Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:

This research study utilizes a realistic motoneuron model to explore the potential to trace back the appropriate levels of excitation, inhibition, and neuromodulation in the firing patterns of motoneurons observed in in-vitro and in-vivo experiments in mammals. The research employs high-performance computing power to achieve its objectives. The work introduces a new framework that enhances understanding of the neural inputs to motoneuron pools, thereby opening up new avenues for hypothesis testing research.

Strengths:<br /> The significance of the study holds relevance for all neuroscientists. Motoneurons are a unique class of neurons with known distribution of outputs for a wide range of voluntary and involuntary motor commands, and their physiological function is precisely understood. More importantly, they can be recorded in-vivo using minimally invasive methods, and they are directly impacted by many neurodegenerative diseases at the spinal cord level.<br /> The computational framework developed in this research offers the potential to reverse engineer the synaptic input distribution when assessing motor unit activity in humans, which holds particular importance.<br /> Overall, the strength of the findings focuses on providing a novel framework for studying and understanding the inputs that govern motoneuron behavior, with broad applications in neuroscience and potential implications for understanding neurodegenerative diseases. It highlights the significance of the study for various research domains, making it valuable to the scientific community.

Weaknesses: The exact levels of inhibition, excitation, and neuromodulatory inputs to neural networks are unknown. Therefore the work is based on fine-tuned measures that are indirectly based on experimental results. However, obtaining such physiological information is challenging and currently impossible. From a computational perspective it is a challenge that in theory can be solved. Thus, although we have no ground-truth evidence, this framework can provide compelling evidence for all hypothesis testing research and potentially solve this physiological problem with the use of computers.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

The study presents an extensive computational approach to identify the motor neuron input from the characteristics of single motor neuron discharge patterns during a ramp up/down contraction. This reverse engineering approach is relevant due to limitations in our ability to estimate this input experimentally. Using well-established models of single motor neurons, a (very) large number of simulations were performed that allowed identification of this relation. In this way, the results enable researchers to measure motor neuron behavior and from those results determine the underlying neural input scheme. Overall, the results are very convincing and represent an important step forward in understanding the neural strategies for controlling movement.

Nevertheless, I would suggest that the authors consider the following recommendations to strengthen the message further. First, I believe that the relation between individual motor neuron behavioral characteristics (delta F, brace height etc.) and the motor neuron input properties can be illustrated more clearly. Although this is explained in the text, I believe that this is not optimally supported by figures. Figure 6 to some extent shows this, but figures 8 and 9 as well as Table 1 shows primarily the goodness of fit rather than the actual fit. Second, I would have expected the discussion to have addressed specifically the question of which of the two primary schemes (push-pull, balanced) is the most prevalent. This is the main research question of the study, but it is to some degree left unanswered. Now that the authors have identified the relation between the characteristics of motor neuron behaviors (which has been reported in many previous studies), why not exploit this finding by summarizing the results of previous studies (at least a few representative ones) and discuss the most likely underlying input scheme? Is there a consistent trend towards one of the schemes, or are both strategies commonly used?

In addition, it seems striking to me that highly non-linear excitation profiles are necessary to obtain a linear CST ramp in many model configurations. Although somewhat speculative, one may expect that an approximately linear relation is desired for robust and intuitive motor control. It seems to me that humans generally have a good ability to accurately grade the magnitude of the motor output, which implies that either a non-linear relation has been learnt (complex task), or that the central nervous system can generally rely on a somewhat linear relation between the neural drive to the muscle and the output (simpler task). Following this reasoning, it could be interesting to report also for which input scheme, the excitation profile is most linear. I understand that this is not the primary aim of the study, but it may be an interesting way to elaborate on the finding that in many cases non-linear excitation profiles were needed to produce the linear ramp.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> I read the paper by Parrotta et al with great interest. The authors are asking an interesting and important question regarding pain perception, which is derived from predictive processing accounts of brain function. They ask: If the brain indeed integrates information coming from within the body (interoceptive information) to comprise predictions about the expected incoming input and how to respond to it, could we provide false interoceptive information to modulate its predictions, and subsequently alter the perception of such input? To test this question, they use pain as the input and the sounds of heartbeats (falsified or accurate) as the interoceptive signal.

Strengths:<br /> I found the question well-established, interesting, and important, with important implications and contributions for several fields, including neuroscience of prediction-perception, pain research, placebo research, and health psychology. The paper is well-written, the methods are adequate, and the findings largely support the hypothesis of the authors. The authors carried out a control experiment to rule out an alternative explanation of their finding, which was important.

Weaknesses:<br /> I will list here one theoretical weakness or concern I had, and several methodological weaknesses.

The theoretical concern regards what I see as a misalignment between a hypothesis and a result, which could influence our understanding of the manipulation of heartbeats, and its meaning: The authors indicate from prior literature and find in their own findings, that when preparing for an aversive incoming stimulus, heartbeats *decrease*. However, in their findings, manipulating the heartbeats that participants hear to be slower than their own prior to receiving a painful stimulus had *no effect* on participants' actual heartbeats, nor on their pain perceptions. What authors did find is that when listening to heartbeats that are *increased* in frequency - that was when their own heartbeats decreased (meaning they expected an aversive stimulus) and their pain perceptions increased.

This is quite complex - but here is my concern: If the assumption is that the brain is collecting evidence from both outside and inside the body to prepare for an upcoming stimulus, and we know that *slowing down* of heartbeats predicts an aversive stimulus, why is it that participants responded in a change in pain perception and physiological response when listened to *increased heartbeats* and not decreased? My interpretation is that the manipulation did not fool the interoceptive signals that the brain collects, but rather the more conscious experience of participants, which may then have been translated to fear/preparation for the incoming stimulus. As the authors indicate in the discussion (lines 704-705), participants do not *know* that decreased heartbeats indicate upcoming aversive stimulus, and I would even argue the opposite - the common knowledge or intuitive response is to increase alertness when we hear increased heartbeats, like in horror films or similar scenarios. Therefore, the unfortunate conclusion is that what the authors assume is a manipulation of interoception - to me seems like a manipulation of participants' alertness or conscious experience of possible danger. I hope the (important) distinction between the two is clear enough because I find this issue of utmost importance for the point the paper is trying to make. If to summarize in one sentence - if it is decreased heartbeats that lead the brain to predict an approaching aversive input, and we assume the manipulation is altering the brain's interoceptive data collection, why isn't it responding to the decreased signal? --> My conclusion is, that this is not in fact a manipulation of interoception, unfortunately.

I will add that the control experiment - with an exteroceptive signal (knocking of wood) manipulated in a similar manner - could be seen as evidence of the fact that heartbeats are regarded as an interoceptive signal, and it is an important control experiment, however, to me it seems that what it is showing is the importance of human-relevant signals to pain prediction/perception, and not directly proves that it is considered interoceptive. For example, it could be experienced as a social cue of human anxiety/fear etc, and induce alertness.

Several additional, more methodological weaknesses include the very small number of trials per condition - the methods mention 18 test trials per participant for the 3 conditions, with varying pain intensities, which are later averaged (and whether this is appropriate is a different issue). This means 6 trials per condition, and only 2 trials per condition and pain intensity. I thought that this number could be increased, though it is not a huge concern of the paper. It is, however, needed to show some statistics about the distribution of responses, given the very small trial number (see recommendations for authors). The sample size is also rather small, on the verge of "just right" to meet the required sample size according to the authors' calculations. Finally, and just as important, the data exists to analyze participants' physiological responses (ECG) after receiving the painful stimulus - this could support the authors' claims about the change in both subjective and objective responses to pain. It could also strengthen the physiological evidence, which is rather weak in terms of its effect. Nevertheless, this is missing from the paper.

I have several additional recommendations regarding data analysis (using an ANOVA rather than multiple t-tests, using raw normalized data rather than change scores, questioning the averaging across 3 pain intensities) - which I will detail in the "recommendations for authors" section.

Conclusion:<br /> To conclude, the authors have shown in their findings that predictions about an upcoming aversive (pain) stimulus - and its subsequent subjective perception - can be altered not only by external expectations, or manipulating the pain cue, as was done in studies so far, but also by manipulating a cue that has fundamental importance to human physiological status, namely heartbeats. Whether this is a manipulation of actual interoception as sensed by the brain is - in my view - left to be proven.<br /> Still, the paper has important implications in several fields of science ranging from neuroscience prediction-perception research, to pain and placebo research, and may have implications for clinical disorders, as the authors propose. Furthermore, it may lead - either the authors or someone else - to further test this interesting question of manipulation of interoception in a different or more controlled manner.

I salute the authors for coming up with this interesting question and encourage them to continue and explore ways to study it and related follow-up questions.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

In this manuscript, Parrotta et al. tested whether it is possible to modulate pain perception and heart rate by providing false HR acoustic feedback before administering electrical cutaneous shocks. To this end, they performed two experiments. The first experiment tested whether false HR acoustic feedback alters pain perception and the cardiac anticipatory response. The second experiment tested whether the same perceptual and physiological changes are observed when participants are exposed to a non-interoceptive feedback. The main results of the first experiment showed a modulatory effect for faster HR acoustic feedback on pain intensity, unpleasantness, and cardiac anticipatory response compared to a control (acoustic feedback congruent to the participant's actual HR). However, the results of the second experiment also showed an increase in pain ratings for the faster non-interoceptive acoustic feedback compared to the control condition, with no differences in pain unpleasantness or cardiac response.

The main strengths of the manuscript are the clarity with which it was written, and its solid theoretical and conceptual framework. The researchers make an in-depth review of predictive processing models to account for the complex experience of pain, and how these models are updated by perceptual and active inference. They follow with an account of how pain expectations modulate physiological responses and draw attention to the fact that most previous studies focus on exteroceptive cues. At this point, they make the link between pain experience and heart rate changes, and introduce their own previous work showing that people may illusorily perceive a higher cardiac frequency when expecting painful stimulation, even though anticipating pain typically goes along with a decrease in HR. From here, they hypothesize that false HR acoustic feedback evokes more intense and unpleasant pain perception, although the actual HR actually decreases due to the orienting cardiac response. Furthermore, they also test the hypothesis that an exteroceptive cue will lead to no (or less) changes in those variables. The discussion of their results is also well-rooted in the existing bibliography, and for the most part, provides a credible account of the findings.

The main weaknesses of the manuscript lies in a few choices in methodology and data analysis that hinder the interpretation of the results and the conclusions as they stand. The first peculiar choice is the convoluted definition of the outcomes. Specifically, pain intensity and unpleasantness are first normalized and then transformed into variation rates (sic) or deltas, which makes the interpretation of the results unnecessarily complicated. This is also linked to the definitions of the smallest effect of interest (SESOI) in terms of these outcomes, which is crucial to determining the sample size and gauging the differences between conditions. However, the choice of SESOI is not properly justified, and strangely, it changes from the first experiment to the second.

Furthermore, the researchers propose the comparison of faster vs. slower delta HR acoustic feedback throughout the manuscript when the natural comparison is the incongruent vs. the congruent feedback. This could be influenced by the fact that the faster HR exteroceptive cue in experiment 2 also shows a significant modulatory effect on pain intensity compared to congruent HR feedback, which puts into question the hypothesized differences between interoceptive vs. exteroceptive cues. These results could also be influenced by the specific choice of exteroceptive cue: the researchers imply that the main driver of the effect is the nature of the cue (interoceptive vs. exteroceptive) and not its frequency. However, they attempt to generalize their findings using knocking wood sounds to all possible sounds, but it is possible that some features of these sounds (e.g., auditory roughness or loomingness) could be the drivers behind the observed effects. Finally, it is noteworthy that the researchers divided the study into two experiments when it would have been optimal to test all the conditions with the same subjects in a randomized order in a single cross-over experiment to reduce between-subject variability.

Taking this into consideration, I believe that the conclusions are only partially supported by the evidence. Despite of the outcome transformations, a clear effect of faster HR acoustic feedback can be observed in the first experiment, which is larger than the proposed exteroceptive counterpart. This work could be of broad interest to pain researchers, particularly those working on predictive coding of pain.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary:

In their manuscript titled "Exposure to false cardiac feedback alters pain perception and anticipatory cardiac frequency", Parrotta and colleagues describe an experimental study on the interplay between false heart rate feedback and pain experience in healthy, adult humans. The experimental design is derived from Bayesian perspectives on interoceptive inference. In Experiment 1 (N=34), participants rated the intensity and unpleasantness of an electrical pulse presented to their middle fingers. Participants received auditory cardiac feedback prior to the electrical pulse. This feedback was congruent with the participant's heart rate or manipulated to have a higher or lower frequency than the participant's true heart rate (incongruent high/ low feedback). The authors find heightened ratings of pain intensity and unpleasantness as well as a decreased heart rate in participants who were exposed to the incongruent-high cardiac feedback. Experiment 2 (N=29) is equivalent to Experiment 1 with the exception that non-interoceptive auditory feedback was presented. Here, mean pain intensity and unpleasantness ratings were unaffected by feedback frequency.

Strengths:

The authors present interesting experimental data that was derived from modern theoretical accounts of interoceptive inference and pain processing.

1. The motivation for the study is well-explained and rooted within the current literature, whereas pain is the result of a multimodal, inferential process. The separation of nociceptive stimulation and pain experience is explained clearly and stringently throughout the text.

2. The idea of manipulating pain-related expectations via an internal, instead of an external cue, is very innovative.

3. An appropriate control experiment was implemented, where an external (non-physiological) auditory cue with parallel frequency to the cardiac cue was presented.

4. The chosen statistical methods are appropriate, albeit averaging may limit the opportunity for mechanistic insight, see weaknesses section.

5. The behavioral data, showing increased unpleasantness and intensity ratings after exposure to incongruent-high cardiac feedback, but not exteroceptive high-frequency auditory feedback, is backed up by ECG data. Here, the decrease in heart rate during the incongruent-high condition speaks towards a specific, expectation-induced physiological effect that can be seen as resulting from interoceptive inference.

Weaknesses:

Additional analyses and/ or more extensive discussion are needed to address these limitations:

1. I would like to know more about potential learning effects during the study. Is there a significant change in ∆ intensity and ∆ unpleasantness over time; e.g. in early trials compared to later trials? It would be helpful to exclude the alternative explanation that over time, participants learned to interpret the exteroceptive cue more in line with the cardiac cue, and the effect is driven by a lack of learning about the slightly less familiar cue (the exteroceptive cue) in early trials. In other words, the heartbeat-like auditory feedback might be "overlearned", compared to the less naturalistic tone, and more exposure to the less naturalistic cue might rule out any differences between them w.r.t. pain unpleasantness ratings.

2. The origin of the difference in Cohen's d (Exp. 1: .57, Exp. 2: .62) and subsequently sample size in the sensitivity analyses remains unclear, it would be helpful to clarify where these values are coming from (are they related to the effects reported in the results? If so, they should be marked as post-hoc analyses).

3. As an alternative explanation, it is conceivable that the cardiac cue may have just increased unspecific arousal or attention to a larger extent than the exteroceptive cue. It would be helpful to discuss the role of these rather unspecific mechanisms, and how it may have differed between experiments.

4. The hypothesis (increased pain intensity with incongruent-high cardiac feedback) should be motivated by some additional literature.

5. The discussion section does not address the study's limitations in a sufficient manner. For example, I would expect a more thorough discussion on the lack of correlation between participant ratings and self-reported bodily awareness and reactivity, as assessed with the BPQ.<br /> a. Some short, additional information on why the authors chose to focus on body awareness and supradiaphragmatic reactivity subscales would be helpful.

6. The analyses presented in this version of the manuscript allow only limited mechanistic conclusions - a computational model of participant's behavior would be a very strong addition to the paper. While this may be out of the scope of the article, it would be helpful for the reader to discuss the limitations of the presented analyses and outline avenues towards a more mechanistic understanding and analysis of the data. The computational model in [7] might contain some starting ideas.

Some additional topics were not considered in the first version of the manuscript:<br /> 1. The possible advantages of a computational model of task behavior should be discussed.<br /> 2. Across both experiments, there was a slightly larger number of female participants. Research suggests significant sex-related differences in pain processing [1,2]. It would be interesting to see what role this may have played in this data.<br /> 3. There are a few very relevant papers that come to mind which may be of interest. These sources might be particularly useful when discussing the roadmap towards a mechanistic understanding of the inferential processes underlying the task responses [3,4] and their clinical implications.<br /> 4. In this version of the paper, we only see plots that illustrate ∆ scores, averaged across pain intensities - to better understand participant responses and the relationship with stimulus intensity, it would be helpful to see a more descriptive plot of task behavior (e.g. stimulus intensity and raw pain ratings)

[1] Mogil, J. S. (2020). Qualitative sex differences in pain processing: emerging evidence of a biased literature. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 21(7), 353-365. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41583-020-0310-6<br /> [2] Sorge, R. E., & Strath, L. J. (2018). Sex differences in pain responses. Current Opinion in Physiology, 6, 75-81. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2468867318300786?via%3Dihub<br /> [3] Unal, O., Eren, O. C., Alkan, G., Petzschner, F. H., Yao, Y., & Stephan, K. E. (2021). Inference on homeostatic belief precision. Biological Psychology, 165, 108190.<br /> [4] Allen, M., Levy, A., Parr, T., & Friston, K. J. (2022). In the body's eye: the computational anatomy of interoceptive inference. PLoS Computational Biology, 18(9), e1010490.<br /> [5] Stephan, K. E., Manjaly, Z. M., Mathys, C. D., Weber, L. A., Paliwal, S., Gard, T., ... & Petzschner, F. H. (2016). Allostatic self-efficacy: A metacognitive theory of dyshomeostasis-induced fatigue and depression. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 10, 550.<br /> [6] Friston, K. J., Stephan, K. E., Montague, R., & Dolan, R. J. (2014). Computational psychiatry: the brain as a phantastic organ. The Lancet Psychiatry, 1(2), 148-158.<br /> [7] Eckert, A. L., Pabst, K., & Endres, D. M. (2022). A Bayesian model for chronic pain. Frontiers in Pain Research, 3, 966034.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The question at hand is whether astrocytes contribute to the mechanism of long-term synaptic potentiation (LTP) at synaptic contacts between excitatory glutamatergic neurons and inhibitory neurons (E-I synapses). This is a legitimate query considering the immense body of work that has now established synaptic plasticity (LTP, LTD and spike-timing dependent plasticity) as an astrocyte-dependent process at excitatory synapses and, by contrast, the lack of knowledge on whether and how astrocytes control IN activity. Taking direct inspiration from that same body of work, authors recapitulate a number of experiments and approaches from prior seminal studies and provide evidence that E-I synapses in the stratum radiatum of the hippocampus display NMDAR-dependent plasticity, which can be suppressed by pharmacologically hindering astrocytes physiology, preventing astrocyte Ca2+ transients or blocking endocannabinoid CB1 receptors. Under any of these conditions, LTP can still be rescued by exogenously applying D-serine, a naturally occurring co-agonist of NMDARs primarily released by astrocytes. Coincidently, authors show that the conditions used to elicit LTP also cause a transient increase in NMDAR co-agonist site occupancy. Lastly, based on some evidence that gamma-CaMKII is predominantly expressed in INs rather than excitatory neurons, authors conducted AAV-mediated IN-specific gamma-CaMKII shRNA experiments and found that this is sufficient to suppress LTP at E-I synapses. They found that this approach also impairs contextual fear learning in behaving mice. Authors conclude that astrocytes gate LTP at E-I synapses via a mechanism wherein neuronal depolarization during LTP induction elicits endocannabinoid release which drives CB1-dependent astrocyte Ca2+ activity, causing the release of the NMDAR co-agonist D-serine (required for NMDAR activation).

Strengths:<br /> This is an important question and the experimental work seems to have been conducted at high standards. The electrophysiology traces are impeccable, the experiments are well powered, including the behavioral testing, and multiple controls and validations are provided throughout. The figures are clear and easy to understand. Overall, the conclusions from the study are consistent, or partially consistent, by the findings.

Main Weaknesses:<br /> 1- A major point of concern is the lack of proper acknowledgment of the seminal studies that were mimicked in this manuscript, notably Henneberger et al, Nature 2010, Adamsky et al, Cell 2018; and Robin et al., Neuron 2017. The entire study design is a replica of these landmark studies: it isn't built upon or inspired from them, it exactly repeats the experiments and methods performed in them, coming dangerously close to being simply a hidden attempt to plagiarize published work. The resemblance goes as far as using an identical figure display (see Fig4.D vs Fig 2D of Ref#4). The issue is that authors frame the problem, scientist logic, reasoning, technical tricks, approaches, and interpretations as their own whereas, in reality, they were taken verbatim out of previous work and applied to a (shockingly) similar problem. The probity of the present study is thus in question. Authors need to clearly acknowledge, in all relevant instances, that the work presented here recapitulates the approach, reasoning and methodology used in past seminal studies that tackled the mechanisms of astrocyte regulation of LTP.

2-Relatedly, in past work, field recordings were used to monitor LTP in hippocampal slices (refs 4, 26 and others). This method captures indiscriminately all excitatory synapses where glutamate is released to cause AMPAR-dependent (and NMDAR) transmembrane flux of cations in the postsynaptic element, including E-I synapses and not just E-E synapse like the authors claim. Therefore, a strong argument can be made that there is no actual ground to differentiate the present results from past ones.

3-There is a general lack of excitement about this study. One reason is that it replicates almost identically past work, as mentioned above. Another is that the scientific question and importance of the findings are not framed appropriately. The work is presented as an astrocyte-focused investigation, but it has very limited value to the astrocyte field. The findings are, in all accounts, identical to those unveiled by previous work especially because E-I synapses are, in fact, excitatory synapses. Where this study does bring value, however, is to the field of interneurons, but it would need to be reframed to shift the emphasis from astrocytes to E-I connections. Authors would need to elevate the text by framing their work around relevant considerations, such as IN diversity, mechanisms of LTP in IN subtypes, role of E-I connections in hippocampal circuit function, information processing, behavior, spatial learning, navigation, or grid cells activity etc...

4-A clear weakness of the study is that it fails to consider the molecular and functional diversity of interneurons in the stratum radiatum and provides no insights or considerations related to it. Authors provide no information on what type of IN were patched, or the location of their cell body in the s.r., effectively treating all patched IN as a homogeneous ensemble of cells - which they are not. Relatedly, the study is extremely evasive on the importance of the results in the context of inhibitory interneurons. This renders the significance of the insights highly uncertain and dampens both the impact of the study and the excitement it generates. Hippocampal interneurons are very diverse in molecular identity, sub-anatomical location, morphology, projections, connectivity and functional importance. Some experts go as far as recognizing 29 subtypes in the CA1, including 9 in the stratum radiatum alone (based on the location of their soma). However, this is neither addressed nor acknowledged by the authors, with the exception of a statement (line 659) where they claim to have "focused on a subpopulation of interneurons in the stratum radiatum" without providing any precision or evidence to corroborate this assertion. This diversity, alone, could explain why not all cells showed LTP, or why the mechanisms authors describe in the radiatum do not seem to be at play in the oriens. Hence, carefully considering the diversity of INs in the present work is necessary. It would refine and augment the conclusions of the paper. Instead of a sub-region specificity, the study might fuel the notion of an IN subtype specificity of LTP mechanisms, which is more useful to the field.

5-Authors take several shortcuts. Some of the conclusions are a leap from the experiments and are only acceptable due to the close analogy with very similar investigations conducted in the past that provided identical results. For instance, the present study provides no evidence of any sort that D-serine is involved - rather, it provides evidence that the pathway at hand contributes to increasing the occupancy of the co-agonist binding site of NMDARs. Considering the absence of work demonstrating that D-serine is the endogenous co-agonist of NMDARs at E-I synapses, most of the authors claims on D-serine are unfounded. This would necessitate using tools such as the canonical D-serine scavengers DAAS or DsDA, serine racemase KO mice etc. Similarly, authors provide no compelling evidence that endocannabinoid CB1 receptors involved in this pathway are located on astrocytes

6-An important caveat in this study is the protocol employed to induce LTP, which includes steps of sustained depolarization of the patched IN to -10mV. Neuronal depolarization is known to induce endocannabinoids production. In several instances, this was shown to 'activate' astrocytes and elicit the release of astrocyte-derived transmitters at nearby synapses. This implies that the endocannabinoid-dependent pathway described in the study is, most likely, artificially engaged by the protocol itself. Hence, the present work only provides evidence that an astrocyte-dependent, CB1-D-serine-pathway can be artificially called upon with this specific LTP protocol, but does not convincingly demonstrate that it is naturally occurring or necessary for plasticity at E-I synapses. Authors would need to thoroughly address this caveat by replicating some of their key findings (AM251, calcium-clamp, D-serine and CaMKII shRNA) using a protocol that does not entail the artificial depolarization of the patched interneuron.

7-Reading and understanding are hindered by a rather vast array of issues with the text itself. It needs thorough editing for typos, misnomers, meaning-altering errors in syntax, and a number of issues with English.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> This work explores the implication of astrocytes in the regulation of long-term potentiation of excitatory synapses onto inhibitory neurons in CA1 hippocampus. They found that astrocytes of a sub-region of CA1 regulate this plasticity through their activation of endocannabinoids that lead to the release of the NMDA receptor co-agonist, D-serine.

Strengths:<br /> The experiments are well considered and conceptualized, and use appropriate tools to explore the role of astrocytes in the tripartite synapse. The results highlight a novel role of astrocytes in an important aspect of the synaptic regulation of the hippocampal circuit. There are extensive levels of analysis for each experimental group of evidence.

Weaknesses:<br /> The authors underscore and used an oversimplified view of the heterogeneity of interneuron populations and their selective roles in the hippocampal network. Also, there is an uneven level of astrocyte-selective tools used in the different experiments which creates an uneven strength of arguments and conclusions regarding the role of glial cells. Finally, the wording used by the authors often lead to some confusion or sense of overinterpretation.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

This paper presents a set of experiments designed to test whether gravity in people's intuitive physics engine is implemented as a simple deterministic representation of gravity or as a Gaussian distribution. The work shows experimentally that the probabilistic representation of gravity does a better job at capturing both human judgments, including biases in stability inferences. The work further shows that Gaussian representations of gravity can evolve in a simple agent-environment reinforcement learning problem setup.

Strengths:<br /> The paper approaches the problem from three different angles in an impressive way. The first is through a direct comparison of human judgments against model predictions. The second is through an analysis of whether the model correctly predicts cognitive illusions. The third is through a computational exploration of how these representations emerge in a reinforcement-learning setup. The idea of approaching the same problem from multiple independent angles, and seeking confirming evidence is laudable.

Weaknesses:<br /> There are two differences between the "natural gravity" account and the "mental gravity" account. The first difference lies in the implementation of gravity. The second, however, is simply that the mental gravity model is integrating more uncertainty into the simulator. In my understanding, adding small amounts of noise to computational models will often increase their fit to human judgments (with softmaxing perhaps being the most common example of this). While counter-intuitive, this is because 'noiseless' models have perfect representations of the stimuli, which is an unrealistic assumption. In the case of intuitive physics, people might have noisy perceptual representations of exactly how flat the table is, the exact location of each block, what small disturbances might be happening in the environment, and so on. The absence of these sources of uncertainty in deterministic models can make them perform in a non-human-like manner.

While all the data presented in the paper is consistent with the possibility that people have a stochastic representation of gravity. It is possible that people have uncertainty over what unobservable forces a block tower might be under (e.g., wind, bumps to the table, etc). Therefore, even if you have a firm belief that gravity goes down, you may want to add noise in your simulations to account for the fact that, in the real world, gravity is almost never the only force acting on an object that has started to move. While the paper acknowledges that such an account would be mathematically equivalent, it does not acknowledge that this raises the question of whether people actually have stochastic representations of gravity.

This alternative account could be particularly important because I believe it might be a more accurate representation of what people believe. I may be wrong, but I believe that it is common to emphasize the probabilistic nature of the models and the importance of implementing forces as distributions (e.g., the concept of 'noisy newtons').

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> Through a set of experiments and model simulations, the authors tested whether the commonly assumed world model of gravity was a faithful replica of the physical world. They found that participants did not model gravity as a single, fixed vector for gravity but instead as a distribution of possible vectors. Surprisingly, the width of this distribution was quite large (~20 degrees). While previous accounts had suggested that this uncertainty was due to perceptual noise or an inferred external perturbation, the authors suggest that this uncertainty simply arises from a noisy distribution of the representation of gravity's direction. A reinforcement learning model with an initial uniform distribution for gravity's direction ultimately converged to a precision in the same order as the human participants, which lends support to the authors' conclusion and suggests that this distribution is learned through experience. What's more, further simulations suggest that representing gravity with such a wide distribution may balance speed and accuracy, providing a potentially normative explanation for the world model with gravity as a distribution.

Strengths:<br /> The authors present surprising findings in a relatively straightforward way in a now classic experimental task. They provide a normative explanation based on a resource-rational framework for why people may have a stochastic world model instead of a deterministic world model.

Weaknesses:<br /> Support for gravity being represented as a Gaussian distribution (stochastic world model), as opposed to perceptual uncertainty or (inferred) external perturbations, is from an RL model simulation. It would be more convincing if the authors could experimentally demonstrate that potential external perturbations did not affect the distribution of gravity.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> Previous studies suggest that humans may infer objects' stability through a world model that performs mental simulations with a priori knowledge of gravity acting upon objects. In this study, the authors test two alternative hypotheses about the nature of this a priori knowledge. According to the Natural Gravity assumption, the direction of gravity encoded in this world model is straight downwards as in the physical world. According to the alternative Mental Gravity assumption, that gravity direction is encoded in a Gaussian distribution, with the vertical direction as the maximum likelihood. They present two experiments and computer simulations as evidence in support of the Mental Gravity assumption. Their conclusion is that when the brain is tasked to determine the stability of a given structure it runs a mental simulation, termed Mental Gravity Simulation, which averages the estimated temporal evolutions of that structure arising from different gravity directions sampled from a Gaussian distribution.

Weaknesses:<br /> In spite of the fact that the Mental Gravity Simulation (MGS) seems to predict the data of the two experiments, it is an untenable hypothesis. I give the main reason for this conclusion by illustrating a simple thought experiment. Suppose you ask subjects to determine whether a single block (like those used in the simulations) is about to fall. We can think of blocks of varying heights. No matter how tall a block is, if it is standing on a horizontal surface it will not fall until some external perturbation disturbs its equilibrium. I am confident that most human observers would predict this outcome as well. However, the MSG simulation would not produce this outcome. Instead, it would predict a non-zero probability of the block to tip over. A gravitational field that is not perpendicular to the base has the equivalent effect of a horizontal force applied on the block at the height corresponding to the vertical position of the center of gravity. Depending on the friction determined by the contact between the base of the block and the surface where it stands there is a critical height where any horizontal force being applied would cause the block to fall while pivoting about one of the edges at the base (the one opposite to where the force has been applied). This critical height depends on both the size of the base and the friction coefficient. For short objects this critical height is larger than the height of the object, so that object would not fall. But for taller blocks, this is not the case. Indeed, the taller the block the smaller the deviation from a vertical gravitational field is needed for a fall to be expected. The discrepancy between this prediction and the most likely outcome of the simple experiment I have just outlined makes the MSG model implausible. Note also that a gravitational field that is not perpendicular to the ground surface is equivalent to the force field experienced by the block while standing on an inclined plane. For small friction values, the block is expected to slide down the incline, therefore another prediction of this MSG model is that when we observe an object on a surface exerting negligible friction (think of a puck on ice) we should expect that object to spontaneously move. But of course, we don't, as we do not expect tall objects that are standing to suddenly fall if left unperturbed. In summary, a stochastic world model cannot explain these simple observations.

The question remains as to how we can interpret the empirical data from the two experiments and their agreement with the predictions of the stochastic world model if we assume that the brain has internalized a vertical gravitational field. First, we need to look more closely at the questions posed to the subjects in the two experiments. In the first experiment, subjects are asked about how "normal" a fall of a block construction looks. Subjects seem to accept 50% of the time a fall is normal when the gravitational field is about 20 deg away from the vertical direction. The authors conclude that according to the brain, such an unusual gravitational field is possible. However, there are alternative explanations for these findings that do not require a perceptual error in the estimation of the direction of gravity. There are several aspects of the scene that may be misjudged by the observer. First, the 3D interpretation of the scene and the 3D motion of the objects can be inaccurate. Indeed, the simulation of a normal fall uploaded by the authors seems to show objects falling in a much weaker gravitational field than the one on Earth since the blocks seem to fall in "slow motion". This is probably because the perceived height of the structure is much smaller than the simulated height. In general, there are even more severe biases affecting the perception of 3D structures that depend on many factors, for instance, the viewpoint. Second, the distribution of weight among the objects and the friction coefficients acting between the surfaces are also unknown parameters. In other words, there are several parameters that depend on the viewing conditions and material composition of the blocks that are unknown and need to be estimated. The authors assume that these parameters are derived accurately and only that assumption allows them to attribute the observed biases to an error in the estimate of the gravitational field. Of course, if the direction of gravity is the only parameter allowed to vary freely then it is no surprise that it explains the results. Instead, a simulation with a titled angle of gravity may give rise to a display that is interpreted as rendering a vertical gravitational field while other parameters are misperceived. Moreover, there is an additional factor that is intentionally dismissed by the authors that is a possible cause of the fall of a stack of cubes: an external force. Stacks that are initially standing should not fall all of a sudden unless some unwanted force is applied to the construction. For instance, a sudden gust of wind would create a force field on a stack that is equivalent to that produced by a tilted gravitational field. Such an explanation would easily apply to the findings of the second experiment. In that experiment subjects are explicitly asked if a stack of blocks looks "stable". This is an ambiguous question because the stability of a structure is always judged by imagining what would happen to the structure if an external perturbation is applied. The right question should be: "do you think this structure would fall if unperturbed". However, if stability is judged in the face of possible external perturbations then a tall structure would certainly be judged as less stable than a short structure occupying the same ground area. This is what the authors find. What they consider as a bias (tall structures are perceived as less stable than short structures) is instead a wrong interpretation of the mental process that determines stability. If subjects are asked the question "Is it going to fall?" then tall stacks of sound structure would be judged as stable as short stacks, just more precarious.

The RL model used as a proof of concept for how the brain may build a stochastic prior for the direction of gravity is based on very strong and unverified assumptions. The first assumption is that the brain already knows about the force of gravity, but it lacks knowledge of the direction of this force of gravity. The second assumption is that before learning the brain knows the effect of a gravitational field on a stack of blocks. How can the brain simulate the effect of a non-vertical gravitational field on a structure if it has never observed such an event? The third assumption is that from the visual input, the brain is able to figure out the exact 3D coordinates of the blocks. This has been proven to be untrue in a large number of studies. Given these assumptions and the fact that the only parameters the RL model modifies through learning specify the direction of gravity, I am not surprised that the model produces the desired results.

Finally, the argument that the MGS is more efficient than the NGS model is based on an incorrect analysis of the results of the simulation. It is true that 80% accuracy is reached faster by the MGS model than the 95% accuracy level is reached by the NGS model. But the question is: how fast does the NGS model reach 80% accuracy (before reaching the plateau)?

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The authors made significant updates to Hippacampome.org including 50 new cell types.

Strengths:<br /> The authors have been thorough in basing their views on peer-reviewed literature. They have made the data highly accessible and the user has the ability to control what is included.

Weaknesses:<br /> There are many inconsistencies in the literature regarding cell types and how these are incorporated into hippocampome.org is not clear.

Properties are often a result of modeling and not biological data, and caveats to this approach, and other assumptions are unclear.

Several interneuron subtypes in the dentate gyrus do not appear to be listed, such as neurogliaform cells.

The nomenclature HIPROM should be distinguished or made synonymous with HIPP. Same for MOCAP and MOPP/HICAP.

Dorsal ventral and sex differences are not mentioned.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary and strengths:<br /> The authors have developed a helpful resource for the community regarding hippocampal cell types and their interactions from many perspectives. There have been many updates to hippocampome v1.0 to v1.12, that are nicely summarized and explained (e.g., Table 1). The content and impact are also presented (Fig. 4).

Weaknesses:<br /> My main comment is that it is not completely clear and/or it is a bit buried as to what makes this v2.0 (rather than v1.13). The title would seem to encompass it ('... enabling data-driven spiking neural network simulations...), but in the introduction, the authors seem to emphasize "50 newly identified neuron types...". Is it the case that launching network simulations (using CARLsim) was not possible up to v1.12? I don't think so? I think that this research advance is to announce and summarize the various updates and to demonstrate how network simulations can be easily done? If so, this should and could be made more clear so that the reader does not necessarily have to go through all the previous versions to understand what is 'special' or different about v2.0. This could perhaps be achieved by situating their tool and its goals relative to other efforts (e.g., blue brain project) that are mentioned in the Discussion?

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The authors aim to provide a multidisciplinary resource on the structural and physiological organization of the hippocampal system and make the available experimental data available for further theoretical work, providing tools to do so in a very flexible and user-friendly way. Since this is a new version of an already existing data-resource, the authors certainly reach their aim and fulfil expectations that the reader might have. The content of the database is as good as the original data, collected from the published knowledge-database, sometimes with the help of the original authors, and the overall quality depends further on how the data are curated by the team of authors and many others who helped them. That process is briefly described and more details are available in descriptions of previous versions and on the website. The data extraction, examples of how data can be used, and the part on attempts to model the hippocampus are exciting and open doors to new and exciting research opportunities.

