57BL6JHUK-SNCA−/− primary neurons (Supp Fig 3B, C). The fact that endogenous aSyn and LDHA associate with each other in neurons argues that this association is likely to be relevant to PD.
On the other hand, showing that overexpression of aSyn protects neurons from mitochondrial stress was more challenging, and so far, we could not find an experimental setting to demonstrate this. None-the-less, we laid the foundation for a longer-term approach, and we are in the process of expanding C57BL6 SNCA+/+ and SNCA−/− mouse colonies. We envision that these mice, and cultured primary neurons prepared from them, will be the ultimate approach to address the relevance of our findings to PD.
Minor comment 1. loading control for the Western blot in Figure 1B is missing.
Response: We thank the reviewer for noting this point. In the revised manuscript, we replaced the original panel with a new subcellular fractionation experiment that more directly addresses the point we intended to make. Specifically, our aim was to determine whether the DSG-cross-linked αSyn-immunoreactive high-molecular-weight (HMW) species are present only in the cytosolic fraction or also in the mitochondria-enriched heavy membrane fraction. To this end, cells from the aSyn-clone #2 were treated with DSG and then subcellularly-fractionated into the cytosolic S100 and the mitochondria-enriched heavy membrane fractions. The results show that both p17-aSyn and the HMW-cross-linked aSyn-immuno-reactive bands/complexes are detected only in the cytosolic S100 fractions (Fig 1B). These results are consistent with the idea that the HMW-cross-linked aSyn-immuno-reactive bands/complexes detected in whole cells are comprised of cytosolic protein(s).
Changes made:
We revised Fig. 1B and the corresponding figure legend.
Minor comment 2. "P17-αSyn" abbreviation (intro, page 6) has never been introduced nor explained.
Response: We thank the reviewer for pointing this out. We revised the text to introduce this notation clearly as the monomeric approximately 17-kDa αSyn band. Where possible, we also simplified the wording to “monomeric αSyn” to avoid unnecessary confusion.
Changes made:
We revised the Results to clarify the meaning of p17-αSyn.
Minor comment 3. Labels in figures are sometimes not properly explained, e.g., shades of red for aSyn clones in Figures 3 and 4 are not keyed to specific clones.
Response: We thank the reviewer for this helpful comment. We revised the figures to include a separate legend for each clone, better explain the clone labeling and experimental groups.
Changes made:
We revised Figures 3A, 3D, 4A, 5A and 6 to include each clone separately.
Note: This preprint has been reviewed by subject experts for Review Commons. Content has not been altered except for formatting.
Learn more at Review Commons
In this manuscript the authors aim to further elucidate the physiological role of aSyn, a protein highly enriched at synaptic terminals that supports key neuronal functions and contributes prominently to Parkinson's disease (PD) pathology when SNCA gene mutations alter/ increase its expression. Based on previous accounts that a) monomeric aSyn alone is not sufficient to promote PD pathology in vivo and b) α-syn can exert cytoprotective effects during oxidative stress or provide neuroprotection in hypoxia-challenged mice when overexpressed, the authors seek to uncover α-syn's metabolic functions.
Using HEK293T stable clones expressing aSyn and exposed to the complex I inhibitor rotenone, the authors provide evidence that aSyn expression enhances LDHA activity, boosts mitochondrial respiration, and lowers mitochondrial ROS levels. Interestingly, pre-treatment of HEK293T with rotenone discloses a mito-hormetic effect of aSyn which confers a proliferative advantage over control cells. Based on these data the authors conclude that aSyn functions as a metabolic rheostat enabling cells adaptation during stress. While these findings suggest a novel role for aSyn in metabolism with potential implications for PD pathology, stronger mechanistic evidence is needed. Critically, despite aSyn's central role in PD, the study provides no data demonstrating relevance in neuronal cells.