Strengths:<br /> Excellent description with many outlined opportunities. Nicely illustrated and inviting to explore the online database.

Weaknesses:<br /> The figures are complex, containing a heavy information load with many abbreviations. You need some general knowledge of the system in order to grasp the enormous potential of what is provided.

Joint Public Review:

Summary: This study follows up on previous work showing a female-specific enhancer region of PAX1 is associated with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). This new analysis combines human GWAS analysis from multiple countries to identify a new AIS-associated coding variant in the COL11A1 gene. Two nonsynonymous variants were found to be significantly associated with AIS: MMP14 p.Asp273Asn and COL11A1 p.Pro1335Leu, the latter of which had the more robust association and remained significant when females were tested independent of males. Using a Pax1 knockout mouse they go on to find that PAX1 and Collagen XI protein are expressed in the intervertebral discs (IVDs) and robustly in the growth plate, showing that COL11A1 expression is reduced in Pax1 mutant growth plate. Moreover, other AIS-associated genes, Gpr126 and Sox6, were also reduced in Pax1 mutant mice, suggesting a common pathway is involved in AIS. The proposed implication of a Pax1-Col11a1-Mmp3 signaling axis modulated by estrogen signaling suggests a potential mechanism by which young women have more severe scoliosis than young men, as is observed in humans.

Strengths: This work integrates a large cohort of human genetic data from AIS patients and controls from diverse ethnic backgrounds, across the globe. This work attempts to functionally test their findings in vivo and by use of cell culture. The authors propose an interesting model which warrants in depth investigation.

Weaknesses: There are concerns regarding the candidacy of COL11A1 p.Pro1335Leu that need to be addressed and clarified. Many of the main functional work was done in cell culture and not in vivo. Moreover, the evidence linking COL11A1 p.Pro1153Leu to AIS is indirect, making unclear whether impaired COL11A1 function can cause scoliosis in the mouse model, thus diminishing the strength of the conclusions regarding the proposed pathogenicity of COL11A1 p.Pro1335Leu.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> In this manuscript, Seba et al., investigate the mechanism of chromosome organization by the MukBEF complex in E. coli. They use a combination of Hi-C and ChIP analysis to understand the steps of MukBEF regulation: its unloading from DNA (how MukBEF activity is prevented in the terminus regions of the chromosome by MatP), and its loading onto DNA (how DNA replication influences MukBEF association with the chromosome). Seba et al., induce chromosomal rearrangements to flip the sections of the ter region, thus perturbing matS site numbers and position. They find that MukBEF activity is prevented around matS sites, and that higher matS density has greater effect on MukBEF. Separately, using replication mutants and inducible MukBEF expression, they find that MukBEF can associate with the chromosome even in the absence of replication (as seen by the emergence of long-range contacts). However, ChIP data suggests that MukBEF binding to DNA is enriched on newly replicated DNA.

Strengths:<br /> Altogether, this work provides a valuable and comprehensive view of MukBEF-mediated chromosome organization, with insights on the mechanism of the exclusion of MukBEF from the terminus region of the chromosome. The use of the programmed genetic rearrangements is powerful, and allows the authors to provide clear and convincing evidence for MukBEF exclusion from ter by matS sites. It is particularly striking to see that MukBEF can promote long-range contacts even in chromosomal regions between two matS, but the complex is excluded from the matS 'zones'. Experiments using cells blocked for replication show that MukBEF can influence chromosome organization in the absence of replication as well. While previous studies have reported some evidence in support of both of the above conclusions, the experiments described here offer clear and direct demonstration of the same.

Limitations:<br /> A few control experiments are required to strengthen conclusions. Additionally, the discussion section is lacking many references and key papers have not been cited (paragraph 1 of discussion for example has no references). The possibility that SMC-ScpAB and MukBEF can act independent of replication has been suggested previously, but are not cited or discussed. Similarly, there is some evidence for SMC-ScpAB association with newly replicated DNA (PMID 21923769).

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> Chromosome organization in E. coli and related species ('transversal') deviates starkly from the pattern more commonly found in bacteria ('longitudinal'). The underlying mechanisms and the physiological roles, however, are not well understood. This manuscript by Seba et al. investigates the activity and regulation of MukBEF in chromosome folding in E. coli. Using a construct for inducible expression of MukBEF, the authors first demonstrate that the initiation of long-range chromosome contacts (likely by loop extrusion) is not restricted to few positions on the chromosome and rather widely distributed but excluding the replication terminus region. Using ChIP-Seq, the authors show that the distribution of MukBEF over the chromosome is consistent with widely distributed loading and moreover indicate a connection of chromosome folding and DNA replication with newly replicated DNA shower an increased tendency for MukBEF binding. To dissect this further, they then redistribute matS sites on the chromosome by a clever strategy based on large-scale transpositions. The results reveal that matS-free DNA segments undergo MukBEF dependent folding regardless of their position relative to the origin of replication, being consistent with a broad distributed loading of MukBEF. By fine-mapping with smaller transposition events, they show that few matS sites are sufficient to impede MukBEF activity. Surprisingly, however, E. coli and most related genomes harbor many matS sites, which are particularly highly concentrated near the chromosome dimer resolution dif site (Fig. 5).

Strengths:<br /> This is a well-executed and well-presented study. The findings show that the MatP/matS system acts locally and independently of DNA replication to restrict MukBEF in the replication terminus region. Few of the many matS sites are sufficient for MukBEF restriction. The main conclusions of the work are clear and well supported by the data.

Weaknesses:<br /> The biological relevance of MukBEF restriction from the replication terminus region remains unresolved. The authors could speculate on possible functions.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Seba et al. investigate whether chromosomal recruitment of the E. coli SMC complex MukBEF is initiated at a single site, how MukBEF activity is excluded from the replication terminus region, and whether its recruitment and activity depend on DNA replication. Upon induction of MukBEF, the authors find that chromosomal long-range contacts increase globally rather than from a single site. Using large-scale chromosome rearrangements, they show that matS sites can insulate separate areas of high MukBEF activity from each other. This suggests that MukBEF loads at multiple sites in the genome. Finally, the authors propose that MukBEF associates preferentially with newly replicated DNA, based on ChIP-seq experiments after DNA replication arrest.

The conclusions of the paper are mostly well supported by the data. The ratiometric contact analyses and range-of-contact analyses are compelling and nicely show the interplay between MukBEF and its proposed unloader MatP/matS. I particularly enjoyed the chromosome re-arrangement experiments, which lend strong support to the idea that MukBEF activity is independent of a centralized loading site.

The enrichment of MukBEF in newly replicated regions is somewhat less convincing, as the effect sizes are rather small and the background signal is unknown. The conclusion that matS density controls MukBEF activity is appealing, but would likely need additional support from more systematic studies. It is based on a comparison of only two strains (looking at different combinations of three matS sites), and the effect size is small. As it is, differences in matS sequence composition and genomic context cannot be factored out.

Overall, the work is an important advance in our understanding of bacterial chromosome organization. It will be of broad interest to chromosome biologists and bacterial cell biologists.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The authors set out to determine how chemical variation on kinase inhibitors determines the selection of Erk2 conformations and how inhibitor binding affects ERk2 structure and dynamics.

Strengths:<br /> The study is beautifully presented both verbally and visually. The NMR experiments and the HDX experiments complement each other for the study of Erk2 solution dynamics. X-ray crystallography of Erk2 complexes with inhibitors shows small but distinct structural changes that support the proposed model for the impact of inhibitor binding.

Weaknesses:<br /> A discussion of compound residence time for the different compounds and kinase constructs and how it could affect the very slow HDX rates might be helpful. For example, could any of the observed effects in Figure 4 be due to slow compound dissociation rather than slowed down kinase dynamics? What would be the implications?

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

The authors investigate the role of chirping in a species of weakly electric fish. They subject the fish to various scenarios and correlate the production of chirps with many different factors. They find major correlations between the background beat signals (continuously present during any social interactions) or some aspects of social and environmental conditions with the propensity to produce different types of chirps. By analyzing more specifically different aspects of these correlations they conclude that chirping patterns are related to navigation purposes and the need to localize the source of the beat signal (i.e. the location of the conspecific).

The study provides a wealth of interesting observation of behavior and much of this data constitute a useful dataset to document the patterns of social interactions in these fish. Some data, in particular the high propensity to chirp in cluttered environments, raises interesting questions. Their main hypothesis is a useful addition to the debate on the function of these chirps and is worth being considered and explored further. However, the data they provide does not support strong conclusion statements arguing that these chirps are used for localization purposes and is even less convincing at rejecting previously established hypotheses on the communication purpose of the chirps. I would suggest thoroughly revising the manuscript to provide a neutral description of the results and leaving any speculations and interpretations for the discussion where the authors should be careful to separate strongly supported hypotheses from more preliminary speculations. I detail below several instances where the argumentation and/or the analysis are flawed.

- They analyze chirp patterning and show that, most likely, a chirp by an individual is followed by a chirp in the same individual. They argue that it is rare that a chirp elicits a "response" in the other fish. Even if there are clearly stronger correlations between chirps in the same individual, they provide no statistical analysis that discards the existence of occasional "response" patterns. The fact that these are rare, and that the authors don't do an appropriate analysis of probabilities, leads to this unsupported conclusion.<br /> - One of the main pieces of evidence that chirps can be used to enhance conspecific localization is based on their "interference" measure. The measure is based on an analysis of "inter-peak-intervales". This in itself is a questionable choice. The nervous system encodes all parts of the stimulus, not just the peak, and disruption occurring at other phases of the beat might be as relevant. The interference will be mostly affected by the summed duration of intervals between peaks in the chirp AM. They do not explain why this varies with beat frequency. It is likely that the changes they see are simply an artifact of the simplistic measure. A clear demonstration that this measure is not adequate comes from the observation in Fig7E-H. They show that the interference value changes as the signal is weaker. This measure should be independent of the strength of the signal. The method is based on detecting peaks and quantifying the time between peaks. The only reason this measure could be affected by signal strength is if noisy recordings affect how the peak detection occurs. There is no way to argue that this phenomenon would happen the same way in the nervous system. Furthermore, they qualitatively argue that patterns of chirp production follow patterns of interference strength. No statistical demonstration is done. Even the qualitative appraisal is questionable. For example, they argue that there are relatively few chirps being produced for DFs of 60 or -60 Hz. But these are DF where they have only a very small sample size. The single pair of fish that they recorded at some of these frequencies might not have chirped by chance and a rigorous statistical analysis is necessary. Similarly, in Fig 5C they argue that the position of the chirps fall on areas of the graph where the interferences are strongest (darker blue) but this is far from obvious and, again, not proven.<br /> - They relate the angle at which one fish produces chirps relative to the orientation of the mesh enclosing. They argue that this is related to the orientation of electric field lines by doing a qualitative comparison with a simplified estimate of field lines. To be convincing this analysis should include a quantitative comparison using the exact same body position of the two fish when the chirps are emitted.<br /> -They show that the very vast majority of chirps in Fig 6 occur when the fish are within a few centimeters (e.g. very large first bin in Fig6E-Type2). This is a situation when the other fish signal will be strongest and localization will be the easiest. It is hard to understand why the fish would need a mechanism to enhance localization in these conditions (this is the opposite of difficult conditions e.g. the "cluttered" environment).<br /> - The argumentation aimed at rejecting the well-established role of chirp in communication is weak at best. First, they ignored some existing data when they argue that there is no correlation between chirping and behavioral interactions. Particularly, Hupe and Lewis (2008) showed a clear temporal correlation between chirps and a decrease in bites during aggressive encounters. It could be argued that this is "causal evidence" (to reuse their wording) that chirps cause a decrease in attacks by the receiver fish (see Fig 8B of the Hupe paper and associated significant statistics). Also, Oboti et al. argue that social interactions involve "higher levels of locomotion" which would explain the use of chirps since they are used to localize. But chirps are frequent in "chirp chamber" paradigms where no movement is involved. They also point out that social context covaries with beat frequency and thus that it is hard to distinguish which one is linked to chirping propensity and then say that it is hard to disentangle this from "biophysical features of EOD fields affecting detection and localization of conspecific fish". But they don't provide any proof that beat frequency affects detection and localization so their argument is not clear. Last, they argue that tests in one species shouldn't be extrapolated to other species. But many of the studies arguing for the role of chirps in communication was done on brown ghost. In conclusion of this point, they do not provide any strong argument that rejects the role of chirps as a communication signal. A perspective that would be better supported by their data and consistent with past research would be to argue that, in addition to a role in communication, chirps could sometimes be used to help localize conspecifics.<br /> -The discussion they provide on the possible mechanism by which chirps could help with localization of the conspecific is problematic. They imply that chirps cause a stronger response in the receptors. For most chirps considered here, this is not true. For a large portion of the beat frequencies shown in this paper, chirps will cause a de-synchronization of the receptors with no increase in firing rate. They cannot argue that this represents an enhanced response. They also discuss a role for having a broader frequency spectrum -during the chirp- in localization by making a parallel with pulse fish. There is no evidence that a similar mechanism could even work in wave-type fish.<br /> -They write the whole paper as if males and females had been identified in their experiments. Although EOD frequency can provide some guess of the sex the method is unreliable. We can expect a non-negligible percentage of error in assigning sex.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Studying the weakly electric brown ghost knifefish, the authors provide evidence that 'chirps' (brief modulations in the frequency and amplitude of the ongoing electric signal) function in active sensing (specifically homeoactive sensing) rather than communication. This is a behavior that has been very well studied, including numerous studies on the sensory coding of chirps and the neural mechanisms for chirp generation. Chirps are largely thought to function in communication behavior, so this alternative function is a very exciting possibility that could have a great impact on the field. The authors do provide convincing evidence that chirps may function in homeoactive sensing. However, their evidence arguing against a role for chirps in communication is not as strong, and neglects a large body of research. Ultimately, the manuscript has great potential but suffers from framing these two possibilities as mutually exclusive and dismissing evidence in favor of a communicative function.

(1) The specific underlying question of this study is not made clear in the abstract or introduction. It becomes apparent in reading through the manuscript that the authors seek to test the hypothesis that chirps function in active sensing (specifically homeoactive sensing). This should be made explicitly clear in both the abstract and introduction, along with the rationale for this hypothesis.

(2) My biggest issue with this manuscript is that it is much too strong in dismissing evidence that chirping correlates with context. This is captured in this sentence in the introduction, "We first show that the choice of different chirp types does not significantly correlate with any particular behavioral or social context." This very strong conclusion comes up repeatedly, and I disagree with it, for the following reasons:

In your behavioral observations, you found sex differences in chirping as well as differences between freely interacting and physically separated fish. Your model of chirp variability found that environmental experience, social experience, and beat frequency (DF) are the most important factors explaining chirp variability. Are these not all considered "behavioral or social context"? Beat frequency (DF) in particular is heavily downplayed as being a part of "context" but it is a crucial part of the context, as it provides information about the identity of the fish you're interacting with.

In your playback experiments, fish responded differently to small vs. large DFs, males chirped more than females, type 2 chirps became more frequent throughout a playback, and rises tended to occur at the end of a playback. These are all examples of context-dependent behavior.

Further, you only considered the identity of interacting fish or stimulated fish, not their behavior during the interaction or during playback. Such an analysis is likely beyond the scope of this study, but several other studies have shown correlations between social behavior and chirping. In the absence of such data here, it is too strong to claim that chirping is unrelated to context.

In summary, it is simply too strong to say that chirping does not correlate with context. Importantly, however, this does not detract from your hypothesis that chirping functions in homeoactive sensing. A given EOD behavior could serve both communication and homeoactive sensing. I actually suspect that this is quite common in electric fish. The two are not mutually exclusive, and there is no reason for you to present them as such. I recommend focusing more on the positive evidence for a homeoactive function and less on the negative evidence against a communication function.

(3) The results were generally challenging to follow. In the first 4 sections, it is not made clear what the specific question is, what the approach to addressing that question is, and what specific experiment was carried out (the last two sections of the results were much clearer). The independent variables (contexts) are not clearly established before presenting the results. Instead they are often mentioned in passing when describing the results. They come across as an unbalanced hodgepodge of multiple factors, and it is not made clear why they were chosen. This makes it challenging to understand why you did what you did, the results, and their implications. For each set of major results, I recommend: First, pose a clear question. Then, describe the general approach to answering that question. Next, describe the specifics of the experimental design, with a rationale that appeals to the general approach described. Finally, describe the specific results.

(4) Results: "We thus predicted that, if behavioral meaning can be attributed to different types of chirps, as posed by the prevailing view (e.g., Hagedorn and Heiligenberg, 1985; Larimer and MacDonald, 1968; Rose, 2004)..." It should be made clear why this is the prevailing view, and this description should likely be moved to the introduction. There is a large body of evidence supporting this view and it is important to be complete in describing it, especially since the authors seem to seek to refute it.

(5) I am not convinced of the conclusion drawn by the analysis of chirp transitions. The transition matrices show plenty of 1-2 and 2-1 transitions occurring. Further, the cross-correlation analysis only shows that chirp timing between individuals is not phase-locked at these small timescales. It is entirely possible that chirp rates are correlated between interacting individuals, even if their precise timing is not.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> This important paper provides the best-to-date characterization of chirping in weakly electric fish using a large number of variables. These include environment (free vs divided fish, with or without clutter), breeding state, gender, intruder vs resident, social status, locomotion state and social and environmental experience, as well as with playback experiments. It applies state-of-the-art methods for reducing dimensionality and finding patterns of correlation between different kinds of variables (factor analysis, K-means). The exceptional strength of the evidence, collated from a large number of trials with many controls, leads to the conclusion that a number of commonly accepted truths about which variable affects chirping must be carefully rewritten or nuanced. Based on their extensive analyses, the authors suggest that chirps are mainly used as probes that help detect beats and objects.

Strengths:<br /> The work is based on completely novel recordings using interaction chambers. The amount of new data and associated analyses is simply staggering, and yet, well organized in presentation. The study further evaluates the electric field strength around a fish (via modelling with the boundary element method) and how its decay parallels the chirp rate, thereby relating the above variables to electric field geometry.

The main conclusions are that the lack of any significant behavioural correlates for chirping, and the lack of temporal patterning in chirp time series, cast doubt on a communication goal for most chirps. Rather, the key determinants of chirping are the difference frequency between two interacting conspecifics as well as individual subjects' environmental and social experience. These conclusions by themselves will be hugely useful to the field. They will also allow scientists working on other "communication" systems to at least reconsider, and perhaps expand the precise goal of the probes used in those senses. There are a lot of data summarized in this paper, and thorough referencing to past work. For example, the paper concludes that there is a lack of evidence for stereotyped temporal patterning of chirp time series, as well as of sender-received chirp transitions beyond the known increase in chirp frequency during an interaction.

The alternative hypotheses that arise from the work are that chirps are mainly used as environmental probes for better beat detection and processing and object localization.

The authors also advance the interesting idea that the sinusoidal frequency modulations caused by chirps are the electric fish's solution to the minute (and undetectable by neural wetware) echo-delays available to it, due to the propagation of electric fields at the speed of light in water.

Weaknesses:<br /> My main criticism is that the alternative putative role for chirps as probe signals that optimize beat detection could be better developed. The paper could be clearer as to what that means precisely. And there is an egg-and-chicken type issue as well, namely, that one needs a beat in order to "chirp" the beating pattern, but then how does chirping optimize the detection of the said beat? Perhaps the authors mean (as they wrote elsewhere in the paper) that the chirps could enhance electrosensory responses to the beat.

A second criticism is that the study links the beat detection to underwater object localization. I did not see a sufficiently developed argument in this direction, nor how the data provided support for this argument. It is certainly possible that the image on the fish's body of an object in the environment will be slightly modified by introducing a chirp on the waveform, as this may enhance certain heterogeneities of the object in relation to its environment. The thrust of this argument seems to derive more from the notion of Fourier analysis with pulse type fish (and radar theory more generally) that the higher temporal frequencies in the beat waveform induced by the chirp will enable a better spatial resolution of objects. It remains to be seen whether this is significant.

I would also have liked to see a proposal for new experiments that could test these possible new roles.

The authors should recall for the readers the gist of Bastian's 2001 argument that the chirp "can adjust the beat frequency to levels that are better detectable" in the light of their current. Further, at the beginning of the "Probing with chirps" section, the 3rd way in which chirps could improve conspecific localization mentions the phase-shifting of the EOD. The authors should clarify whether they mean that the tuberous receptors and associated ELL/toral circuitry could deal with that cue, or that the T_unit pathway would be needed?

On p.17 I don't understand what is meant by most chirps being produced possibly aligned with the field lines, since field lines are everywhere. And what is one to conclude from the comparison of Fig.6D and 7A? Likewise it was not clear what is meant by chirps having a detectable effect on randomly generated beats.

In the section on Inconsistencies between behaviour and hypothesized signal meaning, the authors could perhaps nuance the interpretation of the results further in the context of the unrealistic copy of natural stimuli using EOD mimics. In particular, Kelly et al. 2008 argued that electrode placement mattered in terms of representation of a mimic fish onto the body of a real fish, and thus, if I properly understand the set up here, the movement would cause the mimic to vary in quality. This may nevertheless be a small confounding issue.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Numerous neurodegenerative diseases are thought to be driven by the aggregation of proteins into insoluble filaments known as "amyloids". Despite decades of research, the mechanism by which proteins convert from the soluble to insoluble state is poorly understood. In particular, the initial nucleation step is has proven especially elusive to both experiments and simulation. This is because the critical nucleus is thermodynamically unstable, and therefore, occurs too infrequently to directly observe. Furthermore, after nucleation much faster processes like growth and secondary nucleation dominate the kinetics, which makes it difficult to isolate the effects of the initial nucleation event. In this work Kandola et al. attempt to surmount these obstacles using individual yeast cells as microscopic reaction vessels. The large number of cells, and their small size, provides the statistics to separate the cells into pre- and post-nucleation populations, allowing them to obtain nucleation rates under physiological conditions. By systematically introducing mutations into the amyloid-forming polyglutamine core of huntingtin protein, they deduce the probable structure of the amyloid nucleus. This work shows that, despite the complexity of the cellular environment, the seemingly random effects of mutations can be understood with a relatively simple physical model. Furthermore, their model shows how amyloid nucleation and growth differ in significant ways, which provides testable hypotheses for probing how different steps in the aggregation pathway may lead to neurotoxicity.

In this study Kandola et al. probe the nucleation barrier by observing a bimodal distribution of cells that contain aggregates; the cells containing aggregates have had a stochastic fluctuation allowing the proteins to surmount the barrier, while those without aggregates have yet to have a fluctuation of suitable size. The authors confirm this interpretation with the selective manipulation of the PIN gene, which provides an amyloid template that allows the system to skip the nucleation event.

In simple systems lacking internal degrees of freedom (i.e., colloids or rigid molecules) the nucleation barrier comes from a significant entropic cost that comes from bringing molecules together. In large aggregates this entropic cost is balanced by attractive interactions between the particles, but small clusters are unable to form the extensive network of stabilizing contacts present in the larger aggregates. Therefore, the initial steps in nucleation incur an entropic cost without compensating attractive interactions (this imbalance can be described as a surface tension). When internal degrees of freedom are present, such as the conformational states of a polypeptide chain, there is an additional contribution to the barrier coming from the loss of conformational entropy required to the adopt aggregation-prone state(s). In such systems the clustering and conformational processes do not necessarily coincide, and a major challenge studying nucleation is to separate out these two contributions to the free energy barrier. Surprisingly, Kandola et al. find that the critical nucleus occurs within a single molecule. This means that the largest contribution to the barrier comes from the conformational entropy cost of adopting the beta-sheet state. Once this state is attained, additional molecules can be recruited with a much lower free energy barrier.

There are several considerations in interpreting this result. First, the height of the nucleation barrier(s) comes from the relative strength of the entropic costs compared to the binding affinities. This balance determines how large a nascent nucleus must grow before it can form interactions comparable to a mature aggregate. In amyloid nuclei the first three beta strands form immature contacts consisting of either side chain or backbone contacts, whereas the fourth strand is the first that is able to form both kinds of contacts (as in a mature fibril). This study used relatively long polypeptides of 60 amino acids. This is greater than the 20-40 amino acids found in amyloid-forming molecules like ABeta or IAPP. As a result, Kandola et al.'s molecules are able to fold enough times to create four beta strands and generate mature contacts intramolecularly. This authors make the plausible claim that these intramolecular folds explain the well-known length threshold (L~35) observed in polyQ diseases. The intramolecular folds reduce the importance of clustering multiple molecules together and increase the importance of the conformational states. Similarly, manipulating the sequence or molecular concentrations will be expected to manipulate the relative magnitude of the binding affinities and the clustering entropy, which will shift the relative heights of the entropic barriers.

The authors make an important point that the structure of the nucleus does not necessarily resemble that of the mature fibril. They find that the critical nucleus has a serpentine structure that is required by the need to form four beta strands to get the first mature contacts. However, this structure comes at a cost because residues in the hairpins cannot form strong backbone or zipper interactions. Mature fibrils offer a beta sheet template that allows incoming molecules to form mature contacts immediately. Thus, it is expected that the role of the serpentine nucleus is to template a more extended beta sheet structure that is found in mature fibrils.

A second point of consideration is the striking homogeneity of the nucleus structure they describe. This homogeneity is likely to be somewhat illusory. Homopolymers, like polyglutamine, have a discrete translational symmetry, which implies that the hairpins needed to form multiple beta sheets can occur at many places along the sequence. The asparagine residues introduced by the authors place limitations on where the hairpins can occur, and should be expected to increase structural homogeneity. Furthermore, the authors demonstrate that polyglutamine chains close to the minimum length of ~35 will have strict limitations on where the folds must occur in order to attain the required four beta strands.

A novel result of this work is the observation of multiple concentration regimes in the nucleation rate. Specifically, they report a plateau-like regime at intermediate regimes in which the nucleation rate is insensitive to protein concentration. The authors attribute this effect to the "self-poisoning" phenomenon observed in growth of some crystals. This is a valid comparison because the homogeneity observed in NMR and crystallography structures of mature fibrils resemble a one-dimensional crystal. Furthermore, the typical elongation rate of amyloid fibrils (on the order of one molecule per second) is many orders of magnitude slower than the molecular collision rate (by factors of 10^6 or more), implying that the search for the beta-sheet state is very slow. This slow conformational search implies the presence of deep kinetic traps that would be prone to poisoning phenomena. However, the observation of poisoning in nucleation during nucleation is striking, particularly in consideration of the expected disorder and concentration sensitivity of the nucleus. Kandola et al.'s structural model of an ordered, intramolecular nucleus explains why the internal states responsible for poisoning are relevant in nucleation.

To achieve these results the authors used a novel approach involving a systematic series of simple sequences. This is significant because, while individual experiments showed seemingly random behavior, the randomness resolved into clear trends with the systematic approach. These trends provided clues to build a model and guide further experiments.

There has been discussion in the review process about whether a monomeric nucleus is consistent with established properties of huntingtin aggregation. I do not see a problem with an energetically unfavorable conformational state preceding a concentration-dependent growth step. The authors make the case for this sequence using a schematic free energy landscape (Fig 6) that has many similarities to a free energy landscape derived from models of polyQ nucleation (Phan et al. 2022, see Fig. 6). The theory does not consider molecules large enough to form the conformational state described by Kandola et al., but the transition state is otherwise very similar.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Kandola et al. explore the important and difficult question regarding the initiating event that triggers (nucleates) amyloid fibril growth in glutamine-rich domains. The researchers use a fluorescence technique that they developed, dAMFRET, in a yeast system where they can manipulate the expression level over several orders of magnitude, and they can control the length of the polyglutamine domain as well as the insertion of interfering non-glutamine residues. Using flow cytometry, they can interrogate each of these yeast 'reactors' to test for self-assembly.

In the introduction, the authors provide a fairly thorough yet succinct review of the relevant literature into the mechanisms of polyglutamine-mediated aggregation over the last two decades, as well as a fairly clear description of the experimental techniques they developed.

Their assay shows that the fraction of cells with AmFRET signal increases strongly with an increase in polyQ length, with a threshold around 35-40 glutamines. This roughly correlates with the Q-length dependence of disease. The experiments in which asparagine or other amino acids are inserted at variable positions in the glutamine repeat are creative and thorough, and the data along with the simulations provide compelling support for the proposed Q zipper model. The experiments are strongly supportive of a model where formation of the beta-sheet nucleus is within a monomer. This is a potentially important result, as there are conflicting data in the literature as to whether the nucleus in polyQ is monomer.

The authors present convincing data that there are differences in the structural stability of their "QU" versus "QB" aggregates. However, the conclusion that "QB" must have multilamellar architecture versus "QU" was feasible but less compelling.

The authors present intriguing data showing that amyloid formation does not monotonically increase with increasing concentration, and their conclusion that high concentrations of polyQ can 'self-poison' amyloid growth is supported by the experimental data. The discussion surrounding the mechanism by which 'self-poisoning' occurs is confusing. The authors variously discuss that soluble oligomers must be the inhibitory species, that dead-end products of Q zipper nuclei are the inhibitory species, or that self-poisoning occurs because conformational conversion at the templating surface is slow relative to the rate of arrival of new molecules to the surface. The data seem consistent with an argument that, at high concentrations, non-structured polyQ oligomers form which interfere with elongation into structured amyloid assemblies - but it is not clear why such oligomers would be zippers.

Overall, this is a very valuable and thorough exploration of the fundamental question as to the nature and identity of the nucleating species in polyglutamine aggregation.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The EAG family of ion channels is associated with many pathological conditions and are considered a target for the treatment of disease such as cancer. In this study, Abdelaziz et. al. examine the role of interaction between PAS domain and CNBHD in voltage-dependent gating of EAG channels. Based on their data, the authors conclude that they have identified a hidden open state that is only accessible in the mutant channels but not in the wild type. This hidden open state O1 can distinguished from the canonical open state O2 because it exhibits very different voltage-dependence. Although it is clear that the kinetics of these two open states are different, I have concerns about whether the data presented in this manuscript rule out alternate explanations. The idea that PAS domain deletions uncover a hidden open state is an extraordinary claim and if established, it has the potential to open a completely new approach to studying early gating transitions of these channels.

Strengths:<br /> 1. The study has identified a number of potentially interesting mutants that modulate voltage-dependent gating.<br /> 2. The discovery of a hidden open state due to mutations in the cytosolic domains is quite astonishing.

Weaknesses:<br /> 1. WT EAG currents are far right shifted compared to previously published data. It is not clear whether it is the recording conditions but at 0 mV very few channels are open. Compare this with recordings reported previously of the same channel hEAG1 by Gail Robertson's lab ( Zhao et. al. (2017) JGP). In that case, most of the channels are open at 0 mV. There must be at least 25 mV shift in voltage-dependence. These differences are unusually large.

2. In most of the mutants, O2 state becomes more prevalent at potentials above +50 mV. At these potentials, endogenous voltage-dependent currents are often observed in xenopus oocytes. The observed differences between the various mutants might simply be a function of the expression level of the channel versus endogenous currents.

3. Voltage-dependence of the kinetics of WT currents appears a bit strange. Why is the voltage-dependence saturated at 0 mV even though very few channels have activated at that point? I cannot imagine any kinetic model that can lead to such unusual voltage-dependence of kinetics.

4. One of the other concerns I have is that in many cases, it is clear that the pulse is too short to measure steady-state voltage-dependence. For instance, the currents in -160 mV and -100 mV in Figure 6A and 6B are not saturated.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The present manuscript by Reham Abdelaziz and colleagues addresses the gating of Kv10.1, which belongs to the KCNH gene family and contains other subfamilies such as Kv11 (ERG) and Kv12 (ELK). They all have fundamental physiological roles, from cardiac repolarization to modulation of neuronal excitability and cancer physiology. They have a non-domain swapped architecture at the molecular level; both voltage and Ca-CaM modulate the channel function. They contain an intracellular gating ring formed by a PAS domain (in the N-term) that interacts intimately with the cNBHD (C-term) of the neighbor subunit but also with the cytosolic part of the voltage sensor domain and the C-linker. Mutations in the N- or C- terminus modify the gating dramatically. This complex network of interactions makes the cytosolic section and the PAS domain in particular, an alluring part of the channel to study as responsible for the coupling between the movements of the voltage sensor and the gating ring.

In this paper, Reham Abdelaziz and colleagues address a fundamental question of how in the Kv10.1 channels, the movement of the voltage sensor is coupled to the intracellular gating ring rotation to make the channel conduct ions. The authors perform a series of deletions and mutations in the N-terminal section of the channel (PAS domain) and in the C-terminus (cNHBD) and observe a biphasic behavior on the modified EAG channels that they interpret as two populations of open states, one of them not visible in the WT and only available because of the mutations introduced. While this is a fascinating hypothesis and it fits with the depolarizing range of potentials of the WT channels, there are some issues that, if addressed, will make this work very valuable for biophysicists and molecular physiologists interested in voltage-gated ion channels.

Strengths:<br /> The work presented addresses one of this channel's most fascinating and challenging features in the KCNH family. The authors use adequate mutations and electrophysiological techniques to address the questions they are trying to answer. They help them explore the behavior of the channels and build a Markov model to understand the underlying mechanism.

Weaknesses:<br /> Although very well established, the experimental conditions used in the present manuscript introduce uncertainties, weakening their conclusions and complicating the interpretation of the results. The authors performed most of their functional studies in Cl-based solutions that can become a non-trivial issue when the range of voltages explored extends to very depolarizing potentials such as +120mV. Oocytes endogenously express Ca2+-activated Cl- channels that will rectify Cl- at very depolarizing potentials -due to an increase in the driving force- and contribute dramatically to the current's amplitude observed at the test pulse in the voltage ranges where the authors identify the second open state.

The authors propose a two-layer Markov model with two open states approximating their results. However, the results obtained with the mutants suggest an inactivated state accessible from closed states and a change in the equilibrium between the close/inactivated/open states that could also explain the observed results; therefore, other models could approximate their data.

That said, if the results obtained by the authors get confirmed under different experimental conditions in the absence of Cl-, this present work could be instrumental in understanding the gating mechanisms of the KCNH family.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Gating of Kv10 channels is unique because it involves coupling between non-domain swapped voltage-sensing domains, a domain-swapped cytoplasmic ring assembly formed by the N- and C-termini, and the pore domain. Recent structural data suggests that activation of the voltage sensing domain relieves a steric hindrance to pore opening, but the contribution of the cytoplasmic domain to gating is still not well understood. This aspect is of particular importance because proteins like Calmodulin interact with the cytoplasmic domain to regulate channel activity. The effects of Calmodulin (CaM) in WT and mutant channels with disrupted cytoplasmic gating ring assemblies are contradictory, resulting in inhibition or activation, respectively. The underlying mechanism for these discrepancies is not understood. In the present manuscript, Reham Abdelaziz and collaborators use electrophysiology, biochemistry, and mathematical modeling to explore the mechanistic effects on gating of various mutations and deletions that disrupt inter-subunit interactions at the cytoplasmic gating ring assembly and the consequences for channel modulation by CaM. From the beginning, it becomes challenging for non-experts to grasp the structural basis of the perturbations that are introduced (ΔPASCap and E600R), because no structural data or schematic cartoons are provided to illustrate the rationale for those deletions or their potential mechanistic effects. In addition, the lack of additional structural information or illustrations, and a somewhat confusing discussion of the structural data, make it challenging for a reader to reconcile the experimental data and mathematical model with a particular structural mechanism for gating, limiting the impact of the work.

By expressing mutants in oocytes and recording currents using Two Electrode Voltage-Clamp (TEV), it is found that both ΔPASCap and E600R mutants have biphasic voltage-activation curves, with two clear components contributing to activation and deactivation kinetics. Notably, the first component involving activation occurs at voltages where WT channels are mostly closed. Larger deletions at the N-terminus that further disrupt the cytoplasmic gating ring assembly accentuate the first component by heavily disfavoring the second one. The data can be well described by three components involving a closed state and two open states O1 and O2, in which the second component O2 is the one affected by the mutations and deletions. Based on the structural data, the first component is hypothesized to be associated with voltage sensor activation, whereas the second component is associated with conformational changes at the cytoplasmic ring. Consistent with this interpretation, a deletion construct where the covalent link between the voltage sensor and pore has been severed is shown to primarily affect that first component. Also consistent with the first component involving voltage-sensor activation, it is found that divalent cations that are known to stabilize the voltage sensor in its most deactivated conformations, shift the occupancy of the first component to more depolarizing potentials. Activation towards and closure from the first component is slow, whereas channels close rapidly from O2. A rapid alternating pulse protocol is used to take advantage of the difference in activation and deactivation kinetics between the two open components in the mutants and thus drive an increasing number of channels toward state O1. Currents activated by the alternating protocol reached larger amplitudes than those elicited by a long depolarization to the same voltage. This finding is interpreted as an indication that the first component (O1) has a larger conductance than the second (O2). It is shown that conditioning pulses to very negative voltages results in currents that are larger and activate more slowly than those elicited at the same voltage but starting from less negative conditioning pulses. In voltage-activated curves, the component corresponding to state O1 is shown to be favored by increasingly negative conditioning voltages as compared to less negative ones. This is interpreted as indicating that the first open component O1 is primarily accessed from so-called 'deeply closed' states in which voltage sensors are in their most deactivated position(s). Consistently, a mutation that destabilizes these deactivated states is shown to largely suppress the first component in voltage-activation curves for both ΔPASCap and E600R channels. It is also shown that stimulating calcium entry into the oocytes with ionomycin and thapsigargin, which is assumed to enhance CaM-dependent modulation, results in preferential potentiation of the first component in ΔPASCap and E600R, and this potentiation is attenuated by including an additional mutation that disfavors deeply closed states where voltage sensors are (mostly) deactivated. Together, these results are interpreted as an indication that calcium-CaM preferentially stabilizes O1 in mutant channels, thus favoring activation, whereas in WT channels lacking occupancy of O1, CaM stabilizes closed states and is therefore inhibitory. Moreover, it is found that the potentiation of ΔPASCap and E600R by CaM is more strongly attenuated by mutations in the channel that disrupt interaction with the C-terminal lobe of CaM than mutations affecting interaction with the N-terminal lobe. Finally, a mathematical model is proposed consisting of two layers involving two activation steps for the voltage sensor, and one conformational change in the cytoplasmic gating ring - completion of both sets of conformational changes is required to access state O2, but accessing state O1 only requires completion of the first voltage-sensor activation step in the four subunits. The model qualitatively reproduces most major findings on the mutants.

There are several concerns associated with the analysis and interpretations that are provided. First, the conductance-voltage (G-V) relations for the mutants do not seem to saturate, and the absolute open probability is not quantified for any mutant under any condition. This makes it impossible to quantitatively compare the relative amplitudes of the two components because the amplitude of the second component remains undetermined. This makes it challenging to interpret results involving perturbations that affect the relative occupancy of O1 and O2, such as those in Figures 2, 6, and 7, and also raises concerns about the extent to which model parameters can be constrained. This issue is made even more serious by the observation that the currents in both key mutants (ΔPASCap and E600R) are extremely slow and do not appear to reach steady-state over the intervals that are studied. This reduces confidence in the parameters associated with G-V relations, as the shape and position of both components might change significantly if longer pulses were used. This is not addressed or acknowledged in the manuscript. Further, because the mutant channel currents do not saturate at the most positive potentials and time intervals examined, the kinetic characterization based on reaching 80% of the maximum seems inappropriate, because the 100% mark is arbitrary. Further, the kinetics for some of the other examined mutants (e.g. those in Fig. 2A) are not shown, making it difficult to assess the extent to which the data could be affected by having been measured before full equilibration. There are additional aspects associated with gating kinetics that are not appropriately explored. For example, I would expect that the enhanced current amplitudes from Figure 5 are only transient, ultimately reaching a smaller steady-state current magnitude that depends only on the stimulation voltage and is independent of the pre-pulse. The entire time course including the rise-time and decay is not examined experimentally. This raises concern on whether occupancy of state O1 might be overestimated under some experimental conditions if a fraction of the occupancy is only transient. The mathematical model is not utilized to examine some of these slower relaxations - this may be because the model does not reproduce these slow processes, which would represent a serious shortcoming given that the slow kinetics appear to be intrinsic to transitions around state O1. The significance of the results with the Δ2-10.L341Split is unclear. First, structural as well as functional data has established that the coupling of the voltage sensor and pore does not entirely rely on the S4-S5 linker, and thus the Split construct could still retain coupling through other mechanisms, which is consistent with the prominent voltage dependence that is observed. If both state O1 and O2 require voltage sensor activation, it is unclear why the Split construct would affect state O1 primarily, as suggested in the manuscript, as opposed to decreasing occupancy of both open states.

The figure legends and text do not describe which solutions exactly were utilized for each experiment, and the rationale for choosing some solutions over others is not properly explained. The reversal potential for solutions used to measure voltage-activation curves falls right at the spot where occupancy of the first component peaks (e.g. see Figure 1B). Because no zero-current levels are shown on the current traces, it becomes very hard to determine which voltages correspond to each of the currents (see Fig. 1A). It is unclear whether any artifacts could have been introduced to the mutant activation curves at voltages close to the reversal potential. One key assumption that is not well-supported by the data pertains to the difference in single-channel conductance between states O1 and O2 - no analysis or discussion is provided on whether the data could also be well described by an alternative model in which O1 and O2 have the same conductance. No additional experimental evidence is provided related to the difference in conductance, which represents a key aspect of the mathematical model utilized to interpret the data. The CaM experiments are potentially very interesting and could have wide physiological relevance. However, the approach utilized to activate CaM is indirect and could result in additional non-specific effects on the oocytes that could affect the results.

The description of the mathematical model that is provided is difficult to follow, and some key aspects are left unclear, such as the precise states from which state O1 can be accessed, and whether there is any direct connectivity between states O1 and O2 - different portions of the text appear to give contradictory information regarding these points. Several rate constants other than those explicitly mentioned to represent voltage sensor activation are also assigned a voltage dependence - the mechanistic basis of that voltage dependence is unclear. Finally, a clear mechanistic explanation for the full range of effects that the ΔPASCap and E600R mutants have on channel function is lacking, as well as a detailed description of how those newly uncovered transitions would influence the activity of the WT channel; this latter point is important when considering whether the findings in the manuscript advance our understanding of the gating mechanism of Kv10 channels in general, or are specific to the particular mutants that are studied. It is unclear, for example, how both the mutation or the deletion at the cytoplasmic gating ring enable conduction by state O1, especially when considering the hypothesis put forward in this study that transition to O1 exclusively involves transitions by the voltage sensor and not the cytoplasmic gating ring. It is also not clearly described whether a non-conducting state with the equivalent state-connectivity as O1 can be accessed in WT channels, or if a state like O1 can only be accessed in the mutant channels. Importantly, if a non-conducting state with the same connectivity to O1 were to be accessed in WT channels, it would be expected that an alternating pulse protocol as in Fig. 4 would result in progressively decreasing currents as the occupancy of the non-conducting state equivalent to O1 is increased. Because this is not the case, it means that mutation and deletion cause additional perturbations on the gating energetics relative to WT, which are not clearly fleshed out.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

The current manuscript provides a timely contribution to the ongoing discussion about the mechanism of the apical sodium/bile acid transporter (ASBT) transporters. Recent structures of the mammalian ASBT transporters exhibited a substrate binding mode with few interactions with the core domain (classically associated with substrate binding), prompting an unusual proposal for the transport mechanism. Early structures of ASBT homologues from bacteria also exhibit unusual substrate binding in which the core substrate binding domain is less engaged than expected. Due to the ongoing questions of how substrate binding and mechanism are linked in these transporters, the authors set out to deepen our understanding of a model ABST homolog from bacteria N. meningitidis (ABST-NM).

The premise of the current paper is that the bacterial ASBT homologs are probably not physiological bile acid transporters, and that structural elucidation of a natively transported substrate might provide better mechanistic information. In the current manuscript, the authors revisit the first BASS homologue to be structurally characterized, ABST-NM. Based on bacteriological assays in the literature, the authors identify the coenzyme A precursor pantoate as a more likely substrate for ABST-NM than taurocholate, the substrate in the original structure. A structure of ASBT-NM with pantoate exhibits interesting differences in structure. The structures are complemented with MD simulations, and the authors propose that the structures are consistent with a classical elevator transport mechanism.

The structural experiments are convincing. The binding and molecular dynamics experiments provide intriguing insights into the transporter's conformational changes. However, it is nonetheless a soft spot in the story that a transport assay is not readily available for this substrate. Mechanistic proposals, like the proposed role of T112 in unlocking the transporter, would be better supported by transport data.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

The manuscript starts with a demonstration of pantoate binding to ASBTnm using a thermostability assay and ITC, and follows with structure determinations of ASBTnm with or without pantoate. The structure of ASBTnm in the presence of pantoate pinpoints the binding site of pantoate to the "crossover" region formed by partially unwinded helices TMs 4 and 9. Binding of pantoate induces modest movements of side chain and backbone atoms at the crossover region that are consistent with providing coordination of the substrate. The structures also show movement of TM1 that opens the substrate binding site to the cytosol and mobility of loops between the TMs. MD simulations of the ASBT structure embedded in lipid bilayer suggests a stabilizing effect of the two sodium ions that are known to co-transport with the substrate. Binding study on pantoate analogs further demonstrate the specificity of pantoate as a substrate.

Overall, the structural, functional and computational studies are solid and rigorous, and the conclusions are well justified. In addition, the authors discussed the significance of the current study in a broader perspective relevant to recent structures of mammalian BASS members.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

The manuscript describes new ligand-bound structures within the larger bile acid sodium symporter family (BASS). This is the primary advance in the manuscript, together with molecular simulations describing how sodium and the bile acids sit in the structure when thermalized. What I think is fairly clear is that the ligands are more stable when the sodiums are present, with a marked reduction in RMSD over the course of repeated trajectories. This would be consistent with a transport model where sodium ions bind first, and then the bile acid binds, followed by a conformational change to another state where the ligands unbind.

While the authors mention that BASS transporters are thought to undergo an elevator transport mechanisms, this is not tested here. In my reading, all the crystal structures belong to the same conformational state in the overall transport cycle, and the simulations do not make an attempt to induce a transition on accessible simulation timescales. Instead, there is a morph between two inward facing states.

The focus is on what kinds of substrates bind to this transporter, interrogating this with isothermal calorimetry together with mutations. With a Kd in the micromolar range, even the best binder, pantoate, actually isn't a particularly tight binder in the pharmaceutical sense. For a transporter, tight binding is not actually desirable, since the substrate needs to be able to leave after conformational change places it in a position accessible to the other side.

The structure and simulation analysis falls into the mainstream of modern structural biology work.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The manuscript proposes an alternative method by SDS-PAGE calibration of Halo-Myo10 signals to quantify myosin molecules at specific subcellular locations, in this specific case filopodia, in epifluorescence datasets compared to the more laborious and troublesome single molecule approaches. Based on these preliminary estimates, the authors developed further their analysis and discussed different scenarios regarding myosin 10 working models to explain intracellular diffusion and targeting to filopodia.

Strengths:<br /> Overall, the paper is elegantly written and the data analysis is appropriately presented.

Weaknesses:<br /> While the methodology is intriguing in its descriptive potential and could be the beginning of an interesting story, a good portion of the paper is dedicated to the discussion of hypothetical working mechanisms to explain myosin diffusion, localization, and decoration of filopodial actin that is not accompanied by the mandatory gain/loss of function studies required to sustain these claims.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The paper sought to determine the number of myosin 10 molecules per cell and localized to filopodia, where they are known to be involved in formation, transport within, and dynamics of these important actin-based protrusions. The authors used a novel method to determine the number of molecules per cell. First, they expressed HALO tagged Myo10 in U20S cells and generated cell lysates of a certain number of cells and detected Myo10 after SDS-PAGE, with fluorescence and a stained free method. They used a purified HALO tagged standard protein to generate a standard curve which allowed for determining Myo10 concentration in cell lysates and thus an estimate of the number of Myo10 molecules per cell. They also examined the fluorescence intensity in fixed cell images to determine the average fluorescence intensity per Myo10 molecule, which allowed the number of Myo10 molecules per region of the cell to be determined. They found a relatively small fraction of Myo10 (6%) localizes to filopodia. There are hundreds of Myo10 in each filopodia, which suggests some filopodia have more Myo10 than actin binding sites. Thus, there may be crowding of Myo10 at the tips, which could impact transport, the morphology at the tips, and dynamics of the protrusions themselves. Overall, the study forms the basis for a novel technique to estimate the number of molecules per cell and their localization to actin-based structures. The implications are broad also for being able to understand the role of myosins in actin protrusions, which is important for cancer metastasis and wound healing.

Strengths:<br /> The paper addresses an important fundamental biological question about how many molecular motors are localized to a specific cellular compartment and how that may relate to other aspects of the compartment such as the actin cytoskeleton and the membrane. The paper demonstrates a method of estimating the number of myosin molecules per cell using the fluorescently labeled HALO tag and SDS-PAGE analysis. There are several important conclusions from this work in that it estimates the number of Myo10 molecules localized to different regions of the filopodia and the minimum number required for filopodia formation. The authors also establish a correlation between number of Myo10 molecules filopodia localized and the number of filopodia in the cell. There is only a small % of Myo10 that tip localized relative to the total amount in the cell, suggesting Myo10 have to be activated to enter the filopodia compartment. The localization of Myo10 is log-normal, which suggest a clustering of Myo10 is a feature of this motor.

Weaknesses:<br /> One main critique of this work is that the Myo10 was overexpressed. Thus, the amount in the cell body compared to the filopodia is difficult to compare to physiological conditions. The amount in the filopodia was relatively small - 100s of molecules per filopodia so this result is still interesting regardless of the overexpression. However, the overexpression should be addressed in the limitations.<br /> The authors have not addressed the potential for variability in transfection efficiency. The authors could examine the average fluorescence intensity per cell and if similar this may address this concern.<br /> The SDS PAGE method of estimating the number of molecules is quite interesting. I really like this idea. However, I feel there are a few more things to consider. The fraction of HALO tag standard and Myo10 labeled with the HALO tagged ligand is not determined directly. It is suggested that since excess HALO tagged ligand was added we can assume nearly 100% labeling. If the HALO tag standard protein is purified it should be feasible to determine the fraction of HALO tagged standard that is labeled by examining the absorbance of the protein at 280 and fluorophore at its appropriate wavelength. The fraction of HALO tagged Myo10 labeled may be more challenging to determine, since it is in a cell lysate, but there may be some potential approaches (e.g. mass spec, HPLC).<br /> In Figure 1B, the stain free gel bands look relatively clean. The Myo10 is from cell lysates so it is surprising that there are not more bands. I am not surprised that the bands in the TMR fluorescence gel are clean, and I agree the fluorescence is the best way to quantitate.<br /> In Figure 3C, the number of Myo10 molecules needed to initiate a filopodium was estimated. I wonder if the authors could have looked at live cell movies to determine that these events started with a puncta of Myo10 at the edge of the cell, and then went on to form a filopodia that elongated from the cell. How was the number of Myo10 molecules that were involved in the initiation determined? Please clarify the assumptions in making this conclusion.<br /> It is stated in the discussion that the amount of Myo10 in the filopodia exceeds the number of actin binding sites. However, since Myo10 contains membrane binding motifs and has been shown to interact with the membrane it should be pointed that the excess Myo10 at the tips may be interacting with the membrane and not actin, which may prevent traffic jams.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary:

The unconventional myosin Myo10 (aka myosin X) is essential for filopodia formation in a number of mammalian cells. There is a good deal of interest in its role in filopodia formation and function. The manuscript describes a careful, quantitative analysis of Myo10 molecules in U2OS cells, a widely used model for studying filopodia, how many are present in the cytosol versus filopodia and the distribution of filopodia and molecules along the cell edge. Rigorous quantification of Myo10 protein amounts in a cell and cellular compartment are critical for ultimately deciphering the cellular mechanism of Myo10 action as well as understand the molecular composition of a Myo10-generated filopodium.<br /> Consistent with what is seen in images of Myo10 localization in many papers, the vast majority of Myo10 is in the cell body with only a small percentage (appr 5%) present in filopodia puncta. Interestingly, Myo10 is not uniformly distributed along the cell edge, but rather it is unevenly localized along the cell edge with one region preferentially extending filopodia, presumably via localized activation of Myo10 motors. Calculation of total molecules present in puncta based on measurement of puncta size and measured Halo-Myo10 signal intensity shows that the concentration of motor present can vary from 3 - 225 uM. Based on an estimation of available actin binding sites, it is possible that Myo10 can be present in excess over these binding sites.

Strengths:

The work represents an important first step towards defining the molecular stoichiometry of filopodial tip proteins. The observed range of Myo10 molecules at the tip suggests that it can accommodate a fairly wide range of Myo10 motors. There is great value in studies such as this and the approach taken by the authors gives one good confidence that the numbers obtained are in the right range.

Weaknesses:

One caveat (see below) is that these numbers are obtained for overexpressing cells and the relevance to native levels of Myo10 in a cell is unclear.<br /> An interesting aspect of the work is quantification of the fraction of Myo10 molecules in the cytosol versus in filopodia tips showing that the vast majority of motors are inactive in the cytosol, as is seen in images of cells. This has implications for thinking about how cells maintain this large population in the off-state and what is the mechanism of motor activation. One question raised by this work is the distinction between cytosolic Myo10 and the population found at the 'cell edge' and the filopodia tip. The cortical population of Myo10 is partially activated, so to speak, as it is targeted to the cortex/membrane and presumably ready to go. Providing quantification of this population of motors, that one might think of as being in a waiting room, could provide additional insight into a potential step-by-step pathway where recruitment or binding to the cortical region/plasma membrane is not by itself sufficient for activation.

Specific comments -

1) It is not obvious whether the analysis of numbers of Myo10 molecules in a cell that is ectopically overexpressing Myo10 is relevant for wild type cells. It would appear to be a significant excess based on the total protein stained blot shown in Fig S1E where a prominent band the size of tagged Myo10 seen in the transfected sample is almost absent in the WT control lane. Ideally, and ultimately an important approach, would be to work with a cell line expressing endogenously tagged Myo10 via genome engineering. This can be complicated in transformed cells that often have chromosomal duplications.

However, even though there is an excess of Myo10 it would appear that activation is still under some type of control as the cytosolic pool is quite large and its localization to the cell edge is not uniform. But it is difficult to gauge whether the number of molecules in the filopodium is the same as would be seen in untransfected cells. Myo10 can readily walk up a filopodium and if excess numbers of this motor are activated they would accumulate in the tip in large numbers, possibly creating a bulge as and indeed it does appear that some tips are unusually large. Then how would that relate to the normal condition?

2) Measurements of the localization of Myo10 focuses in large part on 'Myo10 punctae'. While it seems reasonable to presume that these are filopodia tips, the authors should provide readers with a clear definition of a puncta. Is it only filopodia tips, which seems to be the case? Does it include initiation sites at the cell membrane that often appear as punctae?<br /> Along those lines, the position of dim punctae along the length of a filopodium is measured (Fig 3D). The findings suggest that a given filopodium can have more than one puncta which seems at odds if a puncta is a filopodia tip. How frequently is a filopodium with two puncta seen? It would be helpful if the authors provided an example image showing the dim puncta that are not present at the tip.

3) The concentration of actin available to Myo10 is calculated based on the deduction from Nagy et al (2010) that only 4/13 of the actin monomers in a helical turn are accessible to the Myo10 motor (discussion on pg 9; Fig S4). Subsequent work (Ropars et al, 2016) has shown that the heads of the antiparallel Myo10 dimer are flattened, but the neck is rather flexible, meaning that the motor can a variable reach (36 - 52 nm). Wouldn't this mean that more actin could be accessible to the Myo10 motor than is calculated here?

4) Quantification of numbers of Myo10 molecules in filopodial puncta (Fig 3C) leads the authors to conclude that 'only ten or fewer Myo10 molecules are necessary for filopodia initiation' (pg 7, top). While this is a reasonable based on the assumption that the formation of a puncta ultimately results from an initiation event, little is known about initiation events and without direct observation of coalescence of Myo10 at the cell edge that leads to formation of a filopodium, this seems rather speculative.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary: Bloodstream stages of the parasitic protist, Trypanosoma brucei, exhibit very high rates of constitutive endocytosis, which is needed to recycle the surface coat of Variant Surface Glycoproteins (VSGs) and remove surface immune complexes. While many studies have shown that the endo-lysosomal systems of T. brucei BF stages contain canonical domains, as defined by classical Rab markers, it has remained unclear whether these protists have evolved additional adaptations/mechanisms for sustaining these very high rates of membrane transport and protein sorting. The authors have addressed this question by reconstructing the 3D ultrastructure and functional domains of the T. brucei BF endosome membrane system using advanced electron tomography and super-resolution microscopy approaches. Their studies reveal that, unusually, the BF endosome network comprises a continuous system of cisternae and tubules that contain overlapping functional subdomains. It is proposed that a continuous membrane system allows higher rates of protein cargo segregation, sorting and recycling than can otherwise occur when transport between compartments is mediated by membrane vesicles or other fusion events.

Strengths: The study is a technical tour-de-force using a combination of electron tomography, super-resolution/expansion microscopy, immune-EM of cryo-sections to define the 3D structures and connectivity of different endocytic compartments. The images are very clear and generally support the central conclusion that functionally distinct endocytic domains occur within a dynamic and continuous endosome network in BF stages.

Weaknesses: The authors suggest that this dynamic endocytic network may also fulfil many of the functions of the Golgi TGN and that the latter may be absent in these stages. Although plausible, this comment needs further experimental support. For example, have the authors attempted to localize canonical makers of the TGN (e.g. GRIP proteins) in T. brucei BF and/or shown that exocytic carriers bud directly from the endosomes?

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

The authors suggest that the African trypanosome endomembrane system has unusual organisation, in that the entire system is a single reticulated structure. It is not clear if this is thought to extend to the lysosome or MVB. There is also a suggestion that this unusual morphology serves as a trans-(post)Golgi network rather than the more canonical arrangement.

The work is based around very high-quality light and electron microscopy, as well as utilising several marker proteins, Rab5A, 11 and 7. These are deemed as markers for early endosomes, recycling endosomes and late or pre-lysosomes. The images are mostly of high quality but some inconsistencies in the interpretation, appearance of structures and some rather sweeping assumptions make this less easy to accept. Two perhaps major issues are claims to label the entire endosomal apparatus with a single marker protein, which is hard to accept as certainly this reviewer does not really even know where the limits to the endosomal network reside and where these interface with other structures. There are several additional compartments that have been defined by Rob proteins as well, and which are not even mentioned. Overall I am unconvinced that the authors have demonstrated the main things they claim.

The approaches taken are state-of-the-art but not novel, and because of the difficulty in fully addressing the central tenet, I am not sure how much of an impact this will have beyond the trypanosome field. For certain this is limited to workers in the direct area and is not a generalisable finding.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> As clearly highlighted by the authors, a key plank in the ability of trypanosomes to evade the mammalian host's immune system is its high rate of endocytosis. This rapid turnover of its surface enables the trypanosome to 'clean' its surface removing antibodies and other immune effectors that are subsequently degraded. The high rate of endocytosis is likely reflected in the organisation and layout of the endosomal system in these parasites. Here, Link et al., sought to address this question using a range of light and three-dimensional electron microscopy approaches to define the endosomal organisation in this parasite.

Before this study, the vast majority of our information about the make-up of the trypanosome endosomal system was from thin-section electron microscopy and immunofluorescence studies, which did not provide the necessary resolution and 3D information to address this issue. Therefore, it was not known how the different structures observed by EM were related. Link et al., have taken advantage of the advances in technology and used an impressive combination of approaches at the LM and EM level to study the endosomal system in these parasites. This innovative combination has now shown the interconnected-ness of this network and demonstrated that there are no 'classical' compartments within the endosomal system, with instead different regions of the network enriched in different protein markers (Rab5a, Rab7, Rab11).

Strengths:<br /> This is a generally well-written and clear manuscript, with the data well-presented supporting the majority of the conclusions of the authors. The authors use an impressive range of approaches to address the organisation of the endosomal system and the development of these methods for use in trypanosomes will be of use to the wider parasitology community.

I appreciate their inclusion of how they used a range of different light microscopy approaches even though for instance the dSTORM approach did not turn out to be as effective as hoped. The authors have clearly demonstrated that trypanosomes have a large interconnected endosomal network, without defined compartments and instead show enrichment for specific Rabs within this network.

Weaknesses:<br /> My concerns are:

i) there is no evidence for functional compartmentalisation. The classical markers of different endosomal compartments do not fully overlap but there is no evidence to show a region enriched in one or other of these proteins has that specific function. The authors should temper their conclusions about this point.

ii) the quality of the electron microscopy work is very high but there is a general lack of numbers. For example, how many tomograms were examined? How often were fenestrated sheets seen? Can the authors provide more information about how frequent these observations were?

iii) the EM work always focussed on cells which had been processed before fixing. Now, I understand this was important to enable tracers to be used. However, given the dynamic nature of the system these processing steps and feeding experiments may have affected the endosomal organisation. Given their knowledge of the system now, the authors should fix some cells directly in culture to observe whether the organisation of the endosome aligns with their conclusions here.

iv) the discussion needs to be revamped. At the moment it is just another run through of the results and does not take an overview of the results presenting an integrated view. Moreover, it contains reference to data that was not presented in the results.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary: Planar cell polarity core proteins Frizzled (Fz)/Dishevelled (Dvl) and Van Gogh-like (Vangl)/Prickle (Pk) are localized on opposite sides of the cell and engage in reciprocal repression to modulate cellular polarity within the plane of static epithelium. In this interesting manuscript, the authors explore how the anterior core proteins (Vangl/Pk) inhibit the posterior core protein (Dvl). The authors propose that Pk assists Vangl2 in sequestering both Dvl2 and Ror2, while Ror2 is essential for Dvl to transition from Vangl to Fz in response to non-canonical Wnt signaling. There are several points that affect the strength of the author's conclusions.

Strengths: The strengths of the manuscript are in the very interesting and new concept for a model of how non-canonical Wnt induces Dvl to transition from Vangl to Fz. Prickle and Vangl2 are proposed to play an opposing role to suppress Dvl activity during convergent extension movements, whereas Ror antagonizes Vangl and may be required for the transition.

Weaknesses: The weaknesses are in the clarity and resolution of the data that forms the basis of the model. In addition to whole embryo morphology that is used as evidence for convergent extension (CE) defects, two forms of data are presented, co-expression and IP, as well as a strong reliance on IF of exogenously expressed proteins. Thus, it is critical that both forms of evidence be very strong and clear, and this is where there are deficiencies; 1) For vast majority of experiments general morphology and LWR was used as evidence of effects on convergent extension movements rather than Keller explants or actual cell movements in the embryo. 2) The study would benefit from high or super resolution microscopy, since in many cases the differences in protein localization are not very pronounced. 3) The IP and Western analysis data often show subtle differences, and not apparent in some cases. 4) It is not clear how many biological repeats were performed or how and whether statistical analyses were performed.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

The authors use Xenopus embryos to study feedback interactions between the planar cell polarity (PCP) proteins in the context of convergence and extension. They show that binding of the cytoplasmic polarity protein Pk2 to Vangl2 is needed for them to synergistically suppress defects in convergence and extension caused by Dvl overexpression. They then examine protein localizations in animal cap cells, and show that Wnt11-induced accumulation of Fzd7, Ror2 and Dvl into plasma membrane patches is disrupted by the functional Vangl2/Pk complex. This disperses Fzd and causes its endocytosis, while Dvl remains at the plasma membrane.

This is a potentially interesting paper, showing mechanisms by which Vangl2/Pk can functionally antagonize Fzd/Dvl during planar cell polarity.

The protein localization experiments in animal cap assays are for the most part convincing, but with the caveat that the authors assume that the proteins are acting within the same cell. As Fzd and Vangl2 are thought to localize to opposite cell ends in many contexts, can the authors be sure that the effects they observe are not due to trans interactions?

The authors propose a model whereby Vangl2 acts as an adaptor between Dvl and Ror, to first prevent ectopic activation of signaling, and then to relay Dvl to Fzd upon Wnt stimulation. This is based on the observation that Ror2 can be co-IPed with Vangl2 but not Dvl; and secondly that the distribution of Ror2 in membrane patches after Wnt11 stimulation is broader than that of Fzd7/Dvl, while Vangl2 localizes to the edges of these patches. The data for both these points is not wholly convincing. The co-IP of Ror2 and Vangl2 is very weak, and the input of Dvl into the same experiment is very low, so any direct interaction could have been missed. Secondly, the broader distribution of Ror2 in membrane patches is very subtle, and further analysis would be needed to firm up this conclusion.

A final caveat to these experiments is that in the animal cap assays, loss of function and gain of function both cause convergence and extension defects, so any genetic interactions need to be treated with caution i.e. two injected factors enhancing a phenotype does not imply they act in the same direction in a pathway, in particular as there are both cis/trans and positive/negative feedbacks between the PCP proteins.

Joint Public Review:

This paper's strengths are the interesting analysis of TLR signaling in hair follicle stem cell activation and the striking phenotype of the TLR2 cKO mice (but note below). The functional interrogation parts using HFSC-specific TLR2 genetic deletion are solid, and an endogenous regulator, CEP, is identified. The experiments reported in this manuscript are well-designed and presented. The authors provided extensive evidence supporting the roles of TLR2 signaling in regulating hair follicle stem cell functions. Importantly, the findings from this paper may have sustained impacts on our understanding of the roles of innate immunity in regulating tissue regeneration in the absence of inflammation.

The main evidence for the mechanistic analysis is based on fluorescence using immunohistochemistry, and here the expression analysis is not convincing. In addition, additional assays beyond immunolandscaping are needed to confirm the findings. The reviewers felt that your data substantiating the mechanism of interaction between TLR2 and BMP pathway needs bolstering.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Authors performed a meta-analysis of GC concentrations and metabolic rates in birds and mammals. They found close associations for all studies showing a positive association between these two traits. As GCs have been viewed with close links to "stress," authors suggest that this overlooks the importance of metabolism and perhaps GC variation does not relate to "stress" per se but an increase in metabolism instead.

This is an important meta-analysis, as most researchers acknowledge the link between GCs and metabolism, metabolism is often overlooked in studies. The field of conservation physiology is especially focused on GCs being a "stress" hormone, which overlooks the importance of GCs in mediating energy balance, i.e., an animal that has high GC concentrations may not be doing that poorly compared to an animal with low GC concentrations, it might just be expending more energy, e.g., caring for young. The results, with overwhelming directionality and strong effect sizes, support the link for a positive association with these two variables.

My main concern lies in that most of the studies come from a few labs, therefore there may be limited data to test this relationship. I would include lab as a random effect to see how strong this effect might be. Furthermore, I would like to see a test of the directionality of the two variables. Authors suggest that changes in metabolism affect GC levels but likely changes in GC levels would affect metabolism. Why not look into studies that have altered GC levels experimentally and see the effect on metabolism? Based on the close link, authors suggest that GCs may not play a role outside of "stress" beyond the stressor's effect on metabolic rate. However, if they were to investigate manipulations of GCs on metabolic rate, the link may or may not be there, which would be interesting to look at. I firmly believe that GCs are tightly linked to metabolism; however, I also think that GCs have a range of effects outside of metabolism as well, depending on the course and strength of the stressor.

This work helps in the thinking that GCs are not the same as a "stress" hormone or labelling hormones with only one function. As hormones are naturally pleiotropic, the view of any one hormone being X is overly simplistic.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Where this study is interesting is that the authors do a meta-analysis of studies in which metabolic rate was experimentally manipulated and both this rate and glucocorticoid levels were simultaneously measured. Unsurprisingly, there are relatively few such studies and many are from a single lab. More studies are needed. While the results of the analysis are compelling, they are not surprising. That said, this work is important.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary: This work by Zhang et al. provides new strategies to improve the efficiency of precise Prime Editing (PE) in zebrafish embryos. The authors test how two simple changes impact PE efficiency: first, by refolding the pegRNA before complexing with Cas9 nickase-reverse transcriptase PE2, and second, by introducing mutations to the pegRNA intended to reduce its autoinhibitory activity by disrupting complementarity between the 5' spacer sequence and the 3' PBS-RTT (Primer Binding Site-Reverse Transcriptase Template).

Strengths: The authors tested multiple loci in the zebrafish genome to determine how pegRNA refolding and point mutations in the RTT would impact overall mutagenesis efficiency and precise PE at the target sites. The impact on efficiency was tested with three types of pegRNAs designed to introduce base substitutions, insertions or deletions. Next-generation sequencing of amplicons from pooled, injected embryos provided robust measurement of mutagenesis and editing. Insertion and deletion pegRNAs were overall more efficient than substitution pegRNAs, which may be useful information in considering experimental design strategy for introducing a specific variant. There is potential for further improvement by combining the authors' methods with previously published strategies to improve pegRNAs through design and chemical modification.

Weaknesses: The observed increases in the frequency of precise PE were relatively minor and inconsistent across the multiple pegRNAs tested. The substitution pegRNAs showed very low precise PE, at levels less than 1 percent, therefore the fold changes reported were still representative of 10 percent or less of overall edits. Overall mutagenesis frequency, as measured by indel formation, increased along with increased precise PE. The approach produces highly genetically mosaic embryos, therefore the utility for transient studies in injected zebrafish embryos is unclear. Data on improved germline transmission frequency of precise PE alleles would strengthen the study and be of wide interest in the zebrafish community.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Prime editing is a major gene editing technique because it allows for the introduction of all possible substitutions, as well as small insertions and deletions, without causing double strand breaks. However, its efficiency is often limited. In a previous study, the authors showed that prime editing could be performed in zebrafish using recombinant PE2 protein and pegRNAs generated by in vitro transcription, but at many of the sites tested, gene editing efficiency remained relatively low.

In this current paper, the authors find that when pegRNAs were combined with Cas9, many induced much less indels than their corresponding guide RNAs and propose that this is due to the complementarity between the 5' and 3' regions of pegRNAs. Two methods aiming to reduce the resulting circularization of pegRNAs were next shown to increase the efficiency of prime editing: a slow refolding protocol (which was previously shown to be useful for inefficient guide RNAs), and the introduction of a substitution at position +2 of the reverse transcriptase template sequence. The data obtained and analyzed is solid and convincing.

These methods are remarkably straightforward and proved beneficial for most of the pegRNAs tested. Consequently, they represent important advances for the prime editing technique.

It should be noted, however, that despite these advances, prime editing activity remained relatively low for a significant proportion of pegRNAs tested (with less than 2% sequencing reads exhibiting the expected sequence change). This shows that further improvements are still needed for this important gene editing technique.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

In this study, Weiting Zhang et al., improved the editing efficiency of prime editor by reducing misfolded pegRNA interactions, and the improvement of efficiency for prime editor helped to expand its application range. It is a research paper on technology improvement. This study is somewhat innovative.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The preprint by Laganowsky and co-workers describes the use of mutant cycles to dissect the thermodynamic profile of specific lipid recognition by the ABC transporter MsbA. The authors use native mass spectrometry with a variable temperature source to monitor lipid binding to the native protein dimer solubilized in detergent. Analysis of the peak intensities (that is, relative abundance) of 1-3 bound lipids as a function of solution temperature and lipid concentration yields temperature-dependent Kds. The authors use these to then generate van't Hoff plots, from which they calculate the enthalpy and entropy contributions to binding of one, two, and in some cases, three lipids to MsbA.<br /> The authors then employ mutant cycles, in which basic residues involved in headgroup binding are mutated to alanine. By comparing the thermodynamic signatures of single and double (and in one instance triple) mutants, they aim to identify cooperativity between the different positions. They furthermore use inward and outward locking conditions which should control access to the different binding sites determined previously.<br /> The main conclusion is that lipid binding to MsbA is driven mainly by energetically favorable entropy increase upon binding, which stems from the release of ordered water molecules that normally coordinate the basic residues, which helps to overcome the enthalpic barrier of lipid binding. The authors also report an increase in lipid binding at higher temperatures which they attribute to a non-uniform heat capacity of the protein. Although they find that most residue pairs display some degree of cooperativity, particularly between the inner and outer lipid binding sites, they do not provide a structural interpretation of these results.

Strengths:<br /> The use of double mutant cycles and mass spectrometry to dissect lipid binding is novel and interesting. For example, the observation that mutating a basic residue in the inner and one in the outer binding site abolishes lipid binding to a greater extent than the individual mutations is highly informative even without having to break it down into thermodynamic terms (see "weaknesses" section). In this sense, the method and data reported here opens new avenues for the structure/activity relationship of MsbA. The "mutant cycle" approach is in principle widely applicable to other membrane proteins with complex lipid interactions.

Weaknesses:<br /> The use of double mutant cycles to dissect binding energies is well-established, and has, as the authors point out, been employed in combination with mass spectrometry to study protein-protein interactions. Its application to extract thermodynamic parameters is robust in cases where a single binding event is monitored, e.g. the formation of a complex with well-defined stoichiometry, where dissociation constants can be determined with high confidence. It is, however, complicated significantly by the fact that for MsbA-lipid interactions, we are not looking at a single binding event, but a stochastic distribution of lipids across different sites. Even if the protein is locked in a specific conformation, the observation of a single lipid adduct does not guarantee that the one lipid is always bound to a specific site. In some of the complexes detected by MS, the lipid is likely bound somewhere else. Lipid binding Kds from mass spectrometry, although helpful in some instances as a proxy for global binding affinities, should therefore be taken with a grain of salt.

The authors analyze the difference in binding upon mutating binding sites (ddG etc). Here, another complicating factor comes into play, the fact that mutation of a binding site (which the authors show reduces lipid binding) may instead allow the lipid to bind to a lower-affinity site elsewhere. Unfortunately, the authors do not specify the protein concentration, but assuming it is in the single-digit micromolar range, as common for native MS experiments, lipid and protein concentrations are almost equal for most of the data points, resulting in competition between binding sites for free lipids. As a rule of thumb, for Kd measurements, the concentration of the constant component, the protein, should be far below the Kd, to avoid working in the "titration" regime rather than the "binding" regime (see Jarmoskaite et al, eLife 2020). I cannot determine whether this is the case here. The way I understand the double mutant cycle approach, reliable Kd measurements are required to accurately determine dH and TdS, so I would encourage the authors to confirm their Kd values using complementary methods before in-depth interpretations of the thermodynamic components.

It is somewhat counterintuitive that for many double mutants, and the triple mutant, the entropic component becomes more favorable compared to the WT protein. If the increase in entropy upon lipid binding comes from the release of ordered water molecules around the basic residues (a reasonable assumption) why does this apply even more in proteins where several basic residues have been changed to alanine, which coordinate far fewer water molecules?