Major points:
Figure 1C: The co- IP lacks important controls, such as cells expressing an empty vector or a FLAG-tagged non-interacting control protein (e.g., cytosolic GFP-FLAG). Also, IP alone does not sufficiently support a direct interaction between aSyn and LDHA. While co-association in a complex is evident, additional data are needed to confirm direct binding, e.g., AlphaFold-based structural predictions to model potential binding interfaces.
Figure 2D shows that pre-conditioned aSyn-expressing cells exhibit a growth advantage under rotenone treatment but broader metabolic consequences are absent. How does low-dose rotenone preconditioning impact glycolysis vs OXPHOS? What about lactate secretion or other metabolic readouts? Also, could the authors contextualize these findings against contradictory literature in their Discussion? For example, an old study (doi: 10.1074/jbc.M105326200) reports that both wild-type and mutant aSyn expression exacerbate rotenone-induced mitochondrial membrane potential loss, suggesting aSyn indirectly sensitizes mitochondria to complex I inhibition by endogenous/exogenous stressors in cells.
Figure 4. All aSyn clones display elevated basal respiration and maximal respiratory capacity, adding complexity to the narrative of aSyn as direct interactor of LDHA, and leaving also this phenotype rather underexplored: what does it imply for mitochondrial function or bioenergetics? Along these lines, this aSyn-driven increased mitochondrial respiration is introduced but sidelined until the Discussion section, where it's framed as aSyn boosting "overall energetic capacity." This aligns better with the data than overemphasizing LDHA/glycolysis, and I would suggest the authors to integrate and discuss this earlier in the manuscript.
Considering the relevance of the proposed mechanism for PD, how and would the observed effects hold in neurons? And how certain readouts, e.g. the proliferative advantage observed upon mitohormesis, would apply to post-mitotic neurons? To this end, it would be critical to recapitulate some of the effects in more relevant systems, e.g. patient-derived iPSCs with SNCA multiplications/mutations, aSyn-silenced primary neurons, or through reanalysis of publicly available PD patient datasets.
Minor points:
A loading control for the Western blot in Figure 1B is missing.
"P17-aSyn" abbreviation (intro, page 6) has never been introduced nor explained.
Labels in figures are sometimes not properly explained, e.g., shades of red for aSyn clones in Figures 3 and 4 are not keyed to specific clones.
The study proposes a novel metabolic role for aSyn via LDHA/glycolysis modulation which the authors suggest is relevant for OXPHOS-dependent neurons (as also stated at page 16 in the Discussion), but the study requires additional work to substantiate their proposed model, and the exclusive use of HEK293 cells limits the translational impact of the study.
Audience: basic research.
Expertise: mitochondrial metabolism, cellular neuroscience, neurodegeneration
Note: This preprint has been reviewed by subject experts for Review Commons. Content has not been altered except for formatting.
Learn more at Review Commons
In their contribution, Geul et al. found that chronic overexpression of a-synuclein (aSyn) in human embryonic kidney (HEK293) cells shifts cellular metabolism towards increased glycolysis AND simultaneously increased oxidative phosphorylation (OxPhos). These changes correlated with a proposed interaction of aSyn and lactate dehydrogenase A (LDHA). aSyn is the key component of Lewy bodies, the histopathological hallmark of Parkinson's disease (PD) and aSyn mutation and increased gene dosage causes PD which makes the project scientifically interesting. Previous work has apparently found that shifting metabolism of dopaminergic neurons, which degenerate in PD, towards glycolysis has some protective effect. However, the work has several substantial flaws.
For one, the proposed interaction of LDHA and aSyn was only studied by coimmunoprecipitation of tagged and crosslinked proteins after massive transient overexpression in HEK cells. As HEK cells only express very low and negligible amounts of endogenous aSyn this overexpression probably results in vast amounts of mislocalized aSyn. No attempts are described to verify this interaction in a more relevant cellular model with endogenous proteins. I would ask for native co-immunoprecipitation with and without crosslinking and proximity ligation assays from at least something like SH-SY5Y cells which express endogenous aSyn.
aSyn was expressed with an IRES-GFP but the control contained only GFP which is not ideal It is unclear why rotenone results in increased levels of aSyn. Less degradation, increased expression? At least a qPCR could help.