The authors could devote more attention to the fact that they use detergent micelles as a vehicle for lipid binding studies. To a limited extent, detergents compete with lipids for binding, and are present in extreme excess over the lipid. The micelle likely changes its behavior in response to temperature changes. For example, the packing around the protein loosens up upon heating, which may increase the chance for lipids to bind. In this case, the increase in binding at higher temperatures may not be related to a change in heat capacity. This question could be addressed by MD simulations, if it's not already in the literature.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> This is a solid study that dissects the thermodynamics of lipopolysaccharide (LPS) transporter MsbA and LPS. Native ESI-MS and the novel strategies developed by the authors were employed to quantify the affinities of LPS-MsbA interactions and its temperature dependence. Here, the equilibrium of lipid-protein interactions occurs in the micellar phase. The double-/triple-mutant cycle analysis and van't Hoff analysis allowed a full thermodynamic description of the lipid-protein interactions and the analysis of thermodynamic coupling between LPS binding sites. The most notable result would be that LPS-MsbA interaction is largely driven by entropy involving the negative heat capacity, a signature of the solvent reorganization effect (here authors attribute the solvent effect to "water" reorganization). The entropy driven lipid binding has been previously reported by the same authors for Kir1,2-PIP2 interactions.

Strengths:

1) This is overall a very thorough and rigorous study providing the detailed thermodynamic principles of LPS-MsbA interaction.

2) The double and triple-mutant cycle approaches are newly applied to lipid-protein interactions, enabling detailed thermodynamics between LPS binding sites.

3) The entropy-driven protein-lipid interaction is surprising. The binding seems to be mainly mediated by the electrostatic interaction between the positively charged residues on the protein and the negatively charged or polar headgroup of LPS, which could be thought of as "enthalpic" (making of a strong bond relative to that with solvent).

Weaknesses:

1. This study is a good contribution to the field, but it was difficult to find novel biological insights or methodological novelty from this study.

1a) Thermodynamic analysis of lipid-protein interactions, an example of entropy-driven lipid-protein interactions, and the cooperativity between lipid binding sites have been reported by the author's group. Also, the cooperativity between binding sites in general have been reported from numerous studies of biomolecular interactions.

1b) It is not clear how this study provides new insights into the understanding of LPS transport mechanisms. Probably, authors could strengthen the Discussion by providing biological insights-how the residue coupling.

2) One to three LPS molecules bind to MsbA, but it is unclear whether bound KDL occupies inner or outer cavities, or both and how a specific mutation affects the affinity of specific LPS (i.e., to inner or to outer cavities). Based on the known structures, the maximal number of LPS is three. It is possible that the inner and outer cavities have different LPS affinities. Also, there can be multiple one-LPS-bound states, two-LPS-bound states if LPS strictly binds to the binding sites indicated by the structures. This aspect is beyond the scope of this study and difficult to address, but without this information, it seems hard to tell what is going on in the system.

3) If a single mutation is introduced to the inner cavity, its effect will be "doubled" because the inner cavity is shared by two identical subunits. This effect needs to be clarified in the result section.

4) In the result section, "Mutant cycle analysis of KDL binding to vanadate-trapped MsbA.":

4a) It seems necessary to show the mass spectra for Msb-ADP-vanadate complex as well as its lipid bound forms.

4b) The rationale of this section (i.e., what mechanistic insights can be obtained from this study) is unclear. For example, it is not sure what meaningful information can be obtained from a single type (ADP/vanadate) of the bound state regarding the ATP-driven function of MsbA.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> In this paper presented by Liu et al, native MS on the lipid A transporter MsbA was used to obtain thermodynamic insight into protein-lipid interactions. By performing the analyses at different lipid A concentrations and temperatures, dissociation constants for 2-3 lipid A binding sites were determined, as well as enthalpies were calculated using non-linear van't Hoff fitting. Changes in free Gibb's energies were then calculated based on the determined dissociation constants, and together with the enthalpy values obtained via van' t Hoff analysis, the entropic contribution to lipid binding (DeltaS*T) was indirectly determined.

Strengths:<br /> This is an extensive high quality native MS dataset that provides unique opportunities to gain insights into the thermodynamic parameters underlying lipid A binding. In addition, it provides coupling energies between mutations introduced into MsbA, that are implicated in lipid A binding.

Weaknesses:<br /> The data all rely on the accuracy of determining KD values for lipid binding to MsbA. For the weaker binding sites, the range of lipid concentrations probed were in fact too low to generate highly accurate data. Another weakness is a lack of clear evidence, which KD values belong to which of the possible lipid A binding sites.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The biogenesis of outer membrane proteins (OMPs) into the outer membranes of Gram-negative bacteria is still not fully understood, particularly substrate recognition and insertion by beta-assembly machinery (BAM). In the studies, the authors present their studies that in addition to recognition by the last strand of an OMP, sometimes referred to as the beta-signal, an additional signal upstream of the last strand is also important for OMP biogenesis.

Strengths:<br /> 1. Overall the manuscript is well organized and written, and addresses an important question in the field. The idea that BAM recognizes multiple signals on OMPs has been presented previously, however, it was not fully tested.

2. The authors here re-address this idea and propose that it is a more general mechanism used by BAM for OMP biogenesis.

3. The notion that additional signals assist in biogenesis is an important concept that indeed needs fully tested in OMP biogenesis.

4. A significant study was performed with extensive experiments reported in an attempt to address this important question in the field.

5. The identification of important crosslinks and regions of substrates and Bam proteins that interact during biogenesis is an important contribution that gives clues to the path substrates take en route to the membrane.

Weaknesses:

Major critiques (in no particular order):

1. The title indicates 'simultaneous recognition', however no experiments were presented that test the order of interactions during OMP biogenesis.

2. Aspects of the study focus on the peptides that appear to inhibit OmpC assembly, but should also include an analysis of the peptides that do not to determine this the motif(s) present still or not.

3. The b-signal is known to form a b-strand, therefore it is unclear why the authors did not choose to chop OmpC up according to its strands, rather than by a fixed peptide size. What was the rationale for how the peptide lengths were chosen since many of them partially overlap known strands, and only partially (2 residues) overlap each other? It may not be too surprising that most of the inhibitory peptides consist of full strands (#4, 10, 21, 23).

4. It would be good to have an idea of the propensity of the chosen peptides to form b-stands and participate in b-augmentation. We know from previous studies with darobactin and other peptides that they can inhibit OMP assembly by competing with substrates.

5. The recognition motifs that the authors present span up to 9 residues which would suggest a relatively large binding surface, however, the structures of these regions are not large enough to accommodate these large peptides.

6. The authors highlight that the sequence motifs are common among the inhibiting peptides, but do not test if this is a necessary motif to mediate the interactions. It would have been good to see if a library of non-OMP related peptides that match this motif could also inhibit or not.

7. In the studies that disrupt the motifs by mutagenesis, an effect was observed and attributed to disruption of the interaction of the 'internal signal'. However, the literature is filled with point mutations in OMPs that disrupt biogenesis, particular those within the membrane region. F280, Y286, V359, and Y365 are all residues that are in the membrane region that point into the membrane. Therefore, more work is needed to confirm that these mutations are in parts of a recognition motif rather than on the residues that are disrupting stability/assembly into the membrane.

8. The title of Figure 3 indicates that disrupting the internal signal motif disrupts OMP assembly, however, the point mutations did not seem to have any effect. Only when both 280 and 286 were mutated was an effect observed. And even then, the trimer appeared to form just fine, albeit at reduced levels, indicating assembly is just fine, rather the rate of biogenesis is being affected.

9. In Figure 4, the authors attempt to quantify their blots. However, this seems to be a difficult task given the lack of quality of the blots and the spread of the intended signals, particularly of the 'int' bands. However, the more disturbing trend is the obvious reduction in signal from the post-urea treatment, even for the WT samples. The authors are using urea washes to indicate removal of only stalled substrates. However a reduction of signal is also observed for the WT. The authors should quantify this blot as well, but it is clear visually that both WT and the mutant have obvious reductions in the observable signals. Further, this data seems to conflict with Fig 3D where no noticeable difference in OmpC assembly was observed between WT and Y286A, why is this the case?

10. The pull down assays with BamA and BamD should include a no protein control at the least to confirm there is no non-specific binding to the resin. Also, no detergent was mentioned as part of the pull downs that contained BamA or OmpC, nor was it detailed if OmpC was urea solubilized.

11. The neutron reflectometry experiments are not convincing primarily due to the lack controls to confirm a consistent uniform bilayer is being formed and even if so, uniform orientations of the BamA molecules across the surface. Further, no controls were performed with BamD alone, or with OmpC alone, and it is hard to understand how the method can discriminate between an actual BamA/BamD complex versus BamA and BamD individually being located at the membrane surface without forming an actual complex. Previous studies have reported difficulty in preparing a complex with BamA and BamD from purified components. Additionally, little signal differences were observed for the addition of OmpC. However, an elongated unfolded polypeptide that is nearly 400 residues long would be expected to produce a large distinct signal given that only the C-terminal portion is supposedly anchored to BAM, while the rest would be extended out above the surface. The depiction in Figure 5D is quite misleading when viewing the full structures on the same scales with one another.

12. In the crosslinking studies, the authors show 17 crosslinking sites (43% of all tested) on BamD crosslinked with OmpC. Given that the authors are presenting specific interactions between the two proteins, this is worrisome as the crosslinks were found across the entire surface of BamD. How do the authors explain this? Are all these specific or non-specific?

13. The study in Figure 6 focuses on defined regions within the OmpC sequence, but a more broad range is necessary to demonstrate specificity to these regions vs binding to other regions of the sequence as well. If the authors wish to demonstrate a specific interaction to this motif, they need to show no binding to other regions.

14. The levels of the crosslinks are barely detectable via western blot analysis. If the interactions between the two surfaces are required, why are the levels for most of the blots so low?

15. Figure 7 indicates that two regions of BamD promote OMP orientation and assembly, however, none of the experiments appears to measure OMP orientation? Also, one common observation from panel F was that not only was the trimer reduced, but also the monomer. But even then, still a percentage of the trimer is formed, not a complete loss.

16. The experiment in Fig 7B would be more conclusive if it was repeated with both the Y62A and R197A mutants and a double mutant. These controls would also help resolve any effect from crowding that may also promote the crosslinks. Further, the mutation of R197 is an odd choice given that this residue has been studied previously and was found to mediate a salt bridge with BamA. How was this resolved by the authors in choosing this site since it was not one of the original crosslinking sites?

17. As demonstrated by the authors in Fig 8, the mutations in BamD lead to reduction in OMP levels for more than just OmpC and issues with the membrane are clearly observable with Y62A, although not with R197A in the presence of VCN. The authors should also test with rifampicin which is smaller and would monitor even more subtle issues with the membrane. Oddly, no growth was observed for the Vec control in the lower concentration of VCN, but was near WT levels for 3 times VCN, how is this explained?

18. While Fig 8I indeed shows diminished levels for FY as stated, little difference was observed for the trimer for the other mutants compared to WT, although differences were observed for the dimer. Interestingly, the VY mutant has nearly WT levels of dimer. What do the authors postulate is going on here with the dimer to trimer transition? How do the levels of monomer compare, which is not shown?

19. In the discussion, the authors indicate they have '...defined an internal signal for OMP assembly', however, their study is limited and only investigates a specific region of OmpC. More is needed to definitively say this for even OmpC, and even more so to indicate this is a general feature for all OMPs.

20. In the proposed model in Fig 9, it is hard to conceive how 5 strands will form along BamD given the limited surface area and tight space beneath BAM. More concerning is that the two proposal interaction sites on BamD, Y62 and R197, are on opposite sides of the BamD structure, not along the same interface, which makes this model even more unlikely. As evidence against this model, in Figure 9E, the two indicates sites of BamD are not even in close proximity of the modeled substrate strands.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Previously, using bioinformatics study, authors have identified potential sequence motifs that are common to a large subset of beta-barrel outer membrane proteins in gram negative bacteria. Interestingly, in that study, some of those motifs are located in the internal strands of barrels (not near the termini), in addition to the well-known "beta-signal" motif in the C-terminal region.

Here, the authors carried out rigorous biochemical, biophysical, and genetic studies to prove that the newly identified internal motifs are critical to the assembly of outer membrane proteins and the interaction with the BAM complex. The author's approaches are rigorous and comprehensive, whose results reasonably well support the conclusions. While overall enthusiastic, I have some scientific concerns with the rationale of the neutron refractory study, and the distinction between "the intrinsic impairment of the barrel" vs "the impairment of interaction with BAM" that the internal signal may play a role in. I hope that the authors will be able to address this.

Strengths:

1. It is impressive that the authors took multi-faceted approaches using the assays on reconstituted, cell-based, and population-level (growth) systems.

2. Assessing the role of the internal motifs in the assembly of model OMPs in the absence and presence of BAM machinery was a nice approach for a precise definition of the role.

Weaknesses:

1. The result section employing the neutron refractory (NR) needs to be clarified and strengthened in the main text (from line 226). In the current form, the NR result seems not so convincing.

What is the rationale of the approach using NR?<br /> What is the molecular event (readout) that the method detects?<br /> What are "R"-y axis and "Q"-x axis and their physical meanings (Fig. 5b)?<br /> How are the "layers" defined from the plot (Fig. 5b)?<br /> What are the meanings of "thickness" and "roughness" (Fig. 5c)?<br /> What are the meanings of the increases in thickness and roughness?<br /> What does "SLD" stand for?

2. In the result section, "The internal signal is necessary for insertion step of assembly into OM"

This section presents an important result that the internal beta-signal is critical to the intrinsic propensity of barrel formation, distinct from the recognition by BAM complex. However, this point is not elaborated in this section. For example, what is the role of these critical residues in the barrel structure formation? That is, are they involved in any special tertiary contacts in the structure or in membrane anchoring of the nascent polypeptide chains?

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The authors utilize fluid-structure interaction analyses to simulation fluid flow within and around the Cambrian cnidarian Quadrapyrgites to reconstruct feeding/respiration dynamics. Based on vorticity and velocity flow patterns, the authors suggest that the polyp expansion and contraction ultimately develop vortices around the organism that are like what modern jellyfish employ for movement and feeding. Lastly, the authors suggest that this behavior is likely a prerequisite transitional form to swimming medusae.

Strengths:<br /> While fluid-structure-interaction analyses are common in engineering, physics, and biomedical fields, they are underutilized in the biological and paleobiological sciences. Zhang et al. provide a strong approach to integrating active feeding dynamics into fluid flow simulations of ancient life. Based on their data, it is entirely likely the described vortices would have been produced by benthic cnidarians feeding/respiring under similar mechanisms. However, some of the broader conclusions require additional justification.

Weaknesses:

1. The claim that olivooid-type feeding was most likely a prerequisite transitional form to jet-propelled swimming needs much more support or needs to be tailored to olivooids. This suggests that such behavior is absent (or must be convergent) before olivooids, which is at odds with the increasing quantities of pelagic life (whose modes of swimming are admittedly unconstrained) documented from Cambrian and Neoproterozoic deposits. Even among just medusozoans, ancestral state reconstruction suggests that they would have been swimming during the Neoproterozoic (Kayal et al., 2018; BMC Evolutionary Biology) with no knowledge of the mechanics due to absent preservation.<br /> 2. While the lack of ambient flow made these simulations computationally easier, these organisms likely did not live in stagnant waters even within the benthic boundary layer. The absence of ambient unidirectional laminar current or oscillating current (such as would be found naturally) biases the results.<br /> 3. There is no explanation for how this work could be a breakthrough in simulation gregarious feeding as is stated in the manuscript.

Despite these weaknesses the authors dynamic fluid simulations convincingly reconstruct the feeding/respiration dynamics of the Cambrian Quadrapyrgites, though the large claims of transitionary stages for this behavior are not adequately justified. Regardless, the approach the authors use will be informative for future studies attempting to simulate similar feeding and respiration dynamics.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary: The authors seek to elucidate the early evolution of cnidarians through computer modeling of fluid flow in the oral region of very small, putative medusozoan polyps. They propose that the evolutionary advent of the free-swimming medusoid life stage was preceded by a sessile benthic life stage equipped with circular muscles that originally functioned to facilitate feeding and that later became co-opted for locomotion through jet propulsion.

Strengths: Assumptions of the modeling exercise laid out clearly; interpretations of the results of the model runs in terms of functional morphology plausible. An intriguing investigation that should stimulate further discussion and research.

Weaknesses: Speculation on the origin of the medusoid life stage in cnidarians heavily dependent on prior assumptions concerning the soft part anatomy and material properties of the skeleton of the modeled fossil organism that may be open to alternative interpretations.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Precision guided sterile insect technology (pgSIT) is a means of mosquito vector control that aims to simultaneously kill females while generating sterile males for field release. These sterile males are expected to mate with 'wild' females resulting in very few eggs being laid or low hatching rates. Repeated releases are expected to result in the suppression of the mosquito population. This method avoids cumbersome sex-sorting while generating the sterile males. Importantly, until release, the two genetic elements that bring about female lethality and male sterility - the Cas9 and the gRNA carrying mosquitoes - are maintained as separate lines. They are crossed only prior to release, and therefore, this approach is considered to be more safe than gene drives.

The authors had made a version of this pgSIT in their 2021 paper where they targeted *β-Tubulin 85D*, which is only expressed in the male testes and its loss-of-function results in male sterility. In that pgSIT, they did not have female lethality, but generated flightless females by simultaneously targeted *myosin heavy chain,* which is expressed only in the female wings. Here the authors argue, that the survival of females is not ideal, and so modify their 2021 approach to achieve female lethality/sterility.

To do this, they target two genes - the female specific isoform of Dsx and intersex. They use multiple gRNAs against these genes and validate their ability to cause female lethality/sterility. Having verified that these do indeed affect female fertility, they combine gRNAs against Dsx and ix to generate female lethality/sterility and use *β-Tubulin 85D* to generate male sterility (previously validated). When these gRNA mosquitoes are crossed to Cas9 and the progeny crossed to WT (the set-up for pgSIT), they find that very few eggs are laid, larval death is high, and what emerges are males or intersex progeny that are sterile.

As this is the requirement for pgSIT, the authors then test if it is able to induce population suppression. To do this, they conduct cage trials and find that only when they use 20:1 or 40:1 ratio of pgSIT:WT cages, does the population crash in 4-5 generations. They model this pgSIT's ability to suppress a population in the wild. Unfortunately, I was not able to assess what parameters from their pgSIT were used in the model and therefore the predicted efficacy of their pgSIT, (though the range of 0-.1 is not great, given that the assessment is between 0-0.15).

Finally, they also develop a SENSR with a rapid fluorescence read-out for detecting the transgene in the field. They show that this sensor is specific and sensitive, detecting low copy numbers of the transgene. This would be important for monitoring any release.

Overall, the data are clear and well presented. The manuscript is well written (albeit likely dense for the uninitiated!). I had concerns about the efficacy of generating the pgSIT animals - the overall number of eggs hatched from the gRNA (X) Cas9 cross appears to be low, therefore, very large numbers of parental animals would have to be reared and crossed to obtain enough sterile males for the SIT. In addition to this, I was concerned about the intersex progeny that can blood-feed. These could potentially contribute to the population and it would be useful to see the data that suggest that these numbers are low and the animals will not be competent in the field.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

This is a thorough and convincing body of work that represents an incremental but significant improvement on iterations of this method of CRISPR-based Sterile Insect Technique ('pgSIT'). In this version, compared to previous, the authors target more genes than previously, in order to induce both female inviability (targeting the genes intersex and doublesex, compared to fem-myo previously) and male sterility (targeting a beta-tubulin, as previously in the release generation.<br /> The characterization of the lines is extensive and this data will be useful to the field. However, what is lacking is some context as to how this formulation compares to the previous iteration. Mention is made of the possible advantage of removing most females, compared to just making them flightless (as previously) but there is no direct comparison, either experimental, or theoretical i.e. imputing the life history traits into a model. For me this is a weakness, yet easily addressed. In a similar vein, much is made in alluding to the 'safety concerns of gene drive' and how this is a more palatable half-way house, just because it has CRISPR component within it; it is not. It would be much more sensible, and more informative, to compare this pgSIT technology to RIDL (release of insects carrying a dominant lethal), which is essentially a transgene-based version of the Sterile Insect Technique, as is the work presented here.

The authors achieve impressive results and show that these strains, under a scenario of high levels of release ratios compared to WT, could achieve significant local suppression of mosquito populations. The sensitivity analysis that examines the effect of changing different biological or release parameters is well performed and very informative.

The authors are honest in acknowledging that there are still challenges in bringing this to field release, namely in developing sexing strains and optimizing release strategies - a question I have here is how to actually release eggs, and could variability in the efficiency of this aspect be modelled in the sensitivity analysis? It seems to me like this could be a challenge and inherently very variable.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary and Strengths:

The manuscript by Li et al. presents an elegant application of sterile insect technology (pgSIT) utilizing a CRISPR-Cas9 system to suppress mosquito vector populations. The pgSIT technique outlined in this paper employs a binary system where Cas9 and gRNA are conjoined in experimental crosses to yield sterile male mosquitoes. Employing a multiplexed strategy, the authors combine multiple gRNA to concurrently target various genes within a single locus. This approach successfully showcases the disruption of three distinct genes at different genomic positions, resulting in the creation of highly effective sterile mosquitoes for population control. The pioneering work of the Akbari lab has been instrumental in developing this technology, previously demonstrating its efficacy in Drosophila and Aedes aegypti.

By targeting the female-specific splice isoform (exon-5) of doublesex in conjunction with intersex and β-tubulin, the researchers induce female lethality, leading to a predominance of sterile male mosquitoes. This innovation is particularly noteworthy as the deployment of sterile mosquitoes on a large scale typically requires substantial investment in sex sorting. However, this study circumvents this challenge through genetic manipulation.

Weaknesses:

One notable concern arising from this manuscript pertains to the absence of data regarding the potential off-target effects of the gRNA. Given the utilization of multiple gRNA, the risk of unintended mutations in non-target areas of the genome increases. With around 1% of males still capable of producing fertile offspring, understanding the frequency of unintended genome targeting becomes crucial. Such mutations could potentially become fixed within the natural population.<br /> The experiments are well-conceived, featuring suitable controls and repeated trials to yield statistically significant data. However, a primary issue with the manuscript lies in its data presentation. The authors' graphical representations are intricate and demand considerable attention to discern the nuances, especially due to the striking similarity between the symbols representing different genotypes. As it stands, the manuscript primarily caters to experts within the field, thereby warranting improvements in data visualization for broader comprehension.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Despite durable viral suppression by antiretroviral therapy (ART), HIV-1 persists in cellular reservoirs in vivo. The viral reservoir in circulating memory T cells has been well characterized, in part due to the ability to safely obtain blood via peripheral phlebotomy from people living with HIV-1 infection (PWH). Tissue reservoirs in PWH are more difficult to sample and are less well understood. In this small (n=3) autopsy study, Sun and colleagues use an advanced genetic sequencing technique to characterize HIV-1 that persists in human tissues despite antiretroviral therapy. The authors describe isolation and genetic characterization of HIV-1 reservoirs from a variety of tissues including the central nervous system (CNS) obtained from three recently deceased individuals at autopsy. They identified clonally expanded proviruses in the CNS in all three individuals.

Strengths of the work include the study of human tissues that are under-studied and difficult to access, and the sophisticated near-full length sequencing technique that allows for inferences about genetic intactness and clonality of proviruses. The small sample size (n=3) is a drawback. Furthermore, two individuals were on ART for just one year at the time of autopsy and had T cells compatible with AIDS, and one of these individuals had a low-level detectable viral load (Figure S1). This makes generalizability of these results to PWH who have been on ART for years or decades and have achieved durable viral suppression and immune reconstitution difficult.

While anatomic tissue compartment and CNS region accompany these PCR results, it is unclear which cell types these viruses persist in. As the authors point out, it is possible that these reservoir cells might have been infiltrating T cells from blood present at the time of autopsy tissue sampling. Cell type identification would greatly enhance the impact of this work. Overall, this small, thoughtful study contributes to our understanding of the tissue distribution of persistent HIV-1, and informs the ongoing search for viral eradication.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

The authors were trying to survey reservoir viral sequences in different anatomical sites in the body, with the brain being of special interest. This is a study that is technically demanding and here is well done, providing insights that prompt new and more sophisticated questions.

The authors use end-point dilution PCR to identify individual proviruses that can then be sequenced with high accuracy. These are high quality data sets but given the technical requirements of this approach the number of sequenced proviruses is limiting given the scope of questions this study addresses. Nonetheless, there is a lot of data here to draw many useful conclusions.

It will be important to realize how clones of infected T cells can move around the body, including into the CNS compartment. It will also be important to remember that there are limits in sampling depth of proviruses in any one tissue meaning the failure to detect something has a limit in sensitivity of detection when trying to interpret a negative result.

As noted in the next section, it is important to emphasize that there is another entry phenotype beyond X4 that will ultimately be important in interpreting these results. Macrophage-tropic viruses are often found in the CNS compartment and it will be important to understand whether these CNS-derived sequences are macrophage-tropic viruses there infecting macrophages and microglia or if they are all T-tropic viruses brought in by wandering infected T cells (or both).

Joint Public Review:

In this manuscript, Xue and colleagues investigate the fundamental aspects of cellular fate decisions and differentiation, focusing on the dynamic behaviour of gene regulatory networks. It explores the debate between static (noise-driven) and dynamic (signal-driven) perspectives within Waddington's epigenetic landscape, highlighting the essential role of gene regulatory networks in this process. The authors propose an integrated analysis of fate-decision modes and gene regulatory networks, using the Cross-Inhibition with Self-activation (CIS) network as a model. Through mathematical modelling, they differentiate two logic modes and their effect on cell fate decisions: requires both the presence of an activator and absence of a repressor (AA configuration) with one where transcription occurs as long the repressor is not the only species on the promoter (OO configuration).

The authors establish a relationship between noise profiles, logic-motifs, and fate-decision modes, showing that defining any two of these properties allows the inference of the third. They also identify, under the signal-driven mode, two fundamental patterns of cell fate decisions: either prioritising progression or accuracy in the differentiation process. The authors apply this analysis to available high-throughput datasets of cell fate decisions in hematopoiesis and embryogenesis, proposing the underlying driving force in each case and utilising the observed noise patterns to nominate key regulators.

The paper makes a substantial contribution by rigorously evaluating assumptions in gene regulatory network modelling. Notably, it extensively compares two model configurations based on different integration logic, illuminating the consequences of these assumptions in a clear, understandable manner. The practical simulation results effectively bridge theoretical models with real biological systems, adding relevance to the study's insights. With its potential to enhance our understanding of gene regulatory networks across biological processes, the paper holds promise. Its implications extend practically to synthetic circuit design, impacting biotechnology. The conclusions stand out, addressing cell fate decisions and noise's role in gene networks, contributing significantly to our understanding. Moreover, the adaptable approach proposed offers versatility for broader applications in diverse scenarios, solidifying its relevance beyond its current scope.

However, the manuscript in its current form also has some important weaknesses, including the lack of clarity in the text and the questionable generality of specific observations. For instance, even when focusing on the CIS network, the effect of alternative model implementations is not discussed. Notably, the input signals are only considered as an additive effect over the differential equations, while signals can potentially affect each of the individual processes. The proposed model allows for a continuum of interactions/competition between transcription factors, yet only very restrictive scenarios are explored (strict AND/OR logic operations). Moreover, how the model parameters are chosen throughout the paper is not clear. Similarly, the concentration and time units are not clearly specified, making their comparison to experimental data troublesome.

Regarding clarity, how the general model (equations 1-2) transforms into the specific cases evaluated in the paper is not clearly stated in the main text, nor are the positive and negative effects of individual transcription factors adequately explained. Similarly, in the main text and Figure 2, the authors refer to a Boolean model. However, they do not clearly explain how this relates to the differential equation model, nor its relevance to understanding the paper. Additionally, the term "noise levels" is generally used to refer to noise introduced in the "noise-driven" analysis (i.e., as an input or parameter in the models). Nonetheless, it is later claimed to be evaluated as an intrinsic property of the network (likely referring to expression level variability measured by the coefficient of variation). Finally, some jargon is introduced without sufficient context about its meaning (e.g., "temporal fully-connected stage").

Additionally, proper discussion of previous work is also missing. For instance, the dynamics of the CIS network investigated by the authors have been extensively characterised (see e.g., Huang et al., Dev Biol, 2007), and how the author's results compare to this previous work should be discussed. In particular, the central assumptions behind the derivation of the model proposed in the manuscript must be assessed in the context of previous work.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> Human Abeta42 inhibits gamma-secretase activity in biochemical assays.

Strengths:<br /> Determination of inhibitory concentration human Abeta42 on gamma-secretase activity in biochemical assays.

Weaknesses:<br /> Human Abeta42 may concentrate up to microM order in endosomes. If so, production of Abeta42 would be attenuated then lead to less Abeta deposition in the brain. The authors finding is interesting but does not fit the physiological condition in the brain.<br /> It is not clear whether the FRET-based assay in living cells really reflect gamma-secretase activity.<br /> Processing of APP-CTF in living cells is not only the cleavage by gamma-secretase.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> In the current study, the authors tested the hypothesis that Aβ42 toxicity arises from its proven affinity for γ-secretases. Specifically, the increases in Aβ42, particularly in the endolysosomal compartment, promote the establishment of a product feedback inhibitory mechanism on γ-secretases, and thereby impair downstream signaling events. They showed that human Aβ42 peptides, but neither murine Aβ42 nor human Aβ17-42 (p3), inhibit γ-secretases and trigger accumulation of unprocessed substrates in neurons, including (CTFs of APP, p75 and pan-cadherin. Moreover, Aβ42 dysregulated cellular homeostasis by inducing p75-dependent neuronal death. Because γ-secretases process many other membrane proteins, including NOTCH, ERB-B2<br /> receptor tyrosine kinase 4 (ERBB4), N-cadherin (NCAD) and p75 neurotrophin receptor (p75-NTR), revealing a broad range of downstream signaling pathways, including those critical for neuronal structure and function. Hence, they propose to identification of a selective role for the Aβ42 peptide, and raise the intriguing possibility that compromised γ-secretase activity against the CTFs of APP and/or other neuronal substrates contributes to the pathogenesis of AD. Overall, the data are not very convincing to support the main claim.

Strengths.

Different in vitro and cellular approaches are employed to test the hypothesis.

Weaknesses.

The experimental concentrations for Aβ42 peptide in the assay are too high, which are far beyond the physiological concentrations or pathological levels. The artificial observations are not supported by any in vivo experimental evidence.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

In this manuscript, Tian et al. describe a novel modified version of the pro-drug triptolide, CK21, and provide evidence for its improved pharmacokinetics and its safety and efficacy in multiple xenograft models of pancreatic cancer. The authors performed transcriptomic analysis upon CK21 treatment which revealed that downregulation of NF-kB and mitochondrial dysfunction induce apoptosis and therefore lead to tumor regression. Downregulation of NF-kB and induction of apoptosis was then validated in vitro and in vivo. These findings have potential clinical significance as the efficacy of CK21 in preclinical PDAC models is compelling. However, there are also some limitations to their experiments and more validation studies are necessary to strengthen their findings regarding the mechanism of action of the drug. Specifically, the authors suggest that mitochondrial dysfunction is responsible for the observed apoptosis; however, this is not demonstrated. Additionally, side-by-side comparisons to other clinical triptolide analogs to show CK21 is at least as efficacious as other analogs in vivo would be valuable, especially since other analogs have been shown to synergize with conventional chemotherapy in PDAC mouse models, whereas CK21 does not appear to. Moreover, assessing whether CK21 is efficacious in syngeneic orthotopic PDAC models is critical, especially since CK21 was shown to have an impact on NF-KB which plays a major role in the immune compartment and triptolide has been shown to be immunosuppressive.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

The authors describe the synthesis and testing of the anti-cancer activity of a new molecule CK21 against pancreatic cancer mouse models. This part of the study is very strong showing regression of pancreatic tumors at non-toxic concentrations, which is very hard to achieve for practically uncurable pancreatic cancer. Authors synthesized CK21 as an analog of a known inhibitor of RNA synthesis which is very toxic. The authors did very little attempt to understand whether the mechanism of anti-cancer efficacy of CK2 is similar to this known inhibitor of transcription or not. One cannot compare gene expression profiles between untreated and CK21-treated cells, taking into account that CK2 may inhibit the expression of all genes. The effect of CK2 on general transcription needs to be tested first, and then based on this data absolute changes in the expression of genes may be considered for the revealing of the mechanism of activity of CK21.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

This manuscript describes CK21, a modified version of Triptolide, a natural compound with ant-cancer activities, to improve its bioavailability. The authors tested the compound in two human pancreatic cancer cell lines, in vitro and in vivo. The authors also use two human organoid lines derived from pancreatic cancer, and mouse KC and KPC cell lines. In all models, CK21 treatment induces dose-dependent cytotoxicity. In vivo, CK21 causes tumor regression. The authors perform gene expression analysis and show that treated organoids have generally lower transcription, consistent with cytotoxicity, and a reduction in the KFkB pathway activation.

Key experiments that would strengthen the current manuscript are: the inclusion of normal cell lines and organoids, too, presumably, show no cytotoxic effect. If that is the case, the authors would have the opportunity to compare responses and determine whether a tumor-specific mechanism can be defined.

The authors observe that few gene changes - besides from overall lowering in transcription, occur upon treatment with CK21. They suggest that the drug acts through inhibition of the NFkB pathway and an increase in reactive oxygen species (ROS). However, no experiments to test whether either/both of these findings explain the cytotoxic effect (rescue experiments would be particularly valuable).

In the last figure, the authors text whether CK21 is immunosuppressive by testing immunity against a mis-matched tumor cell line (using KPC tumors, mixed strain, in mixed strain mice). The immunity against HLA mis-matched cells is a very strong immune reaction, and mild immune suppression might be missed, which diminishes the value of these findings.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Ruesseler and colleagues combine careful paradigm design, psychophysical and EEG analyses to determine whether information leakage during decision formation is strategically adjusted to meet changing task demands. Participants made motion direction judgments that required monitoring a continuous stream of dot motion for 'response periods' characterised by a sustained period of coherent motion in a leftward or rightward direction. Coherence was modulated on a frame-to-frame basis throughout the task furnishing a parametric regressor that could be used to interrogate the longevity of sensory samples in the decision process and their influence on corresponding EEG signals. Participants completed the task under varying conditions of response period length and frequency. Psychophysical kernel analyses suggest that sensory samples had a more short-lived impact on the participants' choices when response periods were rare, suggestive of greater information leakage. When the stimulus perturbations were regressed against the EEG data, it highlighted a centro-parietal component that showed increased responsiveness to large shifts in evidence when those shifts were more rare, suggestive of a role in representing surprise. An additional triphasic component was found to correlate with the time constant of integration as estimated from the kernel analyses.

This is a very timely paper that addresses an important and difficult-to-address question in the decision-making field - the degree to which information leakage can be strategically adapted to optimise decisions in a task-dependent fashion. The authors apply a sophisticated suite of analyses that are appropriate and yield a range of very interesting observations. The paper centres on analyses of one possible model that hinges on certain assumptions about the nature of the decision process for this task which raises questions about whether leak adjustments are the only possible explanation for the current data. I think the conclusions would be greatly strengthened if they were supported by the application and/or simulation of alternative model structures.

The behavioural trends when comparing blocks with frequent versus rare response periods seem difficult to tally with a change in the leak. The greater leak should result in a reduction in the rate of false alarms yet no significant differences were observed between these two conditions. Meanwhile, false alarms did vary as a function of short/long target durations which did not show any leak effect in the psychophysical kernel analyses. Are there other models that could reproduce such effects? For example, could a model in which the drift rate varies between Rare and Frequent trials do a similar or better job of explaining the data? This ties in to a related query about the nature of the task employed by the authors. Due to the very significant volatility of the stimulus, it seems likely that the participants are not solely making judgments about the presence/absence of coherent motion but also making judgments about its duration (because strong coherent motion frequently occurs in the inter-target intervals). If that is so, then could the Rare condition equate to less evidence because there is an increased probability that an extended period of coherent motion could be an outlier generated from the noise distribution? Note that a drift rate reduction would also be expected to result in fewer hits and slower reaction times, as observed.

Some adjustment of the language used when discussing FAs seems merited. If I have understood correctly, the sensory samples encountered by the participants during the inter-response intervals can at times favour a particular alternative just as strongly (or more strongly) than that encountered during the response interval itself. In that sense, the responses are not necessarily real false alarms because the physical evidence itself does not distinguish the target from the non-target. I don't think this invalidates the authors' approach but I think it should be acknowledged and considered in light of the comment above regarding the nature of the decision process employed on this task.

The authors report that preparatory motor activity over central electrodes reached a larger decision threshold for RARE vs. FREQUENT response periods. It is not clear what identifies this signal as reflecting motor preparation. Did the authors consider using other effector-selective EEG signatures of motor preparation such as beta-band activity which has been used elsewhere to make inferences about decision bounds? Assuming that this central ERP signal does reflect the decision bounds, the observation that it has a larger amplitude at the response on Rare trials appears to directly contradict the kernel analyses which suggest no difference in the cumulative evidence required to trigger commitment.

P11, the "absolute sensory evidence" regressor elicited a triphasic potential over centroparietal electrodes. The first two phases of this component look to have an occipital focus. The third phase has a more centroparietal focus but appears markedly more posterior than the change in evidence component. This raises the question of whether it is safe to assume that they reflect the same process.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

In this manuscript, Ruesseler and colleagues use a continuous task to examine how neural correlates of decision-making change when subjects face conditions with different durations and frequencies of occurrence of signals embedded in noise. The authors develop a novel task where subjects must report the direction of relatively sustained (3 or 5 s) signal changes in average coherence of a random dot kinetogram that are intermittent among relatively transient noise fluctuations (<1 s) of motion coherence that is continuous. Subjects adjust their behavior to changes in the duration of signal events and the frequency of their occurrence. The authors estimate a decay time constant of leaky integration of evidence based on the average coherence leading up to decision responses. Interestingly, there is considerable inter-subject variability in decay time constants even under identical conditions. In addition, the average time constants are shorter when signal periods occur more frequently as opposed to when they are more rare. The authors use EEG to find that a component of the Centroparietal Positivity (CPP) regressed to the magnitude of changes in the noise coherence is larger in conditions when the signal periods occur less frequently. Using a control condition, the authors show that this component of the CPP is not simply based on surprise because it is smaller for changes in motion coherence in irrelevant directions with matched statistics as the changes in relevant directions. The authors also find that a different component of the CPP related to the magnitude of the motion coherence co-varies with the inter-subject variability in decay time constants estimated from behavior.

Overall, the authors use a clever experimental design and approach to tackle an important set of questions in the field of decision-making. The manuscript is easy to follow with clear writing. The analyses are well thought-out and generally appropriate for the questions at hand. From these analyses, the authors have a number of intriguing results. So, there is considerable potential and merit in this work. That said, I have a number of important questions and concerns that largely revolve around putting all the pieces together. I describe these below.

1) Quite sensibly, the authors hypothesize that "decay time constant" for past evidence and "decision threshold" would be altered between the different task conditions. They find clear and compelling evidence of behavioral alterations with the conditions. They also have a method to estimate the decay time constant. However, it is unclear to what extent the decision threshold is changing between subjects and conditions, how that might affect the empirical integration kernel, and how well these two factors can together explain the overall changes in behavior.

To be more specific, the authors state that the lower false alarm rates and slower reaction times for the LONG condition are consistent with a more cautious response threshold for LONG. The empirical integration kernels lead to the suggestion that the decay time constant is not changing between SHORT and LONG, while it is changing between FREQUENT and RARE. Does the lack of change in false alarm rate between FREQUENT and RARE imply no change in the decision threshold? Is this consistent with the behavior shown in Figure 2? I would expect that less decay in RARE would have led to more false alarms, higher detection rates, and faster RTs unless the decision threshold also increased (or there was some other additional change to the decision process). The CPP for motor preparatory activity reported in Fig. 5 is also potentially consistent with a change in the decision threshold between RARE and FREQUENT. If the decision threshold is changing, how would that affect the empirical integration kernel? These are important questions on their own and also for interpreting the EEG changes.

2) The authors find an interesting difference in the CPP for the FREQUENT vs RARE conditions where they also show differences in the decay time constant from the empirical integration kernel. As mentioned above, I'm wondering what else may be different between these conditions. Do the authors have any leverage in addressing whether the decision threshold differs? What about other factors that could be important for explaining the CPP difference between conditions? Big picture, the change in CPP becomes increasingly interesting the more tightly it can be tied to a particular change in the decision process.

I'll note that I'm also somewhat skeptical of the statements by the authors that large shifts in evidence are less frequent in the RARE compared to FREQUENT conditions (despite the names) - a central part of their interpretation of the associated CPP change. The FREQUENT condition obviously has more frequent deviations from the baseline, but this is countered to some extent by the experimental design that has reduced the standard deviation of the coherence for these response periods. I think a calculation of overall across-time standard deviation of motion coherence between the RARE and FREQUENT conditions is needed to support these statements, and I couldn't find that calculation reported. The authors could easily do this, so I encourage them to check and report it.

3) The wide range of decay time constants between subjects and the correlation of this with another component of the CPP is also interesting. However, in trying to interpret this change in CPP, I'm wondering what else might be changing in the inter-subject behavior. For instance, it looks like there could be up to 4 fold changes in false alarm rates. Are there other changes as well? Do these correlate with the CPP? Similar to my point above, the changes in CPP across subjects become increasingly interesting the more tightly it can be tied to a particular difference in subject behavior. So, I would encourage the authors to examine this in more depth.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

The authors are designing a novel continuous evidence accumulation task to look at neural and behavioral adaptations of continuously changing evidence. They particularly focus on centroparietal EEG potential that has been previously linked with evidence accumulation. This paper provides a novel method and analysis to investigate evidence accumulation in a continuous task set-up.

I am not familiar with either the EEG or evidence accumulation literature, therefore cannot comment on the strength of the findings related to centroparietal EEG in evidence accumulation. I have therefore commented only on the coherence and details of the method and clarity of the argumentation and results.

The main strength is in the task design which is novel and provides an interesting approach to studying continuous evidence accumulation. Because of the continuous nature of the task, the authors design new ways to look at behavioral and neural traces of evidence. The reverse-correlation method looking at the average of past coherence signals enables us to characterize the changes in signal leading to a decision bound and its neural correlate.<br /> By varying the frequency and length of the so-called response period, that the participants have to identify, the method potentially offers rich opportunities to the wider community to look at various aspects of decision-making under sensory uncertainty.

The main weaknesses that I see lie within the description and rigor of the method. The authors refer multiple times to the time constant of the exponential fit to the signal before the decision but do not provide a rigorous method for its calculation and neither a description of the goodness of the fit. The variable names seem to change throughout the text which makes the argumentation confusing to the reader. The figure captions are incomplete and lack clarity.<br /> The authors claim that the method enables continuous analysis of decision-making and evidence accumulation which is true. The analysis of the signals that come prior to the decision provides a rich opportunity to characterize decision bound in this task. The behavioral and neural analyses globally lack clarity and description and thus do not strongly support the claims of the paper. The interpretation of the figures within the figure caption and the lack of a neutral and exhaustive description of what is being shown prevent the claims to be strongly supported.

The continuous nature of the task and the computation of those evidence kernels are valuable methods to look at evidence accumulation that could be of use within the community. However, due to the lack of rigor in the analysis and description of the method, it is hard to know if the current dataset is under-exploited or whether the choice of the parameters for this set of experiment does not enable stronger claims.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

The paper first demonstrates that heat-killed bacteria show little DAF-16 activation compared to live food. Of note, daf-16 survival is longer than WT when fed HK bacteria, giving important insights into the lethality of these mutants. Leakiness of the gut is assessed, which is induced by age and exacerbated by daf-16 mutation. The authors then go on to identify indole as the causal bacterial compound to drive daf-16 nuclear localization. The indole effect is fully daf-16 dependent. In searching for the indole sensor in the worm, TRPA-1 is identified and the authors argue that indole is sensed in neurons to modulate gut DAF-16. Closing the circle, lys genes are identified whose expression is upregulated by daf-16 and indole, and which are required to control bacterial growth in the gut with aging.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

The study by Yang et al. examines the interactions between a model host, the nematode C. elegans, and its gut bacteria during aging, focusing on how the host responds to progressing bacterial colonization. In a sense, this work follows up on a previous report describing the activation of DAF-16 in middle-aged worms. Here they test the importance of DAF-16 for aging-dependent accumulation of E. coli in the worm gut, as a model for responses to, and mitigation of, dysbiosis, which in humans is associated with pathology.

The mechanism unraveled in this study includes the sensing of increasing concentrations of indole, a tryptophan metabolite that is secreted by the accumulating gut bacteria, which dependent on the neuronal cation channel TRPA-1 (and NOT through the known indole receptor AHR-1), activates intestinal DAF-16, driving its nuclear translocation and leading to subsequent induction of downstream targets, of which LYS-7 and LYS-8 are essential for diminishing bacterial colonization and mitigating the associated damage.

The authors provide very clean and very strong evidence to support the described mechanism, clean identification of indole as the metabolite responsible for DAF-16 nuclear localization, and good indole supplementation experiments and measurements of indole levels inside of worms to support its function. At the same time, some of the methods are not completely clear - for example, how did the authors obtain pure bioactive fraction to run their NMR analysis and identify indole as the activating molecule (this should be clarified in, or added to the method section); or how were indole supplementation experiments carried out? On solid media, i.e. NGM plates, or in solution; with live bacteria, or heat-killed ones? (this is important for figuring out if indole sensing is from the outside or from the gut); and in a few cases the results appear too clear-cut, like the contribution of lys-7 and lys-8 to controlling gut bacteria - these two lysozymes seem to be sufficient to account for the entire contribution of DAF-16, which is surprising considering the large number of downstream targets this transcription factor has, as well as the very redundant nature of innate immune protection, which would have suggested the partial ability to protect at best; this should be considered and discussed.

Overall, though, the study is strong, and the conclusions are well supported. Given this, its potential impact is high, to inform our understanding of how animals respond to dysbiosis and the mechanisms aimed at mitigating potential detrimental effects of dysbiosis. Here, dysbiosis is manifested as increased colonization of aging worms by bacteria that cannot colonize young adults. In humans, dysbiosis manifests as imbalances in microbiome composition, which may include the proliferation of some gut bacteria at the expense of others. Thus, the mechanisms characterized here, which are conserved in humans, may play similar roles in human pathology and may offer handles to try and mitigate the detrimental effects of dysbiosis.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Dysbiosis has a substantial impact on host physiology. Using the nematode C. elegans and E.coli as a model of host-microbe interactions, Yang et al. defined a mechanism by which the host deals with gut dysbiosis to maintain fitness. They found that accumulation of E. coli in the intestine secreted indole, a tryptophan metabolite, and activated the transcription factor DAF-16. DAF-16 induced the expression of lys-7 and lys-8, which in turn limited E. coli proliferation in the gut of worms and maintained the longevity of worms. Finally, these authors demonstrated that indole-activated DAF-16 via TRPA-1 in neurons of worms.

This study revealed a new mechanism of host-microbe interaction. The concept of their work is of broad interest and the results they present are convincing. However, there are some issues that need to be addressed to support the conclusions.

Major issues<br /> 1. The authors isolated the crude extract from a high-performance liquid chromatograph (HPLC). A candidate compound was detected by activity-guided isolation and further identified as indole with mass spectrometry and NMR data.<br /> The HPLC fractionations and activity-guided isolation experiments should be described in more detail with a schematic figure to reveal how these experiments were performed and how indole was identified. Showing a chemical characterization of indole in Figure 2A is not sufficient for the evaluation of the results. Rather, a figure comparing the fraction 26th with standard indole by MS and NMR is more appealing.

2. DAF-16::GFP was mainly located in the cytoplasm of the intestine in worms expressing daf-16p::daf-16::gfp fed live E. coli OP50 on Day 1 (Figure 1A and 1B). The nuclear translocation of DAF-16 in the intestine was increased in worms fed live E. coli OP50 on Days 4 and 7, but not in age-matched WT worms fed heat-killed (HK)E. coli OP50 (Figure 1A and 1B).<br /> Since DAF-16 functions downstream of DAF-2, have the levels of DAF-2 been tested during aging on OP50 and (HK)OP50, or with and without indole supplementation?

3. In lines 155-157, the author argued that the increase in the levels of indole in worms results from the intestinal accumulation of live E. coli OP50, rather than exogenous indole produced by E. coli OP50 on the NGM plates.<br /> However, the work also showed that supplementation with indole (50-200 μM) could significantly increase the indole levels in young adult worms on Day 1 (Figure 2-figure supplement 3B), which could induce nuclear translocation of DAF-16 in worms (Figure 2B).<br /> This result suggested that worms could take in indole from outside culturing environment. The concentration of indole in OP50 and (HK)OP50 could be measured.

4. Recent work showed that the multicopy DAF-16 transgene acts differently from the single copy GFP knockin DAF-16 transgene. Which DAF-16 transgene was used in this work?

5. In lines 190-193, the author argued that the supplementation with indole (100 M) inhibited the CFU of E. coli K-12 in WT worms, but not daf-16(mu86) mutants, on Days 4 and 7 (Figure 3H and 3I). These results suggest that endogenous indole is involved in maintaining a normal lifespan in worms.<br /> This is overstating. The data here more likely suggest that indole could inhibit the proliferation of E.coli through DAF-16.

6. Sonowal (2017) reported that AHR mediates indole-promoted lifespan extension at 16oC. Yet this work argued that RNAi knockdown of ahr-1 did not affect the nuclear translocation of DAF-16 in worms fed E. coli K12 strain on Day 7 (Figure 4-figure supplement 1A) or young adult worms treated with indole (100 M) for 24 h.<br /> The difference between these two works should be discussed.

7. Sonowal (2017) conducted mRNA profiling for worms growing on K12 and K12△tnaA. Is TRPA1 in their de-regulated gene list? Have other de-regulated genes been tested in this work?

8. How does indole activate TRPA1? In the absence of trpa1, what is the concentration of indole in worms? Since TRPA1 is a channel, is there any possibility that TRPA1 is involved in the transport of indole? It is really interesting and surprising that neuronal TRPA-1, but not intestinal TRPA-1, mediates the beneficial effect of indole. How does indole specifically activate TRPA-1 in neurons to preserve the longevity of worms?

9. How neuronal- and intestinal-specific knockdown of trpa-1 by RNAi was conducted? And what is the tissue-specific expression pattern of trap-1? Speculating how indole was transported to neuron cells is pretty appealing.

10. Supplementation with indole only up-regulated the expression of lys-7 and lys-8 in worms subjected to intestinal-specific (Figure 7-figure supplement 2C), but not neuronal-specific, RNAi of trpa-1 (Figure 7-figure supplement 2D).<br /> If this is the case, should the addition of indole specifically induce the expression of lys-7p::gfp or lys-8p::gfp in neurons?

11. The authors demonstrated that K-12△tnaA strain had undetectable tnaA mRNA or indole levels. Furthermore, the deletion of tnaA significantly inhibited the nuclear translocation of DAF-16 in worms. However, mutations in E. coli still have non-specific effects as there are several transposon insertions or polar mutations influencing downstream genes. The authors should demonstrate that only disruption of TnaA causes the failure of nuclear translocation of DAF-16.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

The strongest aspect of the study is the identification of the probable Ric-8A/NCS-1 interface through the crystal structures of NCS-1 complexed with candidate peptide mimetics from Ric-8A. However, since the structures involve peptides, it is critical to validate this interface with mutational analysis of the full-length or truncated Ric-8A. Furthermore, the evidence for the complex structure based on cryo-EM reconstruction is weak. The low resolution does not allow for reliable modeling of the complex. Two analyses may support the authors' main conclusions: a) validation of the interface with mutational analysis of Ric-8A, and b) new optimized sample/grid preparation for cryo-EM data collection.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

In this study, the authors characterize regulatory control of embryonic genome activation in the allotetraploid, Xenopus laevis. By characterizing transcription from its L and S subgenomes, they determine that homeologous genes are differentially activated in the early embryo. It has recently been appreciated that homeologs may be differentially expressed in later embryonic development (Session and Rokhsar, Nature 2016). However, an unanswered question is whether vertebrate tetraploid genomes undergo differential induction at the onset of the major wave of zygotic genome activation (ZGA). This is a fertile area for research, that enables the study of gene regulatory network adaptations to changes in ploidy, limited by the constraints of gene dosage and an essential early developmental transition. Xenopus laevis, which recently underwent a tetraploidization event, approximately 18 million years ago, provides a very useful model embryonic system for the study of homeologous gene activation during vertebrate ZGA.

To characterize differential subgenome activation the authors focused on the ~ 2600 maternally-regulated genes expressed in the first wave of widespread ZGA. They treated embryos with cycloheximide at Stage 8 to prevent the translation of zygotic factors that would further alter the transcriptome. They found a majority of these maternally-regulated genes have asymmetric expression between the two homeologs, with transcription often occurring from the L or S copy alone. This is a fascinating result from which to dig deeper into gene regulatory mechanisms. To understand whether cis-regulatory networks dictate the biased L/S homeolog expression in the late blastula, the authors performed CUT&RUN to map active chromatin marks, H3K4me3 and H3K27ac. However, they found no differences in promoter sequences of homeologs that would implicate differential recruitment of specific transcription factors. Instead, they focused on distal enhancers and additionally performed ATAC-seq on Stage 8 and 9 animal cap explants. Approximately 70% of enhancers for homeolog pairs exhibited differential H3K27ac enrichment and chromatin accessibility. The authors then searched for transcription factor binding motifs that distinguished active enhancers from their inactive homeolog. They found binding sequences for OCT4 and SOX2/3 were enriched in active L enhancers and active S enhancers. To assess the role of these pluripotency factors, they used antisense morpholinos to block their translation in the early embryo. MOs were complementary to both the L and S homeologs of pou5f3.3 and sox3, but not to their paralogs that are primarily expressed zygotically; pou5f3.1 and pou5f3.2. MO knockdown of both Pou5f3.3 and Sox3 was inhibited leading to significant downregulation of 62% of activated genes compared to embryos injected with a control morpholino. They also analyzed binding to the genome of V5-tagged, injected versions of these 2 transcription factors and found some evidence for differential binding around TSS of homeolog pairs and a correlation between binding and the overall level of transcription at ZGA. Finally, they compare enhancer marks and accessibility in tetraploid X.laevis subgenomes to homologous enhancers in the diploid X.tropicalis. They conclude conservation of active enhancers with X.tropicalis and even zebrafish when considering the combined data from X.laevis L and S subgenome.

There are many strengths of this manuscript. In this interesting study, the authors identify what appears to be an evolutionary divergence of enhancers in a vertebrate tetraploid, that may underlie the differential expression of homeologs during the first major wave of ZGA. They generate CUT&RUN datasets of active chromatin marks during the early and late blastula. Additionally, they provide binding data for pluripotency factors OCT4 and SOX2/3 and demonstrate that their MO knockdown leads to reduced expression at ZGA. Their analyses identify correlations between differential homeolog expression and active or accessible chromatin. Further, they identify that active enhancers are enriched in OCT4 and SOX2/3. Enthusiasm is somewhat dampened by a lack of direct perturbation to differential subgenome activation or an understanding of the functional impacts of differential homeolog expression on subsequent development.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Hybridization events between species are known to result in substantial genomic upheaval, requiring subsequent coordination between gene copies to ensure proper control of gene expression and embryonic viability. An example of such an event happened over 18 million years ago between two frog species that resulted in Xenopus laevis-an allotetraploid that has largely retained copies of both genes from this event, known as L-alleles and S-alleles. Often, the presence of both copies presents an experimental and bioinformatic hurdle for researchers and is a feature of the biology of X. laevis that renders cross-species comparisons difficult. Phelps et al, however, take advantage of this feature of Xenopus biology and use it to their advantage to ask how the hybridization event in this species altered gene regulatory architecture. They find that a handful of pluripotency genes are largely responsible for activating gene expression in the early embryo, but that L and S alleles are differentially activated in many cases. Moreover, they find extensive differences in cis-regulatory architecture between L/S alleles. Despite these differences in alleles, however, they find that their combined gene expression output is largely conserved, possibly reflecting strong selection pressures acting to maintain gene expression output at specific levels. This work represents a significant advance in how hybridization events are something greatly understudied in developmental biology-influence gene regulatory programs and how evolutionary pressures have shaped these programs in response to such events.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

The study by Akter et al demonstrates that astrocyte-derived L-lactate plays a key role in schema memory formation and promotes mitochondrial biogenesis in the Anterior Cingulate Cortex (ACC).

The main tool used by the authors is the DREADD technology that allows to pharmacologically activate receptors in a cell-specific manner. In the study, the authors used the DREADD technique to activate appropriately transfected astrocytes, a subtype of muscarinic receptor that is not normally present in cells. This receptor being coupled to a Gi-mediated signal transduction pathway inhibiting cAMP formation, the authors could demonstrate cell-(astrocyte) specific decreases in cAMP levels that result in decreased L-lactate production by astrocytes.

Behaviorally this pharmacological manipulation results in impairments of schema memory formation and retrieval in the ACC in flavor-place paired associate paradigms. Such impairments are prevented by co-administration of L-lactate.

The authors also show that activation of Gi signaling resulting in L-lactate decreased release by astrocytes impairs mitochondrial biogenesis in neurons in an L-lactate reversible manner.

By using MCT 2 inhibitors and an NMDAR antagonist the authors conclude that the molecular mechanisms underlying the observed effects are mediated by L-lactate entering neurons through MCT2 transporters and involve NMDAR.

Overall, the article's conclusions are warranted by the experimental evidence, but some weak points could be addressed which would make the conclusions even stronger.

The number of animals in some of the experiments is on the low side (4 to 6).<br /> The use of CIN to inhibit MCT2 is not optimal. Authors may want to decrease MCT2 expression by using antisense oligonucleotides.<br /> The experiment using AVP to block NMDAR only partially supports the conclusions. Indeed, blocking NMDAR will knock down any response that involves these receptors, whether L-lactate is necessary or not.<br /> Is inhibition of glycogenolysis involved in the observed effects mediated by Gi signaling? Indeed, L-lactate is formed both by glycolysis and glycogenolysis. The authors could test whether the glycogen metabolism-inhibiting drug DAB would mimic the effects of Gi activation.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Akter et al. investigated how the astroglial Gi signaling pathway in the rat anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) affects cognitive functions, in particular schema memory formation. Using a stereotactic approach they intracranially introduced AAV8 vectors carrying mCherry-tagged hM4Di DREADD (Designer Receptor Exclusively Activated by Designer Drugs) under astrocyte selective GFAP promotor (AAV8-GFAP-hM4Di-mCherry) into the AAC region of the rat brain. hM4Di DREADD is a genetically modified form of the human M4 muscarinic (hM4) receptor insensitive to endogenous acetylcholine but is activated by the inert clozapine metabolite clozapine-N-oxide (CNO), triggering the Gi signaling pathway. The authors confirmed that hM4Di DREADD is selectively expressed in astrocytes after the application of the AAV8 vector by analysing the mCherry signals and immunolabeling of astrocytes and neurons in the ACC region of the rat brain. They activated hM4Di DREADD (Gi signalling) in astrocytes by intraperitoneal administration of CNO and measured cognitive functions in animals after CNO administration. Activation of Gi signaling in astrocytes by CNO application decreased paired-associate (PA) learning, schema formation, and memory retrieval in tested animals. This was associated with a decrease in cAMP in astrocytes and L-lactate in extracellular fluid as measured by immunohistochemistry in situ and in awake rats by microdialysis, respectively. Administration of exogenous L-lactate rescued the astroglial Gi-mediated deficits in PA learning, memory retrieval, and schema formation, suggesting that activation of astroglial Gi signalling downregulates L-lactate production in astrocytes and its transport to neurons affecting memory formation. Authors also show that expression level of proteins involved in mitochondrial biogenesis, which is associated with cognitive functions, is decreased in neurons, when Gi signalling is activated in astrocytes, and rescued when exogenous L-lactate is applied, suggesting the implication of astrocyte-derived L-lactate in the maintenance of mitochondrial biogenesis in neurons. The latter depended on lactate MCT2 transporter activity and glutamate NMDA receptor activity.

The paper is very well written and discussed. The conclusions of this paper are well supported by the data. Although this is a study that uses established and previously published methodologies, it provides new insights into L-lactate signalling in the brain, particularly in AAC, and further confirms the role of astroglial L-lactate in learning and memory formation. It also raises new questions about the molecular mechanisms underlying astrocyte-derived L-lactate-mediated mitochondrial biogenesis in neurons and its contribution to schema memory formation.

• The authors discuss astrocytic L-lactate signalling without considering the recently discovered L-lactate-sensitive Gs and Gi protein-coupled receptors in the brain, which are present in both astrocytes and neurons. The use of nonendogenous L-lactate receptor agonists (Compound 2, 3-chloro-5-hydroxybenzoic acid) would clarify the implication of L-lactate receptor signalling in schema memory formation.

• The use of control animals transduced with an "empty" AAV9 vector (AAV8-GFAP-mCherry) compared with animals transduced with AAV8-GFAP-hM4Di-mCherry throughout the study would strengthen the results of this study, since transfection itself, as well as overexpression of the mCherry protein, may affect cell function.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Zou et al. employ single-cell RNA sequencing of healthy skin, actinic keratosis (AK), squamous cell carcinoma in situ (SCCIS), and cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) to unravel the molecular events driving the progression of AK into cSCC (n=13 samples from 6 patients), thereby filling a gap of knowledge in skin cancer research. The authors identified several previously unreported candidate genes (including ALDH3A1, IGFBP2, MAGEA4, ITGA6, and LGALS1) involved in different stages of malignant progression, the expression of which was validated in situ in a large cohort. Functional in vitro experiments confirm a possible role for these genes in the transformation from benign to malignant skin lesions.

Moreover, the authors identified epidermal cell subpopulations that may play an important role in the development from AK to cSCC, including an "early malignant cell" subpopulation within SCCIS basal cells with higher mutational load according to CNV analysis, which they characterized in more detail. For example, they found MAGEA4 strongly expressed in basal cells of (most) SCCIS and cSCC, as well as ITGA6. Functional assays in HaCaT and cSCC cell lines revealed that the knock-down of MAGEA4 and ITGA6 reduced proliferation, migration, and invasion but increased apoptosis in the cSCC cell lines.

Finally, they describe the tumor microenvironment of a poorly differentiated cSCC sample, and scATAC sequencing of this poorly differentiated cSCC revealed that the majority of differentially accessible chromatin regions (DARs) were located in basal epidermal cells.

Altogether, the authors provide a comprehensive transcriptional analysis of premalignant (AK, SCCIS) and malignant stages of cSCC. They suggest some key driver genes for each stage, the role of which are addressed in vitro and in situ in a large cohort. Thus, this study may provide novel biomarkers for tumor staging and diagnosis as well as potential targets for the prevention and treatment of cSCC.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Zou et al. presented a comprehensive study where they generated single-cell RNA profiling of 138,982 cells from 13 samples of six patients including AK, squamous cell carcinoma in situ (SCCIS), cSCC, and their matched normal tissues, covering comprehensive clinical courses of cSCC. Using bioinformatics analysis, they identified keratinocytes, CAFs, immune cells, and their subpopulations. The authors further compared signatures within subpopulations of keratinocytes along with the clinical progression, especially basal cells, and identified many interesting genes. They also further validate some of the markers in an independent cohort using IHC, followed by some knockdown experiments using cSCC cell lines.

The strength of this study is the unique data set they have created, providing the community with invaluable resources to study and validate their findings. However, a lot of analyses were not robust enough to support the claims and conclusions in the paper. More clarification and cross-comparison with polished data are needed to further strengthen the study and claims.

1) Stemness markers were used. The authors used COL17A1, TP63, ITGB1, and ITGA3 to represent stemness markers. However, these were not common classic stemness markers used in cSCC. What is the source claiming these genes were stemness markers in cSCC? TP63 is a master regulator and early driver event in SCC, while COL17A1, ITGB1, and ITGA3 are all ECM genes. The authors need to use commonly well-known stem cell markers in cSCC, e.g., LGR5, to mark stem-like cells.

2) Cell proportion analysis. The authors used the mean proportions to compare different clinical groups for subpopulations of keratinocytes, e.g., Figure 2B, and Figure 5B. This is not robust, as no statistics can be derived from this. For example, from Fig 2A, it is clearly shown there is a high level of heterogeneity of cellular compositions for normal samples. One cannot say which group is higher or lower simply based on mean not variance as well.

3) Basal tumour cells in SCCIS and SCC. To make the findings valid, authors need to compare these cells/populations with the keratinocyte cell populations defined by Ji et al. Cell 2020. Do basal-SCCIS-tumours cells, also in SCC samples, resemble any of the population defined in Ji et al. Ji et al. also had 10 match normal, thus the authors need to validate their findings of SCC vs normal analysis using the Ji et al. dataset.

4) Copy number analysis. Authors used inferCNV to perform copy number analysis using scRNA-seq data and identified CNVs in subpopulations of keratinocytes in SCCIS and SCC. To ensure these CNVs were not artefacts, were some of the CNVs identified by inferCNV well-known copy number changes previously reported in cSCC?

5) Pseudotime analysis lines 308-313. Not sure the pseudotime analysis added much as, as it is unclear two distinct subgroups were identified from this analysis. Suggest removing this to keep it neater

6) Selection of candidate genes for validation using IHC and cell line work. For example, lines 205-206, lines 352-356 and lines 437-441, authors selected several genes associated with AK and SCC to further validate using IHC and cell line knockdown work. What are the criteria for selecting those genes for validation? It is unclear to readers how these were selected. It reads like a fishing experiment, then followed by a knockdown. Clear rationale/criteria need to be elaborated.

7) TME. Compared to keratinocytes populations, the investigation of TME cells was weak. (a) can authors produce UMAP files just for T cells, DC cells, and fibroblasts separately? Figure 7B is not easy to see those subclusters. (b) similar to what was done for keratinocytes, can authors find differentially expressed clusters and genes among the different clinical groups, associated with disease progression? (c) where are the myeloid cell populations, also B cells?

8) Heat shock protein genes line 327-329. HSP signature was well-known to be induced via tissue dissociation and library prep during the scRNA experiment. How could the authors be sure these were not artefacts induced by the experiment? If authors regress their gene expression against HSP gene signatures, would this cluster still be identified?

9) Cell-cell communication analysis. The authors claimed that that cell-to-cell interaction was significantly enhanced in poorly-differentiated cSCC, and multiple interaction pathways were significantly active. How was this kind of analysis carried out? How did the authors define significance? what statistical method was used? these were all unclear. Furthermore, it is difficult to judge the robustness of the cell-cell communication analysis. Were these findings also supported by another method, such as celltalker, and cellphoneDB?

10) Statistics and significance. In general, the detail of statistics and significance was lacking throughout the paper. Authors need to specify what statistical tests were used, and the p-values. It is difficult to judge the correctness of the test, and robustness without seeing the stats.

11) Overall, this manuscript needs a lot of re-writing. A lot of discussion was also included in the results, making it really difficult to read overall. The authors should simplify the results sections, remove the discussion bits, and further highlight and streamline with the key results of this paper.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Zhao et al. investigated the molecular nature of the binding site for carbohydrates within the UDP-sugars known to activate the P2Y14 receptor. In order to do so, they built a molecular model of the hP2Y14, docked the corresponding agonists, and performed MD simulation on the resulting complexes. The modeling was used to identify the key molecular interactions with a cluster of charged residues in the extracellular side of the TM region of the receptor, which they show are conserved within the P2Y receptors. The binding site of the UDP region was, not surprisingly, overlapping with the analogous ADP binding site experimentally observed for the P2Y12 receptor, and consequently, the region that recognizes the sugars could be anticipated. Nevertheless, the detailed modeling and simulation work shows the consistency of this hypothesis and provides a quantification of the particular interactions involved, pinpointing specifically the residues candidate to be involved in the recognition of sugars.

It follows the characterization, by functional assays, of the effect of single-point mutations of these residues in the efficacy of the different UDP-sugars. Here the results show a tendency to correlate with the molecular models, however some of the data has very low statistical significance and consequently the interpretation and conclusions extracted from this data should be taken with caution. This pertains to the particular role of the identified residues in the binding of the different sugars, which in some cases should be taken as a suggestion rather than a proof, though the general conclusion of the identification of the binding region for the sugar, its conservation among P2Y receptors and the role of some specific residues in sugar recognition seems convincing and the data are conveniently presented.

Finally, the design of ADP-sugars that activate the P2Y12 receptor, based on the transferability of the observations with the UDP-sugars for the P2Y14 receptor, is a first indication that such a recognition is possible and should happen in an analogous binding region. However, the low potencies exhibited by the ATP-sugars, in the micromolar range, are too far from the ATP agonist and the relevance of this mechanism remains to be proved. The difference between P2Y12 and P2T14, with the last one showing much higher potencies for UDP-sugar derivatives than P2Y12 for the corresponding ADP-sugars, remains an interesting question not explored in this manuscript.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

The manuscript employs multiple approaches, including molecular docking, molecular dynamic simulations, and functional experiments to uncover a distinct uridine diphosphate-sugar-binding site on P2Y14 - a key drug target for inflammation and immune responses. Overall, the manuscript is clearly written and the experimental techniques are well-documented. However, it may benefit from further analysis, particularly in terms of validating the binding pose.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Identifying compounds that can selectively inhibit protein kinases is of significant importance. Here, the authors describe a computational method to use existing kinome-wide profiling data to identify sets of compounds that, when combined, are more selective than any of the compounds on their own.

The authors explain the methodology well and the methodology is well-supported. The outcome of the methodology is assessed using an assay orthogonal to the original profiling assays. It is hard to assess whether the methodology works when a different assay is used.

The discussion of using this method for polypharmacology is naively discussed and under-supported.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

There currently are several hundreds of kinase inhibitors described and available for purchase. However, most of the target the ATP binding site of the protein kinase domain and, since it is pretty well conserved across the whole protein family, it means that the inhibitors are rarely selective, and most are able to simultaneously inhibit several kinases with, sometimes, different binding affinities. In this m/s, the authors present a strategy to combine kinase inhibitors with the aim of reducing off-target effects while preserving the inhibition potency in the intended target. To develop the methodology, the authors have used a set of publicly available data (protein kinase inhibitor set-2, or PKIS-2) containing affinity data on 406 kinases and 645 inhibitors. The authors run a series of simulations suggesting that, in a few cases, the identified combination of inhibitors is superior to the most specific single kinase inhibitor (i.e. show fewer off-target effects while maintaining the inhibition of the on-target). Finally, they test one of these examples in cells using nanoBRET.

The manuscript tackles an interesting problem (i.e. poor selectivity of kinase inhibitors) that, in some cases, has important clinical bearings. The approach is novel, interesting, and well-executed. However, unfortunately, I am not convinced that the strategy presents a real advantage over the most selective inhibitor.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Seeking a selective inhibitor that precisely inhibits on-target activities and avoids side effects is a major challenge in the field of drug discovery and therapeutics. The authors proposed an alternative method that combines multiple inhibitors to maximize on-target inhibition and minimize off-target inhibition. Focusing on the kinase-inhibitor interaction dataset, the authors developed a quantitative way to measure the selectivity for mixtures of inhibitors by using the Jenson-Sahannon distance metric. The method sounds technical.

From their computation and assays, the multi-compound-multitarget scoring (MMS) method framework was validated to be able to select a combination of inhibitors that is more selective than a single highly selective inhibitor for one kinase target, or for multiple targets. The MMS method is a promising solution to reduce off-target effects and could be applicable to other inhibitor-target interactions. My suggestion is that a comparative analysis of MMS with other similar methods can be conducted to highlight the advantage of MMS over others.

The paper is not well organized and not easily readable. For example, first, the captions of the figures are two long; some of these texts could be moved to methods or results sections. Second, the concept of "penalty distribution" or "penalty prior" is vital to understand the MMS method, thus, at least a brief definition and introduction should be put in the main text rather than supporting method, as well as the rationale to use it. Third, the method section can be divided into several subsections with clear organizations and connections. Fourth, what is the difference between "a less selective inhibitor profile" and "an even less selective inhibitor profile" in Figure 3? Overall, the details of the paper are difficult to understand in the current version. I suggest rewriting<br /> the paper in a more concise and logical style.

Joint Public Review

In this manuscript, the authors develop a multi-scale agent-based model (ABM) capable of reproducing the self-organizing behavior observed in the intestinal crypt. By considering just the signaling pathways -previously reported as regulatory in the intestinal crypt- and local physical cell-to-cell interactions, the proposed model not only explains the emergence of the spatial organization, but also recapitulates cell composition dynamics in the crypt (proliferation, migration, and differentiation of cells), as previously characterized in the complex tissue of the small intestine epithelium in mice. The authors show that the self-organized system resulting from the model displays a stable composition over time. Additionally, the authors show how this model can be effectively used to test different conditions, such as biomedically relevant perturbations (e.g. stem cell ablation, cell cycle inhibition, and toxicity of particular drug treatments) and the posterior recovery, allowing to predict the safety of potential oncotherapies.

In summary, the authors provide a powerful and versatile model, which can be applied to better understand the formation and response of the intestinal crypt, as well as the functional heterogeneity of the intestinal epithelium at multiple scales. The proposed mathematical model simulates features across scales in the intestinal crypt such as multiple signaling pathways, the mechanical environment and its forces, and cell cycle regulation. The model demonstrates the stability of the homeostatic crypt and recovery following stem cell ablation. The model also simulates the cell cycle protein network and demonstrates that CDK1 inhibition creates oversized cells. In sum, the model generated by the authors increases the understanding of how these biological processes take place in vivo, exploring not only healthy cell behavior but also cell response to injury by oncotherapies or other external factors. Additionally, the authors provide a series of fascinating movies that show the spatial organization of the crypt during these processes, and the manuscript has clear applications for the clinics.

Nevertheless, in its current form, the manuscript has some weaknesses that are worth mentioning:

(1) The developed model considers the interaction of multiple signaling networks that are essential for morphogenesis and homeostasis in the intestinal tissue, as well as other elements that had been proposed as relevant in the literature. Nevertheless, the details of how these interactions are modeled couldn't be evaluated in the current revision as the model was not shared with the reviewers and it is not available yet online, nor specified in any detail in the current manuscript. Additionally, how quantitative information from Wnt and BMP signaling pathways is incorporated in a quantitative way in the model is not clear.