For the claim that aSyn overexpression shifts metabolism towards increased glycolysis and OxPhos important controls are missing. What about cell numbers, mito mass, mitochondrial membrane potential etc. Were these experiments done with or without rotenone preconditioning?
MitoSox measures mitochondrial hydrogen peroxide and not mitoROS
I have my doubts whether the reported findings are relevant for the understanding of aSyn physiology and aSyn-caused PD.
My expertise is in mitochondrial dysfunction and neurodegeneration. I feel well qualified in assessing this work.
Note: This preprint has been reviewed by subject experts for Review Commons. Content has not been altered except for formatting.
Learn more at Review Commons
Geula et al seek insight into the physiological function of a-synuclein in the context of cell metabolism. Misfolded and aggregated form of a-synuclein in neurodegeneration has been a major focus of research but less is known about the function of the physiological monomeric form. The Authors created a stable a-synuclein overexpression in HEK and demonstrated interaction of a-synuclein with LDHA with increased lactate production and decreased ROS production. They also show that a-synuclein overexpressing cells have favorable response to mild and prolonged complex I inhibition in terms of metabolic adaptation and survival. The Authors conclude that a-synuclein has a role in metabolic adaptation during prolonged mitochondrial stress. It is an interesting study and a well written ms.
The following points need consideration:
Overexpression of a-synuclein does not seem to affect cell growth but is its level in the range that might occur in living organisms? Protein protein interactions of a-synuclein are shown under treatment with supramaximal complex I inhibition. To show relevance of the interaction in resistance to prolonged and mild complex I inhibition (40nM rotenone), it would be important to show the protein complexes under those conditions.
Would it be possible to test the physiological relevance of a-synuclein by siliencing/knockout strategy?
Table 1 is difficult to understand and is not explained well by the legend. Fig2A scale bar 20uM has to be changed to 20um.
I am expert in mitochondrial biology
The relationship between finance, technology, and war is of course not new. Bond markets first emerged in Britain in the seventeenth century to finance war with France.
Wow, I had no idea this was where bonds came from!
什么是"字"(word)?
我以前讀到8bits= 1byte, 4bytes = 1word 這是準確的嗎? 適用於這邊的word嗎?
The GWAS association of genotypes with healthcare costs is of great interest. However, it is unclear that “quantifying expenditure associated with pathogenic variants or elevated polygenic risk can inform the cost-effectiveness of screening and other interventions.” Observational cost estimates reported in the paper reflect average healthcare use for individuals with and without clinical diagnoses and with or without the adoption of prevention strategies. The paper states, “we estimate that BRCA2 loss-of-function carriers alone account for an additional €17.4 million (£15.1 million) in annual inpatient costs. Importantly, these estimates capture cumulative healthcare expenditures incurred across conditions and over time, rather than costs attributable to a single cancer diagnosis. As such, they provide empirically grounded inputs for decision-analytic models, including those evaluating screening and preventive interventions, which often rely on simplified assumptions about disease incidence or treatment costs.”
However, a cost-effectiveness model of screening needs to model expected costs with and without diagnoses established through screening. Average costs for individuals with BRCA1/2 variants relative to individuals with other genotypes does not indicate how costs change with earlier diagnosis and management.
Most tags are simple labels, but it is possible to use parameters within tags. For example, you could use the tag importance with different parameters for each level of importance. So one piece of text might contain the tag #importance(low), and another #importance(high).
Bulid nest-like tags.
These businesses aren't just wasting billions – they're replacing skilled workers with defective chatbots. As I've written before, AI is the asbestos we're shovelling into the walls of our technological society. Our descendants will spend generations digging it out again, and the longer the bubble goes on without popping, the longer it will take to repair the damage.
Curious whether you could try label-free imaging, such as quantitative phase or SRS as an orthogonal assessment of organelle morphology. Maybe a coarse-grained measurement pre-expansion could be compared with the expanded sample to check marker dependence without requiring CLEM. Alternatively, do you have a sense of whether intrinsic contrast with either modality would survive expansion to allow label-free imaging of the expanded sample itself?
That trains your vocabulary
You upload and ask AI: Describe the visual style of this image. What terms would I use to recreate this style?
evers
A lever is something you can pull to change the result. For example: “A robot in a city.” v/s “A cinematic cyberpunk robot in a neon-lit futuristic city, low-poly, dramatic lighting.”
You're essentially pulling different visual levers
visual vocabulary
Knowing the words that describe how the image should look
inferring from the gist
The AI sees enough of the surrounding information to make a reasonable guess about what is missing.
AI sees images coarsely.
coarse understanding means big picture understand. AI can understand the the overall scene of picture and is good at this but it is weak at understading the fine(specific/small) details. E.g: Coarse understanding: “I see a car.”
Fine understanding: “It's a 2024 Toyota Corolla, white, with a specific license plate number.”
Instead of the using \link you can also use the shortcut [[ to insert a link to another project or note
Like Wikipedia (MediaWiki Link).
Actions in Agenda allows you to type short commands that upon completion get dynamically converted and expanded into plain text, or invoke a certain action like marking a note as On the Agenda.
Do most actions without mouse (cursor).
Similarly, on some keyboards, like the Chinese or Japanese ones, it’s hard to type a backslash character, therefore wherever a backslash character is shown, you can also use two backticks (``) or two middle-dot characters (··).
If you use IME, can use this replace \.
On iPhone and iPad without a hardware keyboard, typing the backslash character can be a bit cumbersome. Instead you can simply tap-and-hold the plus button above the keyboard to trigger the action menu. Handy!
Hold 'plus' button on iOS to use Text Actions.
A source familiar told Axios that Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei has expressed concern about new talent coming to the firm for the money rather than the mission.
Oh really??? Poor Dario. Maybe he could give up his salary first to set an example.
As @nixCraft@mastodon.social said: "So he steals every info out there and now he wants people to come and work free for him?" https://mastodon.social/@nixCraft/117033260617630492
In Gravitation(opens in new tab), we examined the force of gravity, which acts on all objects with mass. In this chapter, we begin the study of the electric force, which acts on all objects with a property called charge. The electric force is much stronger than gravity (in most systems where both appear), but it can be a force of attraction or a force of repulsion, which leads to very different effects on objects. The electric force helps keep atoms together, so it is of fundamental importance in matter. But it also governs most everyday interactions we deal with, from chemical interactions to biological processes.
A good intro blurb, comparing the gravitational interaction,
$$\vec{F}\left(r\right)=-\frac{G m_1 m_2}{r^2}\hat{r}$$
to the Coulomb interaction,
$$\vec{F}\left(r\right)=\frac{k q_1 q_2}{r^2}\hat{r}$$
in which \(\hat{r}\) points from object #1 toward object #2.
Show that figure, and your recommendation carries weight on any job.
this part was cut off
Check First, Then Choose:
no comment
Two Columns, One Pattern, One Sentence
no comment
One Table, Many Sources
no comment
Estimate to Check Before You Record
no comment
Finish the Job: Solve, Then Check the Limit
no comment
Area or Perimeter? The Question Every Order Slip Asks
no comment
One Measurement, Two Units: Converting for the Job
no comment
62 cm — the number with its unit.