(2) Some conclusions by the authors are not properly justified in the text, as "Paneth cells are the main driver behind the differential mechanical environment in the niche", "Wnt-mediated feedback loop prevents the uncontrolled expansion of the niche", the specific effect of p27 in contrast with Wee1 phosphorylation over the cell cycle length, and "their recovery [absorptive progenitors] started before the end of the treatment, driven by a negative feedback loop from mature enterocytes to their progenitors".

(3) Only the results of the "main" model are shown, with no information about its sensitivity to parameter values, and how their conclusions depend on specific decisions on the model. For example, the authors said that "an optimal crypt cell composition is achieved when BMP and Wnt differentiation thresholds result in progenitors dividing approximately four times before differentiating into enterocytes", but the results of alternative scenarios are not shown.

(4) Regarding the construction of the model, the authors used "counts of Ki-67 positive cells recorded by position" while the original data reported "overall cell counts per crypt and villus". Some explanation about how this conversion was made, why it is valid, as well as any potential problems, is needed. Additionally, the model is based on experiments done by others in mouse models; the similarity to the response in human intestinal crypts is not discussed.

(5) The authors imply that their mathematical model of the intestinal crypt is an improvement over those already published but there is no direct comparison or review of the literature to substantiate this claim.

(6) The authors claim that the simulated data and the available mouse data match up. Nevertheless, the data vs the model still appear both quantitatively and qualitatively different (as presented in Figures 2E, F, and 5C, D). This puts in doubt how much the model can actually reproduce the experimental data. In conclusion, the model would benefit from further refinement, particularly if the goal is to use the model for predicting the dynamics of oncogenic drug candidates.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Respiratory chain complexes assemble in higher-ordered structures termed supercomplexes or respirasomes. The functional significance of these assemblies is currently investigated, there are two main hypothesis tested, namely that supercomplexes provide kinetic advantages or structural stability. Here, the authors use the fruitfly to reveal that, while the respiratory chain in the organism normally does not form higher-order assemblies, it does so under conditions when their assembly is impaired. Because the rather moderate increase in supercomplex formation does not change oxygen consumption stimulated by CI or CII substrate, the authors conclude that supercomplex formation has more a structural than a functional role. The main strength of this work is that the technical quality of the experiments is high and that the authors induced defects in respiratory chain assembly through sets of well-controlled genetic models. The obtained data are mostly descriptive using standard approaches and are very well executed. The authors claim that their experiments allow to conclude that the role of supercomplex formation is restricted to a structural role and, hence, exclude a function directly related to electron transport efficiency. However, while the authors can show convincingly that supercomplexes form in the mutants, but not in the wild type, the main questions still remain, namely what is the structural mechanism of supercomplex formation and what is the significance of their formation. Given that the fly system does not show supercomplex formation under normal conditions, it is likely that it evolved functionally to work different than systems having supercomplexes. Because these differences are yet unknown, it remains questionable whether the fly system can be used to inform about the general significance of supercomplexes found in the other systems.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

In their manuscript, Brischigliaro et al. show that the disruption of respiratory complex assembly results in Drosophila melanogaster results in the accumulation of respiratory supercomplexes. Further, they show that the change in the supercomplex abundance does not impact respiratory function suggesting that the main role of supercomplex formation is structural. Overall, the manuscript is well written and the results and conclusion are supported. The D. melanogaster system, in which the abundance of supercomplexes can be altered through the genetic disruption of the assembly of the individual complexes, will be important for the field to discover the role of the supercomplexes. This manuscript will be of broad interest to the field of mitochondrial bioenergetics. The findings are valuable and the evidence is convincing.

Strengths<br /> The system developed in which the relative levels of SCs can be varied will be extremely useful for studying SC physiology.

The experiments are clearly described and interpreted.

Weaknesses<br /> The previous weaknesses identified have been addressed.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

DMRT1 is essential in testis development in different species. While Dmrt1 is the testis-determining factor in chicken and deletion encompassing this gene lead to gonadal dysgenesis in human, the role of DMRT1 in testis development remains to be clarified. Despite an early expression of Dmrt1 in the mouse gonad and a potential function as a pioneer factor, DMRT1 is only required for the maintenance of the Sertoli cell identity in the postnatal testis. The use of a new animal model could provide new insights into the role of this factor in humans. Here the authors have generated a knockout model of DMRT1 in rabbits. They show that the XY mutant gonads differentiate as ovary indicating that DMRT1 is required for testis differentiation in rabbits. In addition, most of the germ cells remain pluripotent as evidenced by the maintenance of POU5F1 in both XY and XX mutant gonads. These are very important results potentially explaining gonadal dysgenesis associated with the DMRT1 locus in disorders of sex development in humans.

The experiments are meticulous and convincing. I find the arguments of the authors about the role of DMRT1 in germ cells in addition to its function in Sertoli cell differentiation, both comprehensible and compelling. Clearly, this is an important insight in sex determination and gametogenesis.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

It is well known that DMRT proteins and more specifically, DMRT1 plays a key role in the sex determination processes of many species. While DMRT1 has been shown to be critical for the sex determination of fish, birds, and reptiles, it seems less crucial at the sex determination stages of the mice. It is important though for adult sex maintenance in mice.

Unlike its minor role in mouse sex determination, it seems that variants in DMRT1 in humans cause 46, XY DSD and sex reversal.

The paper by Dujardin et al. is a beautiful study that provides an answer to this long-lasting discrepancy of the difference between the two common mammal species: human and mouse. It is a really nice example of how working with other mammal species, like the rabbit, could serve as a nice model for understanding mammalian sex determination.

In this study the researchers first described the expression patterns of DMRT1 in the rabbit XY and XX gonads throughout the window of sex determination.

They then used CRISPR/Cas9 to generate DMRT1 KO rabbits and analysed the phenotype in XY and XX rabbits. They show that XY rabbits present with complete XY male-to-female sex reversal, very similar to what observed in human 46, XY DSD patients (but not the mice model). They further show that in the XY sex reversed gonads, germ cells fail to enter meiosis. They next analysed XX gonads and while there is no major effect on sex determination (as expected), the germ cells in these ovaries fail to enter meiosis, highlighting the critical role that DMRT1 has in germ cells.

I think it is really important that we start to embrace other mammal models that are not the mouse as we find many instances that the mouse is not the optimal system for understanding human sex determination.

The study is well explained and presented. The data is clear, and the paper is fluent to read.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

This manuscript deal with the sex-related gene, DMRT1, showing that is has a testis-promoting function in the rabbit. Loss-of-function studies the mouse and human, DMRT1 has a role in testis maintenance after birth, although forced expression in mouse can induce testis formation.

The authors used CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing to generate DMRT1-/- rabbit embryos. The gonads of these embryos developed as ovaries. Interestingly, in addition Y-linked SRY, DMRT1 is required for timely up-regulation of SOX9 during Sertoli cell differentiation in the male gonad. This is quite different to the situation in mouse, where Dmrt1 is not required in the testis until after birth (and Sry induced up-regulation of Sox9 hence does not require Dmrt1).

The work adds to the field of sex determination by further broadening our understanding of the DMRT1 gene and the evolution of gonadal sex determination.

In the Discussion section, it is suggested that DMRT1 could act as a pioneering factor to allow SRY action upon Sox9 in the rabbit model. The data show that DMRT1 may be more central to testis formation in mammals than previously considered. The work supports the notion that our understanding that the genetics of gonadal development (and indeed development more generally) should not rest solely on findings in the mouse.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

This manuscript by Martin-Flores et al. has examined the role of DKK3 in Alzheimer's disease, focusing on the regulation of synaptic numbers. By using human AD brain databases and tissue samples, the authors showed that DKK3 protein and mRNA levels are increased in the brains of AD patients. DKK3 is expressed in the excitatory neurons in WT mouse brains and accumulates at atrophic neurites around amyloid plaques in AD mouse brains. Interestingly, secretion of DKK3 appears to be regulated by NMDAR antagonist as well as chemical LTD. Through gain and loss of function studies, the authors showed that DKK3 regulates the number of excitatory as well as inhibitory synapses with distinct downstream pathways. Finally, the authors investigated the contribution of DKK3 to synaptic changes in AD and found that DKK3 loss of function rescues both the excitatory and inhibitory synaptic defects, resulting in the improvement of memory function in J20 mice.

Overall, the data is clearly presented and deals with novel roles of DKK3 in controlling excitatory and inhibitory synapses. The finding that shRNA expression of DKK3 in AD model mice rescues synaptic phenotypes and memory impairment is potentially interesting and may provide a new strategy for AD treatment.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

In this study, Nuria Martin-Flores, Marina Podpolny and colleagues investigate the role of Dickkopf-3 (DKK3), a Wnt antagonist in synaptic dysfunction in Alzheimer's disease. Loss of synapses is a feature of Alzheimer's and other forms of dementia such as frontotemporal dementia and linked amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (FTD). The authors utilise a broad range of experimental approaches. They show that DKK3 levels are increased in Alzheimer's disease and that this occurs early in disease. This is an important finding since early disease changes are believed to be the most important. They also show increases in DKK3 in transgenic mouse models of Alzheimer's disease and that DKK3 knockdown restores synapse number and memory in one such model. Finally, they link these DKK3 increases to loss of excitatory synapses via the blockade of the Wnt pathway and subsequent activation of GSK3B; GSK3B is strongly linked to both Alzheimer's disease and FTD. The quality of the data is good and the conclusions well supported by these data. There are no major weaknesses. The findings support studies that target the Wnt pathway as a potential therapeutic for Alzheimer's disease.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

This study investigated cognitive mechanisms underlying approach-avoidance behavior using a novel reinforcement learning task and computational modelling. Participants could select a risky "conflict" option (latent, fluctuating probabilities of monetary reward and/or unpleasant sound [punishment]) or a safe option (separate, generally lower probability of reward). Overall, participant choices were skewed towards more rewarded options, but were also repelled by increasing probability of punishment. Individual patterns of behavior were well-captured by a reinforcement learning model that included parameters for reward and punishment sensitivity, and learning rates for reward and punishment. This is a nice replication of existing findings suggesting reward and punishment have opposing effects on behavior through dissociated sensitivity to reward versus punishment.

Interestingly, avoidance of the conflict option was predicted by self-reported task-induced anxiety. Importantly, when a subset of participants were retested over 1 week later, most behavioral tendencies and model parameters were recapitulated, suggesting the task may capture stable traits relevant to approach-avoidance decision-making.

The revised paper commendably adds important additional information and analyses to support these claims. The initial concern that not accounting for participant control over punisher intensity confounded interpretation of effects has been largely addressed in follow-up analyses and discussion.

This study complements and sits within a broad translational literature investigating interactions between reward/punishers and psychological processes in approach-avoidance decisions.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

This paper describes the development and initial validation of an approach-avoidance task and its relationship to anxiety. The task is a two-armed bandit where one choice is 'safer' - has no probability of punishment, delivered as an aversive sound, but also lower probability of reward - and the other choice involves a reward-punishment conflict. The authors fit a computational model of reinforcement learning to this task and found that self-reported state anxiety during the task was related to a greater likelihood of choosing the safe stimulus when the other (conflict) stimulus had a higher likelihood of punishment. Computationally, this was represented by a smaller value for the ratio of reward to punishment sensitivity in people with higher task-induced anxiety. They replicated this finding, but not another finding that this behavior was related to a measure of psychopathology (experiential avoidance), in a second sample. They also tested test-retest reliability in a sub-sample tested twice, one week apart and found that some aspects of task behavior had acceptable levels of reliability. The introduction makes a strong appeal to back-translation and computational validity. The task design is clever and most methods are solid - it is encouraging to see attempts to validate tasks as they are developed. The lack of replicated effects with psychopathology may mean that this task is better suited to assess state anxiety, or to serve as a foundation for additional task development.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:

The authors develop a computational approach-avoidance-conflict (AAC) task, designed to overcome the limitations of existing offer based AAC tasks. The task incorporated likelihoods of receiving rewards/ punishments that would be learned by the participants to ensure computational validity and estimated model parameters related to reward/punishment and task induced anxiety. Two independent samples of online participants were tested. In both samples participants who experienced greater task induced anxiety avoided choices associated with greater probability of punishment. Computational modelling revealed that this effect was explained by greater individual sensitivities to punishment relative to rewards.

Strengths:

Large internet-based samples, with discovery sample (n = 369), pre-registered replication sample (n = 629) and test-retest sub group (n = 57). Extensive compliance measures (e.g. audio checks) seek to improve adherence.

There is a great need for RL tasks that model threatening outcomes rather than simply loss of reward. The main model parameters show strong effects and the additional indices with task based anxiety are a useful extension. Associations were broadly replicated across samples. Fair to excellent reliability of model parameters is encouraging and badly needed for behavioral tasks of threat sensitivity.

The task seems to have lower approach bias than some other AAC tasks in the literature.

Appraisal and impact:<br /> Overall this is a very strong paper, describing a novel task that could help move the field of RL forward to take account of threat processing more fully. The large sample size with discovery, replication and test-retest gives confidence in the findings. The task has good ecological validity and associations with task-based anxiety and clinical self-report demonstrate clinical relevance. Test-retest of the punishment learning parameter is the only real concern. Overall this task provides an exciting new probe of reward/threat that could be used in mechanistic disease models.

Additional context:

The sex differences between the samples are interesting as effects of sex are commonly found in AAC tasks. It would be interesting to look at the main model comparison with sex included as a covariate.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

This study assesses the volatile profiles from the hair and bodies of 64 vertebrate species to compare odor constituents across taxa. Compared to a similar data set for floral volatiles, the study suggests that vertebrate odors are significantly less diverse and show little phylogenetic relationship regarding profile similarity. Human odors were particularly unique from other species. It is concluded that this may influence the odor coding of organisms (like vectors) who respond to these odors compared to plant-feeding organisms like most other insects. While the study is compelling, several methodological issues leave the conclusions less convincing. It is suggested that the paper be tempered accordingly with these issues mentioned.<br /> The study makes several assumptions about the methodology to be considered when interpreting the results:

Major Concerns:

1) Body hair as a proxy for animals. "Hair odour is likely a reasonable proxy for mammalian body odour, but may lose some volatile compounds during storage. Live-animal odour, on the other hand, can be contaminated with compounds from faeces or urine occasionally excreted during sampling." The study has addressed this by testing hair against the bodies of 4 humans, two rats, and one guinea pig (Figure S1). However, the results show that there are both quantitative and qualitative differences among all the samples. While the presence of waste accounts for some of this variation, this, too, is a natural response of the animal and could be present in natural settings. Also would not body heat in mammals have an impact on odors? The authors should support this. While this does not require reanalysis, the authors should address these differences, particularly when qualitative and quantitative differences are discussed heavily in the results.

2) Sampling medium: Tenax TA was used to sample the vertebrate odors. Please note that any sorbent will exhibit specificity regarding selectivity and sensitivity to VOCs. See https://www.eva.mpg.de/documents/Elsevier/Marcillo_Comparison_JChromA_2017_2452774.pdf for one comparison. For example, it is not surprising that "Aldehydes, ketones, alcohols, aromatics, terpenes, and hydrocarbons dominated" the samples given that these types of compounds are well retained by the Tenax polymer:<br /> https://www.sisweb.com/index/referenc/tenaxta.htm<br /> Many chemical ecology studies will employ multiple polar and non-polar polymers to retain different VOCs for better profile comparison.<br /> By itself, this limitation must be noted. However, it becomes even more relevant when compared to the floral volatile study, which used a different sorbent (Poropak) which is less hydrophobic and may retain more polar compounds than Tenax: https://hero.epa.gov/hero/index.cfm/reference/details/reference_id/2859526<br /> Such differences must be considered when comparing these two datasets, particularly when the study makes conclusions about their differences. Alternatively, a small set of experiments with poropak and a few species (like for the hair vs. body control experiments) could clarify the effect of sorbent type on VOC retention.

3) Sampling quantification: The methods note that " All extractions were run for 5-80 minutes depending on the expected odour concentration of the sample." What does this mean? Such differences in sampling timing in our lab have shown profound differences in the type and amount of volatiles collected. Generally, it is best to sample for as long as possible to ensure that the most volatiles are collected (up to 24 hours if possible). The compounds will eventually come into equilibrium with the sorbent. However, for quantification, the timing must be calibrated carefully, usually by using a representative set of likely compounds with different functional groups to determine the optimal length of sampling time. Was this done in this case? If not, how can one account for the significant variation in sampling time regarding quantification?<br /> A second issue with quantification is the need for an internal standard. Even with robotic assistance, slight variations in processing can significantly affect the quantity of volatile retained through detection at the MS. This is generally avoided by using an internal standard in the sampling arena. See this example with multiple sampling techniques (also employing TD-GCMS): https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fevo.2021.607555/full<br /> Without these methodological controls, it is unclear how effective quantification can be performed. It might be more prudent to confine the results to qualitative discussions.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> Zung et al. use a comparative approach to examine the volatile headspace of diverse mammals and host species to understand the differences in chemical profiles that may provide mosquitoes with signatures of appropriate hosts. The authors collect the volatiles from hair samples and conduct qualitative analyses of the headspace composition. The authors' results suggest that mammals share overlapping volatile signatures, although the sampling method and statistical approaches reduce the veracity of the authors' findings. Additional comparisons between mammalian and floral odours were conducted, although the datasets were limited.

The inter-species comparisons will be helpful in the field, although the data pipeline and approaches may underestimate the headspace chemical diversity, and sampling artifacts and contaminants occur in the datasets, which further weakens the study's findings.

Strengths:<br /> The comparative approach is a strength of the manuscript. The authors identify an important gap in mosquito natural history by attempting to characterize the odours from various mammalian, bird, and reptile species that mosquitoes may use as blood hosts. Although others have compared the skin volatiles of humans, apes, and ungulates (Verhulst et al., 2018, not cited in the current manuscript), Zung and coworkers expand this sampling by using hair samples from collections and zoos. Unfortunately, the sampling approach leads to potential artifacts associated with the collected volatiles and statistical analyses.

Weaknesses:<br /> There are three major points of weakness associated with the manuscript: (1) sampling approach and analysis pipeline; (2) statistical analyses; and (3) premise and prior work.

1. Sampling approach and pipeline<br /> A. The authors have described their sampling and analysis as quantitative, but they use a qualitative approach by not quantifying their samples and using a low-res MS. I outline several approaches that would allow the authors to quantitate their samples. The authors must run synthetic standards for peak verification (the mass spectra alone are insufficient for compound identification). The authors are also encouraged to run the standards in a concentration curve to allow quantification of the compounds. The authors have only tentatively identified 120 compounds. Using an autosampler and standard analyses in the software, the authors could easily quantify their samples which would take less than a week's time (this is not impossible, as the authors state in the methods). Based on the volatile fragmentation and the MS detector, the compounds will differ in their relative abundances - running calibration curves, co-injection of authentic standards, and using multiple column types are necessary for the resulting statistical analyses to prevent mischaracterization of the abundances in the hair samples. Using an internal standard, by spiking the Tenax before collection, would also allow determination if column conditions change over the course of the experiment. These measurements would provide some quantitative measures to explore the differences in host odors. Details on these approaches can be found in Methods in Chemical Ecology, Techniques in Pheromone Research, and article reviews that describe more recent approaches and analyses (Tholl and Rose, 2006; Stashenko and Martínez, 2008; Spicer et al., 2017; Tholl et al., 2020; Eisen et al., 2021; Schulz and Mollerke, 2022).

B. Abundant contaminants in the samples. In the supplemental table of partially identified compounds, many contaminants are associated with the headspace collection method and environmental contaminants. Under thermal deadsorption, Tenax degradation produces many compounds, including quinolones and benzenoid compounds. Phenyl-substituted carbonyl compounds (benzaldehyde, acetophenone, benzene acetaldehyde) are formed as artifacts from the oxidation of Tenax with environmental contaminants. Other compounds, like phenol or -ethyl and methylated benzene compounds, are known to be released from the Tenax traps. The authors' pipeline and blank subtraction should have identified these compounds.

C. Hair and live headspace volatiles. I appreciate the authors' experiments comparing the composition and abundance of volatiles from live collections and hair samples. However, the results demonstrate that the hair does not always match the volatiles from the live animal. Humans 1, 3, and 4 differ significantly in their aldehyde abundances, especially nonanal. The hamster and mice samples also differ significantly. The matrix of the hair will adsorb and modify the emissions and ratios of compounds, which makes the inter-species comparisons difficult if not impossible if the headspace collection approaches differ. The authors need to change their phrasing of the host odours to "hair odours", and soften their statements associated with the complete host odour profile, and use hair samples as a standard matrix for the headspace collections. The comparison of human odour collections relative to hair samples is like the comparison of apples and oranges.

D. The authors need to use another column type to characterize their peaks further. Some of the compounds are enantiomers or closely elute from the column. Although the authors suggest their methods may separate these compounds, they may be misidentified without a different GC temperature ramp or column.

E. The authors should replace their retention indices with KRI values to further identify their compounds. The methods section does not describe whether the alkane standards were run parallel to the hair samples, and the manuscript's retention indices do not match published KRI values.

F. The number of compounds across species (including flower compounds) is very low (approximately 120 compounds) and surprising. This suggests that the analysis pipeline and thresholding may miss many compounds in the headspace. I would encourage the authors to lower their threshold to 10^-5 AU, or to perform a sensitivity analysis on their ability to identify the peaks. Running authentic standards would also allow the identification of compounds missed in the analysis.

G. I understand the difficulty in obtaining these samples across the different species. However, additional information is needed for those species that are limited in the number of replicates (individuals). Sampling the individual multiple times may indicate the variability in the hair volatiles. Although the authors and many others have shown the reproducibility of human skin volatiles through time, additional sampling would indicate this also occurs for other mammals while strengthening the authors' approach.

H. An important measure of natural odour statistics is the odor emission rates, and normalizing across samples by the sample mass. More information on the methods would have clarified these aspects. It needs to be clarified why the samples were collected for different time periods (5 to 80 minutes). The sample mass for each specimen should also be included as this would allow normalization by time and mass, and should be described in the methods. This would allow quantitative measurements of the samples.

I. A critical missing component in the headspace is the acids. Tenax does not perform well at collecting these compounds. However, Gerstel Twisters and other collection matrices can capture those compounds. The authors must use these other collection methods to sample the hair specimens and identify those compounds to include in their table and analyses. Without this information, the manuscript lacks a critical dimension in the human odour landscape that is critical for mosquito attraction.

2. Statistical Analyses<br /> A. Sampling effort and the replicate numbers used in the analyses is an important consideration that the authors do not address, but should be discussed in more detail. In many subfields of chemical ecology, a minimum of ten replicates per species has been suggested to accurately identify the composition of compounds, and even with ten samples, this may not be enough to characterize the volatile profile (Raguso and Pellmyr, 1998; Campbell et al 2019). The authors could perform a power analysis, or an accumulation curve to represent the needed sample number to identify the number of compounds in the hair headspace accurately.

B. It would be worthwhile for the authors to provide more detail on their supervised and unsupervised approaches, and how their data fits the assumptions of the analyses. The PCA parametric method may require log or square root transformation of the data to make residuals fit the normality assumption, but it's unclear if this was the case with the authors' datasets.

C. PCA is also not appropriate when many samples have zero values in the data matrix, which occurs in the authors' data. In such a case, the approaches of NMDS or canonical analysis of principal coordinates would be more appropriate, and allow distance measures (the Bray-Curtis distance) to define dissimilarity of different groups. An analysis of similarity (ANOSIM) could be used to determine if the data clustered significantly by species or by mosquito host.

D. The authors are encouraged to use alternate approaches, such as random forest (ML) approach, to determine if the odor classification is based on host or non-host. This method has been used for the last fifteen years in chemical ecology and human odor analysis (Cutler et al, 2007, Kwak et al 2008).

E. The authors use a phylogenetic framework for their analyses. Multivariate methods are now available to test evolutionary hypotheses about scent composition in a phylogenetic framework (Goolsby, 2017), and the authors are encouraged to use these approaches.

F. Comparison to floral odour space section. I would encourage the authors to examine other datasets of plant headspace samples, including plants used by mosquitoes. There are many datasets out there that the authors could use (El-Sayed 2021, Farré-Armengol et al 2020). Expanding the authors' dataset would provide more statistical power, and provide control of differences in plant visitor and plant phylogenetic relatedness.

G. Adding context related to mosquito olfaction. The authors describe how their work could provide insight into the coding of olfactory information by the mosquito. I would encourage the authors to analyze their data further by collapsing the host volatiles into groups based on biochemical pathways, or knowledge of the detection of the volatiles by the mosquitoes (such as using electroantennogram responses) to filter and identify only those responsive volatiles to keep in their dataset.

Premise and Background Knowledge<br /> A. Analyses of odour headspace have been known for the last three decades, e.g. (Methods in Chemical Ecology, Techniques in Pheromone Research, George Petri's work, Tholl and Rose, 2006; Stashenko and Martínez, 2008; Spicer et al., 2017; Tholl et al., 2020; Eisen et al., 2021; Schulz and Mollerke, 2022). But in many places, the paper conveys the impression that these are new discoveries and analyses. For example,<br /> -"Yet we remain remarkably ignorant of the composition of the chemical world."<br /> -"Our work provides one of the first quantitative descriptions of a natural odour space"<br /> -"Progress in understanding natural odours has also been hindered by the technical challenges of capturing and analyzing odour, especially the complex blends that constitute most natural odours"<br /> The Introduction and Discussion are rife with these overblown statements. I found this frustrating as the authors were not giving due credit to prior work on that topic while (maybe unintentionally) giving an impression that this specific idea was a new contribution. More care is needed to delineate which aspects of the study are 1) based on prior understanding, or 2) totally new). The authors are adding to an already extensive field of chemical ecology and olfactory processing of mixtures, and are contributing to this knowledge by adding datasets related to mammalian odor. I plead that the authors clearly describe these gaps, and place their results into proper context.

B. Similarly to the above statements relating to chemical ecology, the authors have numerous statements about gaps in odour processing. Mixture processing has been an important topic of study for the last forty years (Shorey, 1973, Caprio, 1988, Riffell et al 2009, Su et al 2009, Rokni et al 2014, Mathis et al 2016), which is based on encoding the temporal and concentration-dependent statistics of the odour.<br /> -"Yet compared to visual and auditory scenes, we know very little about the statistics of natural olfactory scenes"<br /> As described above, this is surprising and frustrating because of the rich literature on these topics (searching for "odour mixtures" provides 32,000 articles). In their manuscript, the authors are providing a strawman argument for their analyses by focusing on single odorant signatures, when the literature has repeatedly demonstrated the importance of odour mixtures for behavior and combinatorial processing.

C. There are increasing studies examining the mosquito behavioral and electrophysiological responses to hosts and other odours. However, this literature is not cited or included in the authors' analyses. The chemical ecology of mosquito attractants and natural odours has been studied in the Carde, Leal, Ignell, Carlson, Kline, Riffell, Takken, Torto, Verlhurst, Vosshall labs, and many others. The authors could use this information in their analyses and cite the literature.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

This study focused on collecting and analyzing odour samples from a wide range of vertebrate species to understand the composition and characteristics of vertebrate body odours. The researchers used dynamic headspace sampling to collect odour samples from 120 individual animals representing 64 vertebrate species. They collected odour from both live animals and hair samples, with hair being a reasonable proxy for mammalian body odour.

The odour samples were analyzed using thermal desorption-gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (TD-GC-MS) to identify compounds and estimate their abundance. They identified a total of 116 compounds in the vertebrate odour extracts, including aldehydes, ketones, alcohols, aromatics, terpenes, and hydrocarbons. The compounds varied in prevalence across species, but a large number of compounds were found in at least 15 samples, indicating a broad overlap in odour composition among vertebrates.

The study compared the vertebrate odour space to floral odour space and found that vertebrate odours shared more compounds compared to floral odours. Floral odours tended to be less complex and more likely to contain unique compounds found only in a single species. The analysis also revealed that odour profiles did not show strong phylogenetic signals, indicating that closely related species did not necessarily have similar odour profiles. However, within-species clustering was observed, suggesting that body odour composition may be species-specific.

The researchers also investigated specific compounds that could serve as host-seeking cues for animals. They compared the odour of live vertebrate hosts to non-host stimuli and identified straight-chain aldehydes as abundant compounds in vertebrate odours. These aldehydes were found at substantially lower levels in non-host stimuli. Additionally, when comparing human odour to other vertebrate species and non-host stimuli, several compounds, including decanal, sulcatone, geranylacetone, and undecanal, emerged as strong predictors of human hosts.

Three shortcomings of the study can be highlighted:<br /> 1. Undersampling of certain compound classes: The study acknowledged that they undersampled carboxylic acids, which are generally too polar or non-volatile to be analyzed without a special derivatization step. This limitation could have resulted in an incomplete understanding of the full range of compounds present in vertebrate odours.<br /> 2. Missing highly volatile compounds: The study mentioned the difficulty of capturing and quantifying highly volatile compounds reliably. This limitation suggests that certain compounds with high volatility may not have been adequately represented in the analysis, potentially impacting the comprehensiveness of the odour space.<br /> 3. Lack of controlled experiment for species replicates: Although the study observed strong within-species clustering for some species in their dataset, they cautioned that many of the species replicates came from the same farm or zoo, which could confound the results with sample origin. The lack of a well-controlled experiment limits the generalizability of the findings regarding consistent and characteristic odour profiles across animals.

These shortcomings should be considered when interpreting the results of the study and could be addressed in future research to further advance our understanding of vertebrate body odours.

The manuscript highlights three open questions. First, the authors discuss the implications of the differences between vertebrate and floral odors for olfactory coding in blood feeders and floral visitors. Specialist mosquitoes require odor blends to detect hosts, while honeybees can generalize from attractive mixtures to individual components. The authors suggest that these differences may be influenced by the different odor spaces mosquitoes and bees inhabit.

Second, the authors note that although compounds in vertebrate odor are shared broadly across species, they are also common in other natural odors. This poses a challenge for generalist blood feeders, but the study suggests that straight-chain, saturated aldehydes, which are highly abundant in vertebrate odors, may still serve as useful indicators. These aldehydes have been shown to enhance host-seeking in mosquitoes and are even used by malaria parasites and orchids to attract mosquitoes. However, the study did not capture highly volatile or polar compounds that may also indicate the presence of a vertebrate host.

Third, the manuscript discusses the lack of phylogenetic signal in the odors of mammals, which make up the majority of the sampled species. This may explain why few mosquitoes exhibit preferences for taxonomic groups at the family or order level. The study suggests that within a species, there is high consistency in odor-blend composition, which may mediate species-specific host preference through olfactory cues.

The authors also focus on odor features that may serve as valuable cues for human specialists. They find that certain components of human odor, such as sulcatone, geranylacetone, decanal, and undecanal, are distinctive and enriched in human odor. Undecanal, despite being less common across non-human animals and in nature overall, is a more reliable indicator of human odor than decanal. The two ketones are even more reliable indicators. The authors speculate that the reliance on aldehydes by human-specialist mosquitoes may be due to the evolutionary history of these mosquitoes, which arose from an ancestral generalist subspecies.

In conclusion, this manuscript presents a quantitative study of vertebrate animal odors, highlighting the differences between vertebrate and floral odors. It raises questions about olfactory coding in blood feeders and floral visitors, the challenges faced by generalist blood feeders, and the lack of phylogenetic signal in mammalian odors. The study also explores odor features that may be valuable cues for human specialists and discusses the evolutionary implications of these findings.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

This study seeks to understand how selective mRNA translation informs cellular identity using the Drosophila brain as a model. Using drivers specific for either neurons or glia, the authors express a tagged large ribosomal subunit protein, which they then use as a handle for isolating total mRNA and ribosome footprints. Throughout the study, they compare these data sets to transcriptional and ribosome profiles from the whole fly head, which contains multiple cell types including fat tissue, pigment cells, and others, in addition to neurons and glia. Using GO term analyses, they demonstrate the specificity of their cell-type-based ribosome profiling: known glial mRNAs are efficiently translated in glia and likewise in neurons as well. In further examining their RNAseq data set, they find that "neuronal" mRNAs, such as ion channels, are expressed in both neurons and glia, but are translated at higher rates in neurons. Based on this, they hypothesize that neuronal mRNAs are actively suppressed in glia, and next seek to determine the underlying mechanism. By meta-analysis of all mapped ribosome footprints, they find that glia have higher ribosome occupancies in the 5' leader of neuronal mRNAs. This is corroborated by individual ribosome occupancy profiles for several neuronal mRNAs. In 5'leaders containing upstream AUG codons, they find that the glial data sets show enrichment of ribosomes at these upstream start sites. They thus conclude that 5' leaders containing upstream AUGs confer translational suppression in glia.

Overall, the sequencing data sets generated in this study and their subsequent bioinformatic analyses seem robust and reliable. Their data echo the trends of cell-type specific translational profiles seen in previous studies (e.g. 27380875, 30650354), and making their data sets and analyses accessible to the broader scientific community would be quite helpful. The findings are presented in a logical and methodical manner, and the data are depicted clearly. The authors' results that 5' leaders facilitate translation suppression is well-supported in literature. However, they overinterpret their data by claiming that such suppression is key for maintaining glial/neuronal identity (it is even featured in their title), but do not present any evidence that loss of such regulation has any impact on cellular identity. In many places, the authors do not acknowledge possible biases in their analytical methods, or consider alternate explanations for their data. These weaken the manuscript in its current form, but many of these issues which I describe below, are rectifiable with modest effort.

1. The authors' data in Fig. 2-S1A-B shows substantial cell-to-cell variation in RpL3::FLAG expression. The authors do not consider that this variation may cause certain neuronal/glial types to be overrepresented in their datasets. A related point is that the authors do not discuss whether RpL3::FLAG is only present in the cell body or if it is also trafficked to the neuronal/glial processes where localized translation is known to occur (reviewed in 31270476).

2. The RNA-seq data set that they use to calculate translation efficiency (TE) only represents mRNAs associated with RpL3::FLAG, which is part of the large ribosome subunit. As the authors are likely aware, there are mRNAs on which the full ribosome moiety does not assemble and these are effectively excluded from this data set. Ideally, a more complete picture of the mRNA landscape can be obtained by 40S subunit profiling but I appreciate that this is technically very challenging. At a minimum, this caveat needs to be acknowledged.

How does the TPM of differentially regulated transcripts (such as those in Fig. 2H) compare between whole heads, neurons, and glia? Since the whole head RNA-seq data was not from an enriched sample, this might serve as a decent proxy for showing that the neuron/glia RNA-seq data sets are representative of RNA abundance.

3. The analysis in Fig. 2F shows that low abundance mRNAs in glia are further translationally suppressed, which the authors point out in lines 151-152. However, this data also shows that mRNAs with a 1:1 ratio in neuron:glia (which fall in the 0.5-1 and 1-2 bin) have a TE1; this suggests that on average, mRNAs that are equally abundant are translated equally efficiently. This is the opposite of the thesis presented in Fig. 2G-H where many mRNAs of equal abundance in neurons and glia are actually poorly translated in glia. How do the authors reconcile these observations?<br /> It is also unclear from the manuscript whether all mRNAs were considered for the analysis in Fig. 2F or if some cutoff was employed.

4. Throughout the manuscript the authors favor a "translation suppression" model wherein glia (for example) actively suppress neuronal mRNAs, and this is substantiated in Fig. 3C showing higher ribosome occupancy on 5' leaders than in coding regions. However, they show no evidence that glial mRNAs (such as those indicated in Fig. 2B and 2-S2B) present a different pattern, say that of higher ribosome occupancy in CDS vs. 5' leaders. This type of positive control is a glaring omission from many of their analyses, including ribosome occupancy at upstream AUG codons (Fig. 4).<br /> In order to make a broad case (as they do in the title) that differential translation regulation specifies multiple cell types, it is necessary to show the corollary: that glial mRNAs (repo, bnb, pnt, etc) are suppressed in neurons. There is an inkling of this evidence in Fig. 3-S1 where fat body mRNAs in neurons are shown to have low ribosome occupancy in the CDS regions and enhanced occupancy in the 5' leader region. This data is not quantified, nor is a control neuron mRNA shown as a reference for what the ribosome occupancy profile of an actively translated mRNA looks like in a neuron.

5. The cell-type specific ribosome profiling data sets in the manuscript are from mRNAs associated with 80s subunits that have been treated with cycloheximide during sample preparation. Cycloheximide, and many other translation inhibitors, are known to non-uniformly bias reads towards start codons (PMID: 22056041,22927429). This important caveat and its implications on the start-codon occupancy analysis in Fig. 4 are not acknowledged in the manuscript.<br /> Again, the ideal resolution would be a ribosome profiling data set from 40S footprinting or harringtonine-treated samples (PMIDs: 32589966, 27487212, 32589964) to show the true accumulation of ribosomes at AUG codons. In the absence of such a data set, a comparative meta-analysis of the ribosome distribution around upstream and initiation AUG codons of differentially translated transcripts from neurons would be a useful control.

6. The authors chose Rhodopsin 1 (Rh1) as a model mRNA which is translated efficiently in neurons but suppressed in glia. Though the data in Fig. 2-S3B shows higher TE for Rh1 in neurons, the data in 5A show lower ribosome occupancy in the Rh1 CDS in neuron samples (at least in the fragment of the CDS visible). These data are somewhat contradictory.<br /> Further, given that the neuron data are from all nsyb-positive cells but that Rh1 is expressed only in R1-R6 photoreceptors, it is unclear what motivated them to choose Rh1 as opposed to an mRNA that is more broadly expressed in neurons.