28 cm in the video
From Words to a Rule: Build Your Own Formula
no comment
Reading a Rule Like P = r times h
no comment
Read the Trend: Rising, Falling, Steady, or Repeating
no comment
Up, Down, or the Same: How Two Numbers Move Together
no comment
Remember Your Units: Five Facts for Any Form
no comment
Name the Parts: Tables, Charts, and Graphs
no comment
Variasi Temperatur
Tambahkan satuan, dan jelaskan yang dimaksud adalah temperatur heater.
should not
What is the nature of this obligation? Is it moral, philosophical, political, economic, etc.? Who defines its terms, or who should? What is the position of each stakeholder? Do these questions call for the same answers depending on the nature of the risk?
RRID:CVCL_A8ZU
DOI: 10.7554/eLife.95987
Resource: RRID:CVCL_A8ZU
Curator: @evieth
SciCrunch record: RRID:CVCL_A8ZU
RRID:CVCL_A8ZV
DOI: 10.7554/eLife.95987
Resource: RRID:CVCL_A8ZV
Curator: @evieth
SciCrunch record: RRID:CVCL_A8ZV
12260
DOI: 10.7554/eLife.82205
Resource: RRID:Addgene_12260
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_12260
12259
DOI: 10.7554/eLife.82205
Resource: RRID:Addgene_12259
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_12259
LRRK2
DOI: 10.7554/eLife.111075
Resource: RRID:Addgene_232872
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_232872
AAV9-hSyn-GFP
DOI: 10.7554/eLife.109001
Resource: RRID:Addgene_114213
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_114213
52961
DOI: 10.7150/ijbs.133410
Resource: RRID:Addgene_52961
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_52961
98290
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.25.740577
Resource: RRID:Addgene_98290
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_98290
164108
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.23.740218
Resource: RRID:Addgene_164108
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_164108
210129
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.23.740218
Resource: RRID:Addgene_210129
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_210129
162378/
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.23.739873
Resource: RRID:Addgene_162378
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_162378
105540/
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.23.739873
Resource: RRID:Addgene_105540
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_105540
44361/
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.23.739873
Resource: RRID:Addgene_44361
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_44361
44362/
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.23.739873
Resource: RRID:Addgene_44362
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_44362
50474/
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.23.739873
Resource: RRID:Addgene_50474
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_50474
50475/
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.23.739873
Resource: RRID:Addgene_50475
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_50475
137142/
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.23.739873
Resource: RRID:Addgene_137142
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_137142
62226
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.23.738723
Resource: RRID:Addgene_62226
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_62226
137152
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.21.739922
Resource: RRID:Addgene_137152
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_137152
50457
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.21.739922
Resource: RRID:Addgene_50457
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_50457
26966
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.21.739922
Resource: RRID:Addgene_26966
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_26966
137161
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.21.739922
Resource: RRID:Addgene_137161
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_137161
112010
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.21.739922
Resource: RRID:Addgene_112010
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_112010
129020
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.21.739879
Resource: RRID:Addgene_129020
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_129020
176045
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.21.739879
Resource: RRID:Addgene_176045
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_176045
12259
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.21.739879
Resource: RRID:Addgene_12259
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_12259
51140
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.18.739361
Resource: RRID:Addgene_51140
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_51140
12260
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.17.739205
Resource: RRID:Addgene_12260
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_12260
12259
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.17.739205
Resource: RRID:Addgene_12259
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_12259
25999
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.17.739205
Resource: RRID:Addgene_25999
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_25999
VSV-G
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.16.739020
Resource: RRID:Addgene_14888
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_14888
105553
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.16.738983
Resource: RRID:Addgene_105553
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_105553
68719
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.16.738983
Resource: RRID:Addgene_68719
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_68719
Brunello library
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.16.738975
Resource: RRID:Addgene_73178
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_73178
Addgene
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.16.738938
Resource: Addgene (RRID:SCR_002037)
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:SCR_002037
51502
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.15.738740
Resource: RRID:Addgene_51502
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_51502
105553
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.15.738740
Resource: RRID:Addgene_105553
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_105553
121675
DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.15.738594
Resource: RRID:Addgene_121675
Curator: @olekpark
SciCrunch record: RRID:Addgene_121675