7. Similar to the heterogeneity in nsyb- and repo-GAL4 expression in Fig. 2-S1A-B, Fig. 5C shows substantial variation in the expression of the UAS-GFP reporter driven by tub-GAL4. This variable GAL4 activity makes the mRNA abundance data difficult to interpret. Also, since the authors presume that Rh1 mRNA is expressed in glia (it is not annotated in the RNA-seq analysis in Fig. 2-S2B), would Rh1-GAL4 not be a more apt driver?<br /> These issues are further compounded by the lack of a cellular compartment marker (repo marks glial nuclei) which makes it impossible to determine which cell the mRNA signal is in. There are also no negative controls presented for the mRNA probes.<br /> Most confoundingly though, the control reporter itself seems to show variable translation efficiencies from one cell to another, with high-GFP protein cells showing lower GFP mRNA and vice versa.<br /> The mRNA:protein ratio may be easier to examine by using repo-GAL4 to specifically drive the Rh1-reporter expression in glia (such as in Fig. 5-S1A) rather than simultaneous expression in both neurons and glia using tub-GAL4.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The authors used next-generation sequencing approaches combined with ribosome trapping to investigate gene expression in neurons and glia in the heads of adult fruit flies. Ribosome footprinting was further used to investigate the translational efficiency (TE) of particular RNAs in these two tissues. The evidence convincingly demonstrated that translation of specific messages is repressed in glia while others are repressed in neurons. Further evidence suggests that cis-acting elements within the 5'UTR of neuronal transcripts cause the repression of translation in glia. For instance, a fluorescent reporter using the 5'UTR of Rhodopsin-1 is highly translated in neurons but fluorescence from this reporter is nearly undetectable in glia. Furthermore, pausing of ribosomes on start codons of upstream Open Reading Frames (uORFs) is seen on the 5'UTR of this and other messages in glia but not in neurons.

Strengths:<br /> The main strength of the manuscript is its use of cutting-edge next-generation sequencing and bioinformatic approaches to investigate the tissue-specific translatome of Drosophila.

Weaknesses:<br /> A minor weakness is that little insight is provided into the mechanism that leads to ribosome stalling on uORFs in glia but not in neurons. The manuscript could be improved by some discussion on potential pathways that might control the differential TE through uORF pausing.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

It is well established that there is extensive post-transcriptional gene regulation in nervous systems, including the fly brain. For example, dynamic regulation of hundreds of genes during photoreceptor development could only be observed at the level of translated mRNAs, but not the entire transcriptomes. The present study instead addresses the role of differential translational regulation between cell types (or rather classes: neurons and glia, as both are still highly heterogenous groups) in the adult fly brain. By performing bulk RNA-seq and Ribo-seq on the same lysates, the authors are able to compare the translation efficiency (TE) of all transcripts between neurons and glia. Many genes display differential TE, but interestingly, they tend to be the genes that already show strong differences at their mRNA level. The most striking observation is the finding that neuronal transcripts in glia display increased ribosome stalling at their 5' UTR, and in particular at the start codons of short "upstream ORFs". This could suggest that glia specifically employ a mechanism to upregulate upstream ORF translation, enabling them to better suppress the expression of the genes that have them. And neuronal genes tend to have longer 5' UTRs, perhaps to facilitate this type of regulation.

However, it is difficult to evaluate the functional significance of these differences because the authors provide only one follow-up experiment to their RNA-seq analysis. Venus expressed with the Rh1 UTR sequences may be displaying differential levels between glia and neurons, but I find this image (Fig. 5C) rather unconvincing to support that conclusion. There are no quantifications of colocalization or even sample size information provided for this experiment. And if there is indeed a difference, it would still be difficult to argue this is because of the 5' stalling phenomenon authors observe with Rh1, because they switched both the 5' and 3' UTRs.

I also find it puzzling that the TE differences between the groups are mostly among the transcripts that are already strongly differentially expressed at the transcriptional level. The authors would like to frame this as a mechanism of 'contrast sharpening'; but it is unclear why that would be needed. Rh1, for instance, is not just differentially expressed between neurons and glia, but it is actually only expressed by a very specific neuronal type (photoreceptors). Thus it's not clear to me why the glia would need this 5' stalling mechanism to fully suppress Rh1 expression, while all the other neurons can apparently do so without it.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

In the article "Temporal transcriptomic dynamics in developing macaque neocortex", Xu et al. analyze the cellular composition and transcriptomic profiles of the developing macaque parietal cortex using single-cell RNA sequencing. The authors profiled eight prenatal rhesus macaque brains at five timepoints (E40, E50, E70, E80, and E90) and obtained a total of around 53,000 high-quality cells for downstream analysis. The dataset provides a high-resolution view into the developmental processes of early and mid-fetal macaque cortical development and will potentially be a valuable resource for future comparative studies of primate neurogenesis and neural stem cell fate specification. Their analysis of this dataset focused on the temporal gene expression profiles of outer and ventricular radial glia and utilized pesudotime trajectory analysis to characterize the genes associated with radial glial and neuronal differentiation. The rhesus macaque dataset presented in this study was then integrated with prenatal mouse and human scRNA-seq datasets to probe species differences in ventricular radial glia to intermediate progenitor cell trajectories. Additionally, the expression profile of macaque radial glia across time was compared to those of mouse apical progenitors to identify conserved and divergent expression patterns of transcription factors.

The main findings of this paper corroborate many previously reported and fundamental features of primate neurogenesis: deep layer neurons are generated before upper layer excitatory neurons, the expansion of outer radial glia in the primate lineage, conserved molecular markers of outer radial glia, and the early specification of progenitors. Furthermore, the authors show some interesting divergent features of macaque radial glial gene regulatory networks as compared to mouse. Overall, despite some uncertainties surrounding the clustering and annotations of certain cell types, the manuscript provides a valuable scRNA-seq dataset of early prenatal rhesus macaque brain development. The dynamic expression patterns and trajectory analysis of ventricular and outer radial glia provide valuable data and lists of differentially expressed genes (some consistent with previous studies, others reported for the first time here) for future studies.

The major weaknesses of this study are the inconsistent dissection of the targeted brain region and the loss of more mature excitatory neurons in samples from later developmental timepoint due to the use of single-cell RNA-seq. The authors mention that they could observe ventral progenitors and even midbrain neurons in their analyses. Ventral progenitors should not be present if the authors had properly dissected the parietal cortex. The fact that they obtained even midbrain cells point to an inadequate dissection or poor cell classification. If this is the result of poor classification, it could be easily fixed by using more markers with higher specificity. However, if it is the result of a poor dissection, some of the cells in other clusters could potentially be from midbrain as well. The loss of more mature excitatory neurons is also problematic because on top of hindering the analysis of these neurons in later developmental periods, it also affects the cell proportions the authors use to support some of their claims. The study could also benefit from the validation of some of the genes the authors uncovered to be specifically expressed in different populations of radial glia.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> This manuscript by Xu et al., is an interesting study aiming to identify novel features of macaque cortical development. This study serves as a valuable atlas of single cell data during macaque neurogenesis, which extends the developmental stages previously explored. Overall, the authors have achieved their aim of collecting a comprehensive dataset of macaque cortical neurogenesis and have identified a few unknown features of macaque development.

Strengths:<br /> The authors have accumulated a robust dataset of developmental time points and have applied a variety of informatic approaches to interrogate this dataset. One interesting finding in this study is the expression of previously unknown receptors on macaque oRG cells. Another novel aspect of this paper is the temporal dissection of neocortical development across species. The identification that the regulome looks quite different, despite similar expression of transcription factors in discrete cell types, is intriguing.

Weaknesses:<br /> Due to the focus on demonstrating the robustness of the dataset, the novel findings in this manuscript are underdeveloped. There is also a lack of experimental validation. This is a particular weakness for newly identified features (like receptors in oRG cells). It's important to show expression in relevant cell types and, if possible, perform functional perturbations on these cell types. The presentation of the data highlighting novel findings could also be clarified at higher resolution, and dissected through additional informatic analyses. Additionally, the presentation of ideas and goals of this manuscript should be further clarified. A major gap in the study rationale and results is that the data was collected exclusively in the parietal lobe, yet the rationale and interpretation of what this data indicates about this specific cortical area was not discussed. Last, a few textual errors about neural development are also present and need to be corrected.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary: The study adds to the existing data that have established that cortical development in rhesus macaque is known to recapitulate multiple facets cortical development in humans. The authors generate and analyze single cell transcriptomic data from the timecourse of embryonic neurogenesis.

Strengths:<br /> Studies of primate developmental biology are hindered by the limited availability and limit replication. In this regard, a new dataset is useful.

The study analyzes parietal cortex, while previous studies focused on frontal and motor cortex. This may be the first analysis of macaque parietal cortex and, as such, may provide important insights into arealization, which the authors have not addressed.

Weaknesses:<br /> The number of cells in the analysis is lower than recent published studies which may limit cell representation and potentially the discovery of subtle changes.

The macaque parietal cortex data is compared to human and mouse pre-frontal cortex. See data from PMCID: PMC8494648 that provides a better comparison.

A deeper assessment of these data in the context of existing studies would help others appreciate the significance of the work.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

The main goal of the study was to tease apart the associative and non-associative elements of cued fear conditioning that could influence which defensive behaviors are expressed. To do this, the authors compared groups conditioned with paired, unpaired, or shock only procedures followed by extinction of the cue. The cue used in the study was not typical; serial presentation of a tone followed by a white noise was used in order to assess switches in behavior across the transition from tone to white noise. Many defensive behaviors beyond the typical freezing assessments were measured, and both male and female mice were included throughout. The authors found changes in behavioral transitions from freezing to flight during conditioning as the tone transitioned into white noise, and a switch in freezing during extinction such that it became high during the white noise as flight behavior decreased. Overall, this was an interesting analysis of transitions in defensive behaviors to a serially presented cue consisting of two auditory stimuli during conditioning and then extinction. There are some concerns regarding the possibility that the white noise is more innately aversive than the tone, inducing more escape-like behaviors compared to a tone, especially since the shock only group also showed increased escape-like behaviors during the white noise versus tone. This issue would have been resolved by adding a control group where the order of the auditory stimuli was reversed (white noise->tone). While the more complete assessment of defensive behaviors beyond freezing is welcomed, the main conclusions in the discussion are overly focused on the paired group and the associative elements of conditioning, which would likely not be surprising to the field. If the goal, as indicated in the title, was to tease apart the associative and non-associative elements of conditioning and defensive behaviors, there needs to be a more emphasized discussion and explicit identification of the non-associative findings of their study, as this would be more impactful to the field.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The authors examined several defensive responses elicited during Pavlovian conditioning using a serial compound stimulus (SCS) as the conditioned stimulus (CS) and a shock unconditioned stimulus (US) in male and female mice. The SCS consisted of tone pips followed by white noise. Their design included 3 treatment groups that were either exposed to the CS and US in a paired fashion, in an unpaired fashion, or only exposed to the shock US. They compared freezing, jumping, darting, and tail rattling across all groups during conditioning and extinction. During conditioning, strong freezing responses to the tone pips followed by strong jumping and darting responses to the white noise were present in the paired group but less robust or not present in the unpaired or shock only groups. During extinction, tone-induced freezing diminished while the jumping was replaced by freezing and darting in the paired group. Together, these findings support the idea that associative pairings are necessary for conditioned defensive responses.

Strengths:<br /> The study has strong control groups including a group that receives the same stimuli in an unpaired fashion and another control group that only receives the shock US and no CS to test the associative value of the SCS to the US. The authors examine a wide variety of defensive behaviors that emerge during conditioning and shift throughout extinction: in addition to the standard freezing response, jumping, darting, and tail rattling were also measured.

Weaknesses:<br /> This study could have greater impact and significance if additional conditions were added (e.g., using other stimuli of differing salience during the SCS), and determining the neural correlates or brain regions that are differentially recruited during different phases of the task across the different groups.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

The paper submitted by Yogesh and Keller explores the role of cholinergic input from the basal forebrain (BF) in the mouse primary visual cortex (V1). The study aims to understand the signals conveyed by BF cholinergic axons in the visual cortex, their impact on neurons in different cortical layers, and their computational significance in cortical visual processing. The authors employed two-photon calcium imaging to directly monitor cholinergic input from BF axons expressing GCaMP6 in mice running through a virtual corridor, revealing a strong correlation between BF axonal activity and locomotion. This persistent activation during locomotion suggests that BF input provides a binary locomotion state signal. To elucidate the impact of cholinergic input on cortical activity, the authors conducted optogenetic and chemogenetic manipulations, with a specific focus on L2/3 and L5 neurons. They found that cholinergic input modulates the responses of L5 neurons to visual stimuli and visuomotor mismatch, while not significantly affecting L2/3 neurons. Moreover, the study demonstrates that BF cholinergic input leads to decorrelation in the activity patterns of L2/3 and L5 neurons.

This topic has garnered significant attention in the field, drawing the interest of many researchers actively investigating the role of BF cholinergic input in cortical activity and sensory processing. The experiments and analyses were thoughtfully designed and conducted with rigorous standards, leading to convincing results which align well with findings in previous studies. In other words, some of the main findings, such as the correlation between cholinergic input and locomotor activity and the effects of cholinergic input on V1 cortical activity, have been previously demonstrated by other labs (Goard and Dan, 2009; Pinto et al., 2013; Reimer et al., 2016). However, the study by Yogesh and Keller stands out by combining cutting-edge calcium imaging and optogenetics to provide compelling evidence of layer-specific differences in the impact of cholinergic input on neuronal responses to bottom-up (visual stimuli) and top-down inputs (visuomotor mismatch).

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

The manuscript investigates the function of basal forebrain cholinergic axons in mouse primary visual cortex (V1) during locomotion using two-photon calcium imaging in head-fixed mice. Cholinergic modulation has previously been proposed to mediate the effects of locomotion on V1 responses. The manuscript concludes that the activity of basal forebrain cholinergic axons in visual cortex provides a signal which is more correlated with binary locomotion state than locomotion velocity of the animal. Cholinergic axons did not seem to respond to grating stimuli or visuomotor prediction error. Optogenetic stimulation of these axons increased the amplitude of responses to visual stimuli and decreased the response latency of layer 5 excitatory neurons, but not layer 2/3 neurons. Moreover, optogenetic or chemogenetic stimulation of cholinergic inputs reduced pairwise correlation of neuronal responses. These results provide insight into the role of cholinergic modulation to visual cortex and demonstrate that it affects different layers of visual cortex in a distinct manner. The experiments are well executed and the data appear to be of high quality. However, further analyses are required to fully support several of the study's conclusions.

1) In experiments analysing the activity of V1 neurons, GCaMP6f was expressed using a ubiquitous Ef1a promoter, which is active in all neuronal cell types as well as potentially non-neuronal cells. The manuscript specifically refers to responses of excitatory neurons but it is unclear how excitatory neuron somata were identified and distinguished from that of inhibitory neurons or other cell types.

2) The manuscript concludes that cholinergic axons convey a binary locomotion signal and are not tuned to running speed. The average running velocity of mice in this study is very slow - slower than 15 cm/s in the example trace in Figure 1D and speeds <6 cm/s were quantified in Figure 2E. However, mice can run at much faster speeds both under head-fixed and freely moving conditions (see e.g. Jordan and Keller, 2020, where example running speeds are ~35 cm/s). Given that the data in the present manuscript cover such a narrow range of running speeds, it is not possible to determine whether cholinergic axons are tuned to running speed or convey a binary locomotion signal.

3) The analyses in Figure 4 only consider the average response to all grating orientations and directions. Without further analysing responses to individual grating directions it is unclear how stimulation of cholinergic inputs affects visual responses. Previous work (e.g. Datarlat and Stryker, 2017) has shown that locomotion can have both additive and multiplicative effects and it would be valuable to determine the type of modulation provided by cholinergic stimulation.

4) The difference between the effects of locomotion and optogenetic stimulation of cholinergic axons in Figure 5 may be confounded by differences in the visual stimulus. These experiments are carried out under open-loop conditions, where mice may adapt their locomotion based on the speed of the visual stimulus. Consequently, locomotion onsets are likely to occur during periods of higher visual flow. Since optogenetic stimulation is presented randomly, it is likely to occur during periods of lower visual flow speed. Consequently, the difference between the effect of locomotion and optogenetic stimulation may be explained by differences in visual flow speed and it is important to exclude this possibility.

5) It is unclear why chemogenetic manipulations of cholinergic inputs had no effect on pairwise correlations of L2/3 neuronal responses while optogenetic stimulation did.

6) The effects of locomotion and optogenetic stimulation on the latency of L5 responses in Figure 7 are very large - ~100 ms. Indeed, typical latencies in mouse V1 measured using electrophysiology are themselves shorter than 100 ms (see e.g. Durand et al., 2016). Visual response latencies in stationary conditions or without optogenetic stimulation appear surprisingly long - much longer than reported in previous studies even under anaesthesia. Such large and surprising results require careful analysis to ensure they are not confounded by artefacts. However, as in Figure 4, this analysis is based only on average responses across all gratings and no individual examples are shown.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

This manuscript by He et al. explores the molecular basis of the different stinging behaviors of two related anemones. The freshwater Nematostella which only stings when a food stimulus is presented with mechanical stimulation and the saltwater Exaiptasia which stings in response to mechanical stimuli. The authors had previously shown that Nematostella stinging is calcium-dependent and mediated by a voltage-gated calcium channel (VGCC) with very pronounced voltage-dependent inactivation, which gets removed upon hyperpolarization produced by taste receptors.

In this manuscript, they show that Exaiptacia and Nematostella differing stinging behavior is near optimal, according to their ecological niche, and conforms to predictions from a Markov decision model.

It is also shown that Exaiptacia stinging is also calcium-dependent, but the calcium channel responsible is much less inactivated at resting potential and can readily induce nematocyte discharge only in the presence of mechanical stimulation. To this end, the authors record calcium currents from Exaipacia nematocysts and discover that the VGCCs in this anemone are not strongly inactivated and thus are easily activated by mechanical stimuli-induced depolarization accounting for the different stinging behavior between species. The authors further explore the role of the auxiliary beta subunit in the modulation of VGCC inactivation and show that different n-terminal splice variants in Exaiptacia produce strong and weak voltage-dependent inactivation.

The manuscript is clear and well-written and the conclusions are in general supported by the experiments and analysis. The findings are very relevant to increase our understanding of the molecular basis of non-neural behavior and its evolutionary basis. This manuscript should be of general interest to biologists as well as to more specialized fields such as ion channel biophysics and physiology.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

This manuscript links the distinctive stinging behavior of sea anemones in different ecological niches to varying inactivation properties of voltage-gated calcium channels that are conferred by the identity of auxiliary Cavbeta subunits. Previous work from the Bellono lab established that the burrowing anemone, Nematostella vectensis, expresses a CaV channel that is strongly inactivated at rest which requires a simultaneous delivery of prey extract and touch to elicit a stinging response, reflecting a precise stinging control adapted for predation. They show here that by contrast, the anemone Exaiptasia diaphana which inhabits exposed environments, indiscriminately stings for defense even in the absence of prey chemicals, and that this is enabled by the expression of a CaVbeta splice variant that confers weak inactivation. They further use the heterologous expression of CaV channels with wild type and chimeric anemone Cavbeta subunits to infer that the variable N-termini are important determinants of Cav channel inactivation properties.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The present article attempts to answer both the ultimate question of why different stinging behaviours have evolved in Cnidiarians with different ecological niches and shed light on the proximate question of which electro-physiological mechanisms underlie these distinct behaviours.

Account of major methods and results:<br /> In the first part of the paper, the authors try to answer the ultimate question of why distinct dependencies of the sting response on internal starvation levels have evolved. The premise of the article that Exaiptasia's nematocyte discharge is independent of the presence of prey (Artemia nauplii) as compared to Nematostella's significant dependence of the discharge on the presence of actual prey, is shown to be a robust phenomenon justified by the data in Figure 1.

The hypothesis that defensive vs. predatory stinging leads to different nematocyte discharge behaviours is analysed in mathematical models based on the suitable framework of optimal control/decision theory. By assuming functional relations between the:<br /> 1) cost of a full nematocyte discharge and the starvation level.<br /> 2) probability of successful predation/avoidance on the discharge level.<br /> 3) desirability/reward of the reached nutritional state.

Based on these assumptions of environmental and internal influences, the optimal choice of attack intensity is calculated using Bellman's equation for this problem. The model predictions are validated using counted nematocytes on a coverslip. The scaling of normalised nematocyte discharge numbers with scaled starvation time is qualitatively comparable to what is predicted from the models. The abundance of nematocytes in the tentacles was, on the other hand, independent of the starvation state of the animals.

Next, the authors turn to investigate the proximate cause of the differential stinging behaviour. The authors have previously reported convincing evidence that a strongly inactivating Cav2.1 channel ortholog (nCav) is used by Nematostella to prevent stinging in the absence of prey (Weir et al. 2020). This inactivation is released by hyperpolarising sensory inputs signalling the presence of prey. In this article, it is clearly shown by blocking respective currents that Exaiptasia, too, relies on extracellular Ca2+ influx to initiate stinging. Patch clamp data of the involved currents is provided in support. However, the authors find that in addition to the nCav with a low-inactivation threshold, Exaiptasia has a splice variant with a higher inactivation threshold expressed (Figure 3D).

The authors hypothesise that it is this high-threshold nCav channel population that amplifies any voltage depolarisation to release a sting irrespective of the presence of prey signals. They found that the β subunit that is responsible for Nematostella's unusually low inactivation threshold exists in Exaiptasia as two alternative splice isoforms. These N-terminus variants also showed the greatest variation in a phylogenetic comparison (Figure 5), rendering it a candidate target for mutations causing variation in stinging responses.

Appraisal of methodology in support of the conclusions:<br /> The authors base their inference on a normative model that yields quantitative predictions which is an exciting and challenging approach. The authors take care in stating the model assumptions as well as showing that the data indeed does not contradict their model predictions. The interesting comparative nature of the modelling part of the study is complicated by slightly different cost assumptions for the two scenarios. Hence, Figure 2 needs to be carefully digested by readers.

It would be even more prudent to analyse the same set of cost-of-discharge vs. starvation scenarios for both species. Specifically, for Nematostella the complete cost-of-discharge vs starvation-state curves as for Exaiptasia (Figure 2E, example 2-4) could be used. It is likely that the differential effect size of Nematostella and Exaiptasia behaviour is the strongest if only the flat cost-of-discharge vs starvation is used (Figure 2A) for Nematostella. But as a worst-case comparison the other curves, where the cost to the animal scales with starvation would be a good comparison. This could help the reader to understand when the different prediction of Nematostella's behaviour breaks down. In addition, this minor change could shed light on broader topics like common trade-offs in pursuit predation.

The qualitatively similar scaling of the model-derived relation between starvation and sting intensity with the counted nematocytes for different feeding pauses is evidence that feeding has indeed been optimised for the two distinct ecological niches.<br /> To prove that Exaiptasia uses a similar Ca2+ channel ortholog as well as a different splice variant, the authors employed both clean electrophysiological characterisation (Figure 3) as well as transcriptomics data (Figure 4S1).

To strengthen the authors' hypothesis that variation in the N-termini leads to changes in Ca2+ channel inactivation and hence altered stinging, the response sequence variability of 6 Cnidaria was analysed.

Additional context:<br /> Although, the present article focuses on nematocytes alone, currently, there has been a refocus in neurobiology on the nervous systems of more basal metazoans, which received much attention already in the works of Romanes (1885). In part, this is driven by the goal to understand the early evolution of nervous systems. Cnidarians and Ctenophors are exciting model organisms in this venture. This will hopefully be accompanied by more comparative studies like the present one. Some of the recent literature also uses computational models to understand mechanisms of motor behaviour using full-body simulations (Pallasdies et al. 2019; Wang et al. 2023), which can be thought of as complementary to the normative modelling provided by the authors.

Comparative studies of recent Cnidarians, such as the present article, can shed light on speculative ideas on the origin of nervous systems (Jékely, Keijzer, and Godfrey-Smith 2015). During a time (the Ediacarium/Cambrium transition) that has seen the genesis of complex trophic foodwebs with preditor-prey interaction, symbioses, but also an increase of body sizes and shapes, multiple ultimate causes can be envisioned that drove the increase in behavioural complexity. The authors show that not all of it needs to be implemented in dedicated nerve cells.

References:

Jékely, Gáspár, Fred Keijzer, and Peter Godfrey-Smith. 2015. "An Option Space for Early Neural Evolution." Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 370 (December): 20150181. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0181.

Pallasdies, Fabian, Sven Goedeke, Wilhelm Braun, and Raoul-Martin Memmesheimer. 2019. "From Single Neurons to Behavior in the Jellyfish Aurelia Aurita." eLife 8 (December). https://doi.org/10.7554/elife.50084.

Romanes, G. J. 1885. Jelly-Fish, Star-Fish and Sea-Urchins: Being a Research on Primitive Nervous Systems. Appleton.

Wang, Hengji, Joshua Swore, Shashank Sharma, John R. Szymanski, Rafael Yuste, Thomas L. Daniel, Michael Regnier, Martha M. Bosma, and Adrienne L. Fairhall. 2023. "A Complete Biomechanical Model of hydra Contractile Behaviors, from Neural Drive to Muscle to Movement." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 120 (March). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2210439120.

Weir, Keiko, Christophe Dupre, Lena van Giesen, Amy S-Y Lee, and Nicholas W Bellono. 2020. "A Molecular Filter for the Cnidarian Stinging Response." eLife 9 (May). https://doi.org/10.7554/elife.57578.

Joint Public Review:

The authors have previously established that activation of dopamine inputs to prefrontal cortex during adolescence can drive increases in mPFC DA bouton number and enhanced mPFC activity in WT mice. The current study was designed to test the hypothesis that neural circuit plasticity during adolescence can be targeted to restore cortical function under conditions of developmental disruptions that are relevant to psychiatric disorders.

Specifically, the manuscript explores how transient adolescent stimulation of ventral midbrain neurons that project to the frontal cortex may help to improve performance on certain memory tasks. The authors used DREADDs to regulate the mesofrontal cortical dopamine system in two mouse models - one with a reporter replacing the Arc gene, and another with knockout of the schizophrenia-associated gene Disc1, both of which are thought to have reduced prefrontal cortical activity. The manuscript provides an interesting set of observations that DREADD-based activation over only 3 days during adolescence provides a fast-acting and long-lasting improvement in performance on Y-maze spontaneous alternation as well as aspects of neuronal function as assessed using in vivo imaging methods.

A strength of this study is that the authors performed key manipulations using age and dose/intensity as dependent variables to show that the level of neural circuit activation during adolescence follows an inverted U-shape pattern, though the precise postsynaptic mechanisms underlying the positive impact of adolescent mesofrontal dopamine neuron stimulation were not addressed.

One limitation discussed by the reviewers is that using TH-Cre mice (as compared with DAT-Cre) to drive transgene expression in VTA neurons could lead to expression outside the dopaminergic population of neurons, though in the revision the authors have provided additional lines of evidence to support their model of dopamine regulation of frontal cortex in this study.

Collectively, this is a well-design study with many strengths and novel findings that are likely to positively impact a widespread of disciplines within the biological psychiatry and neuroscience field.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

The authors present here a comparative meta-analysis analysis designed to detect evidence for a reproduction/ survival trade-off, central to expectations from life history theory. They present variation in clutch size within species as an observation in conflict with expectations of optimisation of clutch size and suggest that this may be accounted for from weak selection on clutch size. The results of their analyses support this explanation - they found little evidence of a reproduction - survival trade-off across birds. They extrapolated from this result to show in a mathematical model that the fitness consequences of enlarged clutch sizes would only be expected to have a significant effect on fitness in extreme cases, outside of normal species' clutch size ranges. Given the centrality of the reproduction-survival trade-off, the authors suggest that this result should encourage us to take a more cautious approach to applying concepts the trade-off in life history theory and optimisation in behavioural ecology more generally. While many of the findings are interesting, I don't think the argument for a major re-think of life history theory and the role of trade-offs in fitness maximisation is justified.

The interest of the paper, for me, comes from highlighting the complexities of the link between clutch size and fitness, and the challenges facing biologists who want to detect evidence for life history trade-offs. Their results highlight apparently contradictory results from observational and experimental studies on the reproduction-survival trade-off and show that species with smaller clutch sizes are under stronger selection to limit clutch size.

Unfortunately, the authors interpret the failure to detect a life history trade-off as evidence that there isn't one. The construction of a mathematical model based on this interpretation serves to give this possible conclusion perhaps more weight than is merited on the basis of the results, of this necessarily quite simple, meta-analysis. There are several potential complicating factors that could explain the lack of detection of a trade-off in these studies, which are mentioned and dismissed as unimportant (lines 248-250) without any helpful, rigorous discussion. I list below just a selection of complexities which perhaps deserve more careful consideration by the authors to help readers understand the implications of their results:

• Reproductive output is optimised for lifetime reproductive success and so the consequences of being pushed off the optimum for one breeding attempt are not necessarily detectable in survival but in future reproductive success (and, therefore, lifetime reproductive success).<br /> • The analyses include some species that hatch broods simultaneously and some that hatch sequentially (although this information is not explicitly provided (see below)). This is potentially relevant because species which have been favoured by selection to set up a size asymmetry among their broods often don't even try to raise their whole broods but only feed the biggest chicks until they are sated; any added chicks face a high probability of starvation. The first point this observation raises is that the expectation of more chicks= more cost, doesn't hold for all species. The second more general point is that the very existence of the sequential hatching strategy to produce size asymmetry in a brood is very difficult to explain if you reject the notion of a trade-off.<br /> • For your standard, pair-breeding passerine, there is an expectation that costs of raising chicks will increase linearly with clutch size. Each chick requires X feeding visits to reach the required fledge weight. But this is not the case for species which lay precocious chicks which are relatively independent and able to feed themselves straight after hatching - so again the relationship of care and survival is unlikely to be detectable by looking at the effect of clutch size but again, it doesn't mean there isn't a trade-off between breeding and survival.<br /> • The costs of raising a brood to adulthood for your standard pair-breeding passerine is bound to be extreme, simply by dint of the energy expenditure required. In fact, it was shown that the basal metabolic rate of breeding passerines was at the very edge of what is physiologically possible, the human equivalent being cycling the Tour de France (Nagy et al. 1990). If birds are at the very edge of what is physiologically possible, is it likely that clutch size is under weak selection?<br /> • Variation in clutch size is presented by the authors as inconsistent with the assumption that birds are under selection to lay the Lack clutch. Of course, this is absurd and makes me think that I have misunderstood the authors' intended point here. At any rate, the paper would benefit from more clarity about how variable clutch size has to be before it becomes a problem for optimality in the authors' view (lines 84-85; line 246). See Perrins (1965) for an exquisite example of how beautifully great tits optimise clutch size on average, despite laying between 5-12 eggs.

[Editors’ note: the authors had already made data files publicly available, available here, https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.q83bk3jnk.]

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:

The authors present a comprehensive meta-analysis of Clostridioides difficile (CD) occurrence across 42,900 metagenomes from 253 public studies, largely representing stool samples from human adults, infants, and with a smaller fraction of samples from non-gut body sites and from environmental samples (e.g., non-human animals, wastewater, soil, etc.). In particular, the authors looked at adults who were healthy, diseased (but not with C. diff), and with diagnosed C. diff infection (CDI) and found that CD occurrence was fairly low: ~30% in adult CDI samples, ~2% in adult diseased samples, and ~1% in healthy samples. CD was much more prevalent in infants (15 and 40% in healthy and diseased infants, respectively). These findings, if they hold true, would be significant because they would suggest an over-diagnosis of CDI and an under-diagnosis of other putative enteric pathogens (also enriched in CDI samples) across the population. Furthermore, these results suggest that the asymptomatic carriage of CD in adults (~1-5%, depending on demographics) may be much lower than some prior estimates (some as high as ~30-40%).

Strengths:

The authors have done an admirable job pulling down an enormous data set for this CD-focused meta-analysis, which is a valuable service to the field. The results push against some common wisdom in the field, in terms of the prevalence of CD in CDI patients, which will be impactful if they hold up to further scrutiny. Furthermore, the identification of commensal bacteria that are positively or negatively associated with CD presence in both healthy and diseased people at different periods of the lifespan (infant, child, and adult), is a valuable synthesis with potential translational value. The manuscript is clearly written and the figures are presented well. The methodology is robust, although I have a few suggestions for improvement.

Weaknesses:

My main critique relates to detection limitations, both in terms of sequencing depth and read-mapping. Given that CD detection is the root of the main conclusions reported here, this deserves some additional care. The authors have already done some work to address this by including sequencing depth in their linear mixed effects model, which is great. Furthermore, they were conservative with how they labeled CD positive/negative individuals with multiple time points (i.e., if you had CD detected at any point, this sample was selected for the cross-sectional analysis, and that individual was labeled as CD positive). I have a few additional suggestions to explore this issue, which I outline in the recommendations for authors.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:

C. difficile infection (CDI) is clinically important as a hospital-acquired infection and a frequent cause of antibiotic-associated diarrhea, which is associated with high morbidity and mortality and increases in prevalence. It is also the prime example of a disease that is associated with gut microbiome dysbiosis and successfully treated with fecal microbiota transfer, highlighting the important but unclear functional or structural role of this bacterial pathogen and the condition of CDI for the gut microbiome, which is the focus of this study.

Ferretti et al. assembled an impressive gut metagenome dataset from previous and ongoing microbiome studies, which involves a large number of samples from patients with CDI or other diarrheal and non-diarrheal diseases and from healthy individuals, as well as from infants, adolescents, and adults. The authors analyze the prevalence and relative abundance of C. difficile in this dataset in relation to CDI diagnosis, host age and disease background, and the composition of the remaining microbiota. They detect C. difficile only in a minority of samples labelled as originating from CDI patients but frequently identify other pathogens and their toxin genes in the same samples. In infants, they detect C. difficile at high frequency and relative abundance in samples without clinical symptoms. They associate C. difficile presence in infant samples with "multiple indicators of healthy gut microbiome maturation' and suggest 'distinct biotic and physiological contexts in infants and adults' for C. difficile.

Strengths:

The manuscript provides an important overview of the complex relationship of C. difficile with the gut microbiome of healthy and diseased infants and adults, mostly due to the large studied dataset and convincing applied analysis that underlies the presented findings. This includes a number of interesting findings including, for example, that CDI can be reliably predicted based on taxonomic microbiota compositions, without including C. difficile itself or that C. difficile in infants appears not to originate from maternal sources.

Weaknesses:

Inconsistent associations of C. difficile with what is clinically labeled CDI, as well as the frequent detection of C. difficile in healthy infants, have been reported before and the manuscript does not reveal to what extent this bacterium reflects or even directly influences the gut microbiome of infants and adults. Whether the increased microbiota diversity, richness, and compositional similarity of C. difficile-positive infants to their mothers is sufficient to associate this bacterium with "healthy gut microbiome maturation" seems questionable, since C. difficile was also found to be more prevalent in preterm infants, formula-fed or antibiotically treated infants, and infants born by C-section, all of which are typically considered detrimental influences on microbiota development. The conclusion that "C. difficile may be a transient hallmark of healthy gut microbiome maturation" therefore appears too strong.

In addition, the statement that "its asymptomatic carriage in adults depends on microbial context" is not sufficiently supported by the presented data. Apparently, the authors are unable to define or measure "asymptomatic carriage", as they convincingly show that many patients diagnosed with "CDI" appear not to carry C. difficile, suggesting that neither asymptomatic nor symptomatic "CDI" conditions are necessarily linked to C. difficile.

The manuscript includes a large number of samples from poorly defined, but diverse patient backgrounds. It might be helpful to better define these samples (e.g. fecal samples vs. other gut samples) and to specify subcategories for samples from "diseased control subjects without CDI". Maybe this information could help validate the interesting suggestion from the manuscript that C. difficile may be (one of several) dysbiosis marker rather than the cause of (CDI) dysbiosis.

The phylogenetic analysis of C. difficile from metagenomic sequence data seems to suggest that there is a large mostly toxin gene-free cluster that is only identified in infants (Supplementary Figure 13). Could this indicate that there are, in fact, less pathogenic C. difficile lineages that are more prevalent in infants?

The authors argue in the Discussion that "Differential diagnosis against multiple enteropathogens may therefore stratify patients with CDI-like symptoms, towards adapted therapeutic interventions." It might be helpful to expand this discussion of different clinical options that could be adapted to highlight the clinical applicability of the presented findings.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

This contribution focuses on the zinc(II) transporter YiiP, a widely used model system of the Cation Diffusion Facilitator (CDF) superfamily. CDF proteins function as dimers and are typically involved in the maintenance of homeostasis of transition metal ions in organisms from all kingdoms of life. The system investigated here, YiiP, is a prokaryotic zinc(II)/H+ antiporter that exports zinc(II) ions from the cytosol. The authors addressed multiple crucial questions related to the functioning of YiiP, namely the specific role of the three zinc(II) binding sites present in each protomer, the zinc(II):H+ stoichiometry of antiport, and the impact of protonation on the transport process. Clarity on all these aspects is required to reach a thorough understanding of the transport cycle.

The experimental approach implemented in this work consisted of a combination of site-directed mutagenesis, high-quality 3D structural determination by cryoEM, microscale electrophoresis, thermodynamic modeling and molecular dynamics. The mutants generated in this work removed one (for the structural characterization) or two (for microscale electrophoresis) of the three zinc(II) binding sites of YiiP, allowing the authors to unravel respectively the structural role of metal binding at each site and the metal affinity of every site individually. pH-dependent measurements and constant pH molecular dynamics simulations, together with the metal affinity data, provided a detailed per-site overview of dissociation constants and Ka values of the metal-binding residues, casting light on the interplay between protonation and metal binding along the transport cycle. This thermodynamic modeling constitutes an important contribution, with consistent experimental information gained from the various mutants.

Overall the authors were successful in providing a model of the transport cycle (Figure 5) that is convincing and well supported by the experimental data. The demonstration that two protomers act asymmetrically during the cycle is another nice achievement of this work, confirming previous suggestions. This novel overview of the cycle can constitute a basis for future work on other systems such as human ZnT transporters, also exploiting a methodological approach for the thermodynamic of these proteins similar to the one deployed here. The latter approach may be applicable also to other superfamilies of metal transporters.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

The manuscript by Hussein et al. uses cryoEM structure, microscale thermophoresis (MST), and molecular dynamics simulations (conventional and CpHMD) to unravel the Zn2+ and proton role in the function of the Cation Diffusion Facilitator YiiP. First, they generate mutants that abolish each of the three Zn2+ models to study the role of each of them separately, both structurally and functionally. Next, they used a Monte Carlo approach refining the CpHMD data with the MST points to establish the Zn2+ or proton binding state depending on the pH. That predicted a stoichiometry of one Zn2+ to 2 or 3 protons (1:3 under lower pH values). Finally, they proposed a mechanism that involves first the binding of Zn2+ to one low-affinity site and then, after the Zn2+ migrates to the highest affinity site in the transmembrane portion of the protein. The lack of Zn2+ in the low-affinity site might induce occlusion of the transporter.

The manuscript is well-written it is of interest to the field of Cation Facilitator Transporters. It is also an excellent example of a combination of different techniques to obtain relevant information on the mechanism of action of a transporter.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

In this work, the authors reported cryo-EM structures of four types of zinc-binding site mutants of a bacterial Zn2+/H+ antiporter YiiP, and proposed distinct structural/functional roles of each of the binding sites in the intramolecular Zn2+ relay and the integrity of the homodimeric structure of YiiP. MST analysis using the mutants with a single Zn2+-binding site at different pH further clarified the pH dependence of Zn2+ binding affinity of each site. Moreover, the inverse Multibind approach refined the CpHMD pKa values of the key Zn2+-binding residues so that they agreed with the MST data. Consequently, energetic coupling of Zn2+ export to the proton-motive force has been suggested. These findings definitely provide new mechanistic insight into this Zn2+/H+ antiporter.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary<br /> CLC-2 channels play an important role in cellular homeostasis and electrical excitability, and dysfunctions are associated with aldosteronism and leukodystrophy. Structural insights into the functioning of CLC-2 are just emerging. CLC-2 channels are distinct among the members of the CLC family in that they are activated by hyperpolarization. Earlier studies have implicated channel regulation by a "ball-and-chain" type of channel block mechanism which underlies its strong rectification and use-dependent "run-up" properties. Structural insights into these mechanisms are currently lacking. In this manuscript, Xu et al present CryoEM structures of CLC-2 in the apo and inhibitor-bound conformations in the 2.5-2.7 A resolution range. Several novel structural features are presented that lend support to the "ball-and chain" model, identify an interesting role for the c-terminal domain in gating, and establish the interaction pocket for AK-42. Electrophysiology and simulations nicely support the structural work. Overall, an elegant study, with high-quality data, and a well-presented manuscript.

Strengths<br /> 1. The cryoEM data presented reveals that the channel is in a closed conformation at depolarizing potential (0 mv). Structures for the closed state of CLCs were not previously available. A strong density for Glu205, which constitutes the Egate, allows for an unambiguous assignment of its position at the Scen Cl-binding site, thereby establishing the basis for the block in the closed channel.<br /> 2. The apo state particles were sorted into two classes that differ in the conformation of the CTD. A previously unobserved rearrangement of the CBS region in the CTD is reported wherein the CTD is positioned closer to the TM region in one of the subunits, breaking the C2 symmetry. The data implicates a role for the conformational flexibility of CTD in gating.<br /> 3. The most interesting finding of this work is, perhaps, the presence of an additional density, corresponding to a hairpin-like structure, that is seen only at the subunit where the CTD is positioned away from the TMD. The authors propose that the additional density corresponds to a 13 aa stretch in the N-terminal region. The position of the hairpin at the intracellular mouth of the CL-permeation pathway is likely to impede ion conduction, by a mechanism analogous to the "ball-and-chain" proposed in other voltage-gated channels.<br /> 4. The structure of CLC-2 in complex with a selective inhibitor AK-42 is in a conformation very similar to that of the apo state, with a clear additional density for the AK-42 molecule. Binding site interaction provides insights into AK-42 selectivity for CLC-2 vs CLC-1.

Weaknesses<br /> Although the conformation-dependent placement of the hairpin loop is convincing based on the density, the sequence assigned to this region is not conclusive.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

This manuscript deftly combines cryo-EM and electrophysiology to investigate the gating mechanisms of human CLC-2. Although another structure of CLC-2 was recently reported, this is the first structure to report density for the absolutely critical gating glutamate, and - an even more exciting result - the first structure to identify the N-terminal gating peptide that is the heart of this manuscript. There has been previous controversy over such a gating peptide in CLC-2, but the combined structural/functional approach appears to establish a role for this peptide in gating and sets up exciting future experiments to understand why its effects might change under different physiological scenarios. The experiments reported here are thoughtful and well-controlled and the data presentation is excellent. For the electrophysiology experiments, the use of inhibitor AK-42 (developed by the current senior author's lab) to establish a zero current level is a welcome advance and should become standard for electrophysiological studies of CLC-2.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

This paper makes important and novel advances that significantly enhance our understanding of the ClC-2 channel. The EM data are of high quality, and the most important argument, concerning the role of the N-terminus of the protein as an occluding inactivation gate, is very well supported by structural, computational, and functional data (some of which is previously published). The proposal that the "run up" observed in patch clamp experiments represents relief of inactivation is interesting and compelling. The model predicts that mutations at the hairpin binding site should influence this "run up", which should be tested in the near future. Finally, the confirmation of the AK-42 binding site further solidifies evidence that this is a pore-blocking compound; the authors' argument about determinants of specificity is convincing.

Joint Public Review:

This study provides evidence of the ability of sublethal imidacloprid doses to affect growth and development of honeybee larva. While checking the effect of doses that do not impact survival or food intake, the authors found changes in the expression of genes related to energy metabolism, antioxidant response, and metabolism of xenobiotics. The authors also identified cell death in the alimentary canal, and disturbances in levels of ROS markers, molting hormones, weight and growth ratio. The study strengths come from exploring different aspects and impacts of imidacloprid exposure on honeybee juvenile stages and for that it demonstrates potential for assessing the risks posed by pesticides. The study weaknesses come from the lack of in depth investigation and an incomplete methodological design. For instance, many of the study conclusions are based on RT-qPCR, which show only a partial snapshot of gene expression, which was performed at a single time point and using whole larvae. There is no understanding of how different organs/tissues might respond to exposure and how they change over time. That creates a problem to understand the mechanisms of damage caused by the pesticide in the situation studied here. There is no investigation of what happens after pupation. The authors show that the doses tested have no impact on survival, food consumption and time to pupation, and the growth index drops from ~0.96 to ~0.92 in exposed larvae, raising the question of its biological significance. The origin of ROS are not investigated, nor do the authors investigate if the larvae recover from the damage observed in the gut after pupation. That is important as it could affect the adult workers' health. One of the study's central claims is that the reduced growth index is due to the extra energy used to overexpress P450s and antioxidant enzymes, but that is based on RT-qPCR only. Other options are not well explored and whether the gut damage could be causing nutrient absorption problems, or the oxidative stress could be impairing mitochondrial energy production is not investigated. These alternatives may also affect the growth index. The authors also state that the honeybee larvae has 7 instars, which is an incorrect as Apis mellifera have 5 larval instars. It is not clear from methods which precise stage of larval development was used for gut preparations. That information is important because prior to pupation larvae defecate and undergo shedding of gut lining. That could profoundly affect some of the results in case gut preparations for microscopy were made close to this stage. A more in-depth investigation and more complete methodological design that investigates the mechanisms of damage and whether the exposures tested could affect adult bees may demonstrate the damage of low insecticide doses to a vital pollinator insect species.

Joint Public Review:

The manuscript by Aguirre et al. describes an elegant approach for developing selective inhibitors of inositol hexakisphosphate kinases (IP6Ks). There are 3 IP6K isozymes (IP6K1-3) in humans, which catalyze the synthesis of inositol pyrophosphates. The lack of isozyme-selective inhibitors has hampered efforts to understand their individual physiological roles. While several inhibitors of IP6Ks have been described, they either lack isozyme selectivity or inhibit other kinases. To address this gap, Aguirre et al. used an analog-sensitive approach, which involves the identification of a mutant that, in an ideal world, doesn't impact the activity of the enzyme but renders it sensitive to an inhibitor that is absolutely selective for the engineered (analog-sensitive) enzyme. Initially, they generated the canonical gatekeeper (Leu210 in IP6K1) mutations (glycine and alanine); unfortunately, these mutations had a deleterious effect on the enzymatic activity of IP6K1. Interestingly, mutation of Leu210 to a valine, a subtly smaller amino acid, didn't affect enzymatic activity. The authors then designed a clever high-throughput assay to identify compounds that show selectivity for L210V IP6K1 versus WT IP6K1. The assay monitors the reverse reaction catalyzed by IP6Ks, monitoring the formation of ATP using a luminescence-based readout. After validating the screen, the authors screened 54,912 compounds. After culling the list of compounds using several criteria, the authors focused on one particular compound, referred to as FMP-201300. FMP-201300 was ~10-fold more potent against L210V IP6K1 compared to WT IP6K1. This selectivity was maintained for IP6K2. Mechanistic studies showed that FMP-201300 is an allosteric inhibitor of IP6K1. The authors also did a small SAR campaign to identify key functional groups required for inhibition.

Overall, this manuscript describes a unique and useful strategy for developing isozyme-selective inhibitors of IP6Ks. The serendipitous finding that subtle changes to the gatekeeper position can sensitize the IP6K1 mutant to allosteric inhibitors will undoubtedly inspire other analog-sensitive inhibitor studies. The manuscript is well-written and the experiments are generally well-controlled.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

In the "Drivers of species knowledge across the Tree of Life", Mammola and collaborators explore the determinants of scientific and societal interest across very wide taxonomic and spatial scales. Their work highlights our uneven knowledge of biodiversity and its potential causes.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Using standard and widely used tools, the author revealed the factors (cultural, phenotypic, phylogenetic, etc.) shaping societal and scientific interest in natural species around the globe. The strength of this ms (and the authors) lies in its command of the available literature, database and variable management and analysis, and its solid discussion. The authors thus achieved a manuscript that was pleasant to read.

While I agree that doing a global study requires losing details of local patterns, maybe this is exactly the biggest shortcoming of the manuscript, oblivious to how different cultures (compare USA to PNG, for example) are reflected in these global patterns.

Joint Public Review:

When the left-right asymmetry of an animal body is established, a barrier that prevents the mixing of signals or cells across the midline is essential. Such a midline barrier preventing the spreading of asymmetric Nodal signaling during early left-right patterning has been identified. However, midline barriers during later asymmetric organogenesis have remained largely unknown, except in the brain. In this study, the authors discovered an unexpected structure in the midline of the developing midgut in the chick. Using immunofluorescence, they convincingly show the chemical composition of this midline structure as a double basement membrane and its transient existence during the left-right patterning of the dorsal mesentery, which authors showed previously to be essential for forming the gut loop and guiding local vasculogenesis. Labelling experiments suggest a physical barrier function, to cell mixing and signal diffusion in the dorsal mesentery. Cell labelling and graft experiments rule out a cellular composition of the midline from dorsal mesenchyme or endoderm origin and rule out an inducing role by the notochord. Based on laminin expression pattern and Ntn4 resistance, the authors propose a model, whereby the midline basement membrane is progressively deposited by the descending endoderm.

Laterality defects encompass severe malformations of visceral organs, with a heterogenous spectrum that remains poorly understood, by a lack of knowledge of the different players of left-right asymmetry. This fundamental work significantly advances our understanding of left-right asymmetric organogenesis, by identifying an organ-specific and stage-specific midline barrier. The complexities of basement membrane assembly, maintenance, and function are of importance in several other contexts, as for example in the kidney and brain. Thus, this original work is of broad interest.

Overall, reviewers refer to a strong and elegant paper discovering a novel midline structure, combining classic but challenging techniques, to show the dynamics, chemical, and physical properties of the midline. However, reviewers also indicate that further work will be necessary to conclude on the origin and impact of the midline for asymmetric organogenesis. Three issues have been raised to strengthen the claims:

1) The function of the midline as a physical barrier requires clarification. Dextran injection here seems to label cells and not the extracellular space. By counting the proportion of dextran-labeled cells rather than dextran intensity itself, the authors do not measure diffusion per se, but rather cell mixing.

2) The descending endoderm zippering model for the formation of the midline lacks direct evidence. The claim of an endoderm origin is based on laminin expression, but the laminin observed in the midline with an antibody may not necessarily correspond to the same subtype assessed by in situ hybridization. The midline may be Ntn4 resistant until it is injected in the relevant source cells. Alternative origins could be considered, from the bilateral dorsal aortae or the paraxial mesoderm, which would explain the double layer as a meeting point of two lateral tissues.

3) The title implies a role of the midline in left-right asymmetric gut development. However, the importance of the midline is currently inferred from previously published data and stage correlations and will require more direct evidence.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

This work is hugely significant in the context of the debates surrounding ancient Egyptian activity on the Red Sea and voyages to the Egyptian land of Punt. Using genetic studies to provenance baboon mummified baboons in Egypt with contemporary baboon populations in the Red Sea region, the study argues persuasively that Egyptians obtained Baboons from coastal Eritrea, and thus that Egyptian baboon trade involved this region. This of course brings up the larger issue of Egyptian trade with Punt and the southern Red Sea, a place known to have furnished Egyptians with baboons. The authors argue logically for the region of the ancient port-city of Adulis as being particularly important in this baboon trade, as the region around the harbour was said to have been a baboon habitat in the Graeco-Roman period.

Along with other previous geoprovenancing scientific studies relating to baboon isotopes and obsidian trace elements, this study provides a solid foundation for considering coastal Sudan and especially Eritrea as part of the land of Punt.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

The paper presents new mitochondrial sequence data from baboons from a museum collection and from one ancient Egyptian mummified baboon. By comparing the mitochondrial sequence of the mummified baboon with the new and existing data, they conclude that it originated from present-day Eritrea, specifically the ancient city of Adulis.

The paper is well-written and an interesting read. The background and details of the study are well-described and logical. Not knowing much about the history of the region I learned a lot. The data also seem sound and the analysis robust, with the exception of one check that should be added (in particular, to assess contamination by looking at mismatching reads).

The main limitation of the paper is just down to the N=1 sample and the limits of mitochondrial phylogeography. Based on the present-day distribution of hamadryas, the baboon must either come from the area of Africa around present-day Eritrea/Ethiopia/Sudan, or from Arabia. All the authors can really reasonably establish here is that this particular baboon did not come from Arabia. But beyond that, there is not much more they can say. Fig 2b makes it clear that the G3Y clade extends over a large range. Given the limited sampling, this is a minimum bound for the range, which probably includes most of the non-Arabian hamadryas range. The link to Adulis is speculative. There may be historical or archaeological evidence to support this but the genetic data really do not come close to establishing this. The authors do acknowledge this in the text, though the abstract makes a much stronger claim. And of course, it also remains possible that other baboons in the assemblage came from other places.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

This manuscript describes conditions under which "Self-inactivating Rabies" (SiR) can be grown to limit mutations that would allow the virus to replicate in the absence of TEV protease. It is also shown that neurons directly infected with a non-mutated virus remain healthy and that the virus does not mutate in the brain in vivo. Remarkably there is nothing in the manuscript to address the obvious question that is raised by the observation that such mutations were occurring around the time of the initial description of circuit tracing with this virus. Can the transsynaptic tracing experiments in the absence of TEV expression (as described in their original Neuron paper) be replicated with SiR that is not mutated? This obvious omission suggests that the authors might have conducted such experiments and were unable to replicate their published results. It is imperative that the authors be forthcoming about whether they have conducted such experiments and what were the results. If they have not conducted such experiments, they should do them and include the results here. If they cannot replicate their results, then the reliability of the Neuron paper is in doubt.

How do the results presented here relate to the results published in the Neuron paper and why are they not definitive with respect to the utility of SiR? The original publication in Neuron presents results that do not appear to be plausible and are best explained by the possibility that some experiments described in that manuscript were conducted using mutated SiR. This became most apparent when shortly after the Neuron publication, the Tripodi lab shared SiR as well as TEV expressing cell lines for propagation with other labs. Several of those groups observed that when they progagated the SiR received from the Tripodi lab, there was a mutation that removed the linkage of the PEST targeting sequence to N. This would be expected to allow the virus to replicate and spread without the need for TEV protease to remove the PEST sequence - precisely the phenotype observed in the trans-synaptic tracing experiments described in the Neuron paper. In the Neuron paper, culture experiments showed that the N-PEST (SiR) rabies could not replicate in the absence of TEV. And additional experiments showed that the virus is not toxic to neurons directly infected. These are the same experiments that are replicated in this submission. But then (in the Neuron paper) comes the unlikely report that this virus can spread trans-synaptically in vivo, in the absence of TEV expression. An alternative explanation would be that the virus used for those experiments was mutated and that is why TEV expression was not needed. There are no experiments in the original Neuron paper that address this possibility. Specifically, the experiments in Neuron describing cell survival during trans-synaptic tracing are not adequate to rule this out. This is because the two timepoints during which neurons were counted correspond to an early time when labeled neurons would be expected to still be accumulating and a later time that might be past the peak and represent a time when many neurons have died. To quantify proportions of neurons that survive, it is necessary to follow the same neurons over time, as has been done to demonstrate that only about half of neurons infected with G-deleted rabies die (half survive). Until tests are conducted testing whether TEV expression is required to obtain trans-synaptic labeling with an SiR that is known to not be mutated, it is irrelevant whether mutations can be prevented under particular culture conditions. The utility of this virus depends on whether it can be used for trans-synaptic tracing without toxicity and this manuscript presents no experiments to address that. Further, the omission of such experiments is glaring, as it is difficult to imagine that they have not been attempted.

Other comments:

"A recently developed engineered version of the ΔG-Rabies, the non-toxic self-inactivating (SiR) virus, represents the first tool for open-ended genetic manipulation of neural circuits."<br /> It is not clear what the authors intend to be claiming with respect to "open-ended genetic manipulation of neural circuits" but it is clear that this assertion is overblown. There are numerous tools that are available for genetic manipulation of neural circuits. This is not the first, won't be the last, and it is arguably not the best.

"Interestingly, a fraction of tdTomato+ neurons survived in ΔG- Rab-CRE-injected brains, differing from what we observed when injecting ΔGRab-GFP, where no cells were detected at 3 weeks p.i. (Fig 3CD) (Ciabatti et al., 2017). " This is a known result (same as Chatterjee et al., 2018) with a known mechanism. GFP expression is not observed because the rabies virus transitions from transcription to replication resulting in the termination of GFP expression. But Cre-recombination of the genome permanently labels cells with TdTomato. This is how Chatterjee et al. demonstrated that half of the neurons infected with G-deleted rabies survive. They imaged cells and saw that the GFP disappeared but the cells marked by Cre-recombination and RFP expression remained healthy indefinitely. The consideration of this in the Introduction is strange. There is no reason to suppose that Cre expression would somehow protect cells from rabies infection and there is no need to propose any such mechanism to explain the observed results.

"Here we show that revertant-free SiR-CRE efficiently traces neurons in vivo without toxicity in cortical and subcortical regions for several months p.i.."<br /> This wording is disingenuous and appears to be intentionally misleading. "Trace" implies that circuits were traced by transynaptic labeling, which they were not.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

The study by Ciabatti et al examined the mutation issue for self-inactivating rabies (SiR), which was found by other labs. The authors identified the mutations in the rabies genome and showed that this mutation occurred more frequently after multiple passage of production cell lines with suboptimal TEVp expressions. The authors further showed that such mutation did not accumulate in vivo and that SiR-labeled cells remained alive across longitudinal imaging in vivo.

In this study, the rabies genome is rigorously examined by sequencing many viral particles from independent preparations. The rabies with point mutation in the PEST domain is directly engineered for sequencing and infection test. Overall, the mutation issue is well addressed by the authors and the conclusions are well supported, but some more aspects of discussion and data analysis need to be extended for an easier production of SiR in a condition not that optimal.

1) The authors stated that one should produce SiR from cDNA in order to avoid the potential mutation in SiR. From a practical point of view, it would be much better to amplify the rabies from a stock virus directly in the production cell lines. Any discussion or exploration on this direction would be appreciated in the field.

2) 6 passages of production cell lines are not that extensive. In Fig.2C, there was already some level of TEVp activity reduction at 2nd passage. It is not clear to me that how the TEVp activity reduction naturally happens. Is there some room to play around puromycin concentration to maintain high TEVp activity?

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

This paper is a response to the report by Lin et al., bioRxiv 2022 (DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/550640) that mutations in the genome of SiR were identified, which could result in a canonical G-deleted Rabies virus.

Strengths:

First, the authors found that SiR production from cDNA leads to revertant-free viruses by analyzing a total of 400 individual viral particles obtained from 8 independent viral productions with Sanger sequencing. Next, they identified the molecular mechanisms of mutations in the SiR; they found that extensive amplification of packaging cells HEK-TGG leads to the selection of clones with suboptimal TEVp expression level, which leads to the accumulation of revertant mutants, where, as the authors discuss, the revertant mutants have a specific replication advantage. Based on these observations, the authors recommend producing SiR freshly from cDNA with low passage packaging cells. Lastly, the authors observed that SiR-infected hippocampal and cortical neurons can survive for longer periods of time than the neurons infected with revertant mutants or a canonical G-deleted Rabies virus by combining next-generation sequencing of RNAs isolated from infected tissue and 2-photon in vivo longitudinal imaging of infected cortical neurons. Together, these findings support the idea that the degradation of N by PEST-mediated cellular mechanism results in the self-inactivation of SiR as suggested in the original SiR manuscript (Ciabatti et al., Cell 2017). Thus, SiR remains a powerful viral tool for the chronic investigation of neuronal circuitry and function as long as the virus is prepared in a way the authors recommend.

Weaknesses:

While most of the findings are solid, some conclusions are not fully supported by the data presented. The authors need to address the following points:

1. In Figure 3B-D, the authors concluded that SiR-CRE -infected cells did not show cell death in contrast to Rab-CRE and SiR-G453X, but it cannot be fully supported only by this experiment. The authors should consider the potential variance in infection efficiency in each experimental animal and show evidence of suppressed cell death. In addition, it needs to be confirmed that SiR-Cre is diminished in infected cells at later times. The authors should explain and address these concerns by conducting additional experiments, for example, cleaved caspase-3 staining and quantification of virus RNA levels in each time point as performed in their previous study Ciabatti et al., Cell 2017 (DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2017.06.014).

2. In Figure 3E-F, to ensure the long-term stability of SiR-Cre in the vivo mouse brain, authors conducted SMRT sequencing 1 week after the virus infection. To test the potential slow accumulation of mutations at 1-month and 2-month, the authors should perform the same experiment at these time points. Only when SiR-Cre was undetected at 1-month and 2-month, would it be reasonable to show only 1-week data, however, such data is not presented.

3. In figure 4, the authors used only 2 mice for this experiment, although this is one of the most important experiments to ensure SiR-infected cells stay alive for the long term in vivo animals. It should be confirmed whether the conclusion remains the same by increasing the number of animals.

4. The legend in Table 3 doesn't match the contents.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Wang and colleagues show that tree shrews can detect optogenetic stimulation of the lateral geniculate nucleus (LGN) using an AAV2-CamKIIα-ChR2 construct after training detection of visual stimuli. Solid evidence links optogenetic stimulation to behavioural detection and neurophysiological responses in LGN and local field potentials in V1.

The major strength is the carefully conducted optogenetic detection experiments showing that training of a visual detection task can be transferred to the the detection of focal optogenetic stimulation in the LGN. The optogenetic stimulation can evoke responses in LGN that can be transmitted to V1.

However, the behavioural results are highly variable between individual animals and different optogenetic stimulation frequencies. The nature of this variability remains unclear. A weakness of this complex in vivo study lies in the underspecified description of some of the details and the links between the histology, the neurophysiology and optogenetic results, in order to understand this variability better. The neurophysiological results are clear and important, but the distribution of significant results across the different animals studied is missing. The expression patterns across layers of the optogenetic viruses appear to differ in the histology of three different animals shown, but it is unclear except for one animal from which experimental individuals these results stem. While the methods of the behavioural and neurophysiological results are well described, the methods section is incomplete with regards to the very nice histology presented (perfusion, sectioning, staining).

The detection of optogenetic activation of LGN in this visual animal model suggests that LGN is a potential target for a neuroprosthetic device. This paper is potentially of interest to neuroscientists and clinicians working on the visual system and visual prostheses.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Wang et al. investigate the LGN in the tree shrew as a potential target for artificial vision. They report that (a) animals pre-trained on a visual detection task can generalize from visual to optogenetic detection and (b) optogenetic activation of the LGN results in reliable field potential activity in V1.

In this revised version of the manuscript, the authors have done a commendable job of addressing the critiques from the previous round of reviews.

Among the new results, the analysis of V1 LFP entrainment with optogenetic stimulation in the LGN is quite interesting and convincing. However, I found the spiking results in V1 to be underwhelming (which the authors also acknowledge). I find this a little surprising, given the robustness of the LFP results. Was this a matter of finding a better alignment of LGN and V1 sites? Might the authors have found more convincing spiking activity results if they use laminar electrodes in V1 to find monosynaptic connectivity between the LGN injection sites and their targets in V1?

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

The overarching goal of this study is to assess the feasibility of using optogenetic stimulation in the LGN for future visual neuroprostheses. This is an interesting and important research direction.

To address this goal, the author express ChR2 in the LGN of tree shrews, implant a wireless μ‐LED stimulation probe, and test for the ability of tree shrews to generalize from visual detection to detection of optogenetic stimulation. The authors provide compelling evidence that tree shrews can generalize from visual detection to the detection of optogenetic stimulation in the LGN. This is an important and novel finding which demonstrates that optogenetic stimulation in the LGN can lead to detectable percepts. While the basic finding seems to be robust, some aspects of the paper still need further attention.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Dolgova et al present a well-written manuscript focused on the mechanism of MEMO1 function in tumor cells. They use genome-wide analyses to predict function based on MEMO1 structure in yeast, identify MEMO1 expression in a screen of cancer cell lines, and demonstrate a correlation between MEMO1 expression and severity of disease in primary breast cancer cells. The authors focus on a breast cancer model as it overexpresses MEMO1 and melanoma as a control and uses CRISPR-Cas9 knockdown of MEMO1 in breast and melanoma cell lines and concurrently knockdown selected genes in the iron homeostasis pathway. In this data, MEMO1 appears to interact with elements involved in iron trafficking and sensing and its overexpression leads to possible hypersensitivity while knockout/knockdown leads to resistance to lipid oxidation. They also interrogate the effect of iron chelation on mitochondrial morphology and ferroptosis. In addition, they evaluate iron and copper binding loci and resolve MEMO1 structure. The work is of high quality. However, there are some inaccuracies regarding the known function of some iron-related elements. Furthermore, it is unresolved whether controlling iron per se (by modulating other importers and transporters or limiting iron availability in culture) recapitulates or ameliorates their findings, currently attributed specifically to the mechanism of action of MEMO1. In addition, the authors make claims that they have not substantiated about overexpression of MEMO1 by extrapolating from data about MEMO1 knockdown or knockout. Finally, the results show only indirect evidence for a central role for MEMO1 via regulation of iron trafficking and more targeted approaches are necessary to increase confidence in the claims.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

While the hypothesis that MEMO1 plays a key role in cell iron homeostasis remains to be directly tested, the data presented herein clearly support further delineation of the underlying mechanisms. The key findings in this regard are the facts, as established herein, that: 1) MEMO1 binds ferrous iron (the appropriate valence state for cell iron) along with glutathione (Fig. 5A); 2) the structure of MEMO1 in complex with Fe(II)-GSH reveals the coordination site within the protein for this complex (Fig. 5B/c); 3) oxidative stress and sensitivity to ferroptosis correlate with MEMO1 protein abundance in a consistent fashion (Fig. 4); and 4) while the effect is limited, there are data that indicate a relation between cell iron content and MEMO1 abundance (Fig. 4A/B).

Experimentally, it is thorough and well-documented and offers a new look at a protein that has been at the edges of iron metabolism (and copper, but I agree with the authors that this is not likely to be the case). This work and its subject will stimulate much further research.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

The goal of this manuscript is to determine the function of MEMO1 (mediator of ERBB2-driven cell motility 1), an evolutionarily conserved protein with many putative functions but none that have been firmly established. The authors take an unbiased, bioinformatics approach to identify genetic interactions between MEMO1 and other genes in cancer cell lines. Notably, they uncovered multiple links to genes with relevance to cellular iron homeostasis. They then explore these genetic links through a variety of experiments. First, they use shRNA-mediated gene knockdown to confirm the functional interaction between MEMO1 and interacting genes at the level of protein expression and cell proliferation. Second, they analyze the impact of altered MEMO1 levels on iron levels, mitochondrial morphology, and sensitivity to ferroptosis. Third, they determine the crystal structure of MEMO1, both wild-type and mutant forms, and demonstrate that MEMO1 binds iron as well as copper.

There are notable strengths to this manuscript. I appreciated the unbiased, bioinformatics approach they took to identify genes that interact with MEMO1 and the ensuing approaches they took to explore the potential relevance of MEMO1 to cancer cell iron homeostasis. The methods employed are varied and state-of-the-art and address different aspects of MEMO1's potential role in cellular iron biology. There are some weaknesses. One is that direct protein-protein interactions are not assessed between MEMO1 and TFR2, one of the key genes shown to genetically interact with MEMO1 in cancer cell lines. This limits the authors' ability to more strongly assign a function for MEMO1 in cellular iron homeostasis. They do show that MEMO1 binds to iron, but how does this finding relate to the MEMO1-TFR2 interaction?

The authors conclude that MEMO1 is an iron-binding protein that regulates iron homeostasis in cancer cells. To this end, I agree that the authors have generated adequate evidence in support of this conclusion. The impact of this paper is that it will direct the field to focus on the relevance of MEMO1 to iron homeostasis. While this manuscript does not firmly establish the specific role of MEMO1 in iron homeostasis, future studies should be able to address that knowledge gap.

Joint Public Review:

In this study, the authors investigate the biological function of the FK506-binding protein FKBP35 in the malaria-causing parasite Plasmodium falciparum. Like its homologs in other organisms, PfFKBP35 harbors peptidyl-prolyl isomerase and chaperoning activities, and has been considered a promising drug target due to its high affinity to the macrolide compound FK506. However, PfFKBP35 has not been validated as a drug target using reverse genetics, and the link between PfFKBP35-interacting drugs and their antimalarial activity remains elusive. The manuscript addresses the biological function of PfFKBP35 and the antimalarial activity of FK506.

The authors combine conditional genome editing, proteomics and transcriptomics analysis to investigate the effects of FKBP35 depletion in P. falciparum. The work is very well performed and clearly described. The data provide conclusive evidence that FKBP35 is essential for P. falciparum blood stage growth. Conditional knockout of PfFKBP35 leads to a delayed death-like phenotype, associated with defects in ribosome maturation as detected by quantitative proteomics and stalling of protein synthesis in the parasite. The authors clearly demonstrate that FKBP35 is essential for parasite growth and that ribosome biogenesis is disrupted, but further insights into the pathway itself would be more convincing that this is a direct consequence rather than a secondary feature of parasite death.

The knockdown of PfFKBP35 has no phenotypic consequence, showing that very low amounts of FKBP35 are sufficient for parasite survival and growth. In the absence of quantification of the protein during the course of the experiments, it remains unclear whether the delayed death-like phenotype in the knockout is due to the delayed depletion of the protein or to a delayed consequence of early protein depletion. This limitation also impacts the interpretation of the drug assays.

The authors investigate the activity of FK506 on P. falciparum, and conclude that FK506 exerts its antimalarial effects independently of FKBP35, based on the observation that FK506 has the same activity on FKBP35 wild type and knock-out parasites, indicating that FK506 activity is independent of FKBP35 levels. Using cellular thermal shift assays, the authors confirm the interaction between FK506 and FKBP35, and further identify candidate proteins bound by the compound, albeit at lower affinity. Further work is needed to validate whether these putative targets contribute to the FKBP35-independent antimalarial activity of FK506.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

In this study, Jiamin Lin et al. investigated the potential positive feedback loop between ZEB2 and ACSL4, which regulates lipid metabolism and breast cancer metastasis. They reported a correlation between high expression of ZEB2 and ACSL4 and poor survival of breast cancer patients, and showed that depletion of ZEB2 or ACSL4 significantly reduced lipid droplets abundance and cell migration in vitro. The authors also claimed that ZEB2 activated ACSL4 expression by directly binding to its promoter, while ACSL4 in turn stabilized ZEB2 by blocking its ubiquitination. While the topic is interesting, there are several concerns with the study:

1. My concern regarding the absence of appropriate thresholds or False Discovery Rate (FDR) adjustments for the RNA-seq analysis has not been addressed, leading to incorrect thresholds and erroneous identification of significant signals.

2. In Figure 3B and C, it appears that the knockdown efficiency of ACSL4 is inadequate in these cells, which contradicts the Western blot results presented in Figure 2F.

3. Regarding Figure 6, the discovery of consensus binding sequences (CACCT) for ZEB2 alone is insufficient evidence to support the direct binding of ZEB2 to the ACSL4 promoter.

4. For Figure 7E, there are multiple bands present, and it appears that ZEB2-HA has been cropped, which should ideally be presented with unaltered raw data. Please provide the uncropped raw data.

5. In Figure 7C, the author claimed to have used 293T cells for the ubiquitin assay, which are not breast cancer cells. Moreover, the efficiency of over-expression differs between ZEB2 and ACSL4 in 293T cell lines. Performing the experiment in an unrelated cell line to justify an important interaction is not acceptable.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

In this study, the authors validated a positive feedback loop between ZEB2 and ACSL4 in breast cancer, which regulates lipid metabolism to promote metastasis.

Overall, the study is original, well structured, and easy to read.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

The manuscript by Lin et al. reveals a novel positive regulatory loop between ZEB2 and ACSL4, which promotes lipid droplets storage to meet the energy needs of breast cancer metastasis.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:

Tiemann et al. have undertaken an original study on the availability of molecular dynamics (MD) simulation datasets across the Internet. There is a widespread belief that extensive, well-curated MD datasets would enable the development of novel classes of AI models for structural biology. However, currently, there is no standard for sharing MD datasets. As generating MD datasets is energy-intensive, it is also important to facilitate the reuse of MD datasets to minimize energy consumption. Developing a universally accepted standard for depositing and curating MD datasets is a huge undertaking. The study by Tiemann et al. will be very valuable in informing policy developments toward this goal.

Strengths:

The study presents an original approach to addressing a growing concern in the field. It is clear that adopting a more collaborative approach could significantly enhance the impact of MD simulations in modern molecular sciences.

The timing of the work is appropriate, given the current interest in developing AI models for describing biomolecular dynamics.

Weaknesses:

The study primarily focuses on one major MD engine (GROMACS), although this limitation is not significant considering the proof-of-concept nature of the study.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:

Molecular dynamics (MD) data is deposited in public, non-specialist repositories. This work starts from the premise that these data are a valuable resource as they could be used by other researchers to extract additional insights from these simulations; it could also potentially be used as training data for ML/AI approaches. The problem is that mining these data is difficult because they are not easy to find and work with. The primary goal of the authors was to discover and index these difficult-to-find MD datasets, which they call the "dark matter of the MD universe" (in contrast to data sets held in specialist databases).

The authors developed a search strategy that avoided the use of ill-defined metadata but instead relied on the knowledge of the restricted set of file formats used in MD simulations as a true marker for the data they were looking for. Detection of MD data marked a data set as relevant with a follow-up indexing strategy of all associated content. This "explore-and-expand" strategy allowed the authors for the first time to provide a realistic census of the MD data in non-specialist repositories.

As a proof of principle, they analyzed a subset of the data (primarily related to simulations with the popular Gromacs MD package) to summarize the types of simulated systems (primarily biomolecular systems) and commonly used simulation settings.

Based on their experience they propose best practices for metadata provision to make MD data FAIR (findable, accessible, interoperable, reusable).

A prototype search engine that works on the indexed datasets is made publicly available. All data and code are made freely available as open source/open data.

Strengths:

- The novel search strategy is based on relevant data to identify full datasets instead of relying on metadata and thus is likely to have many true positives and few false positives.

- The paper provides a first glimpse at the potential hidden treasures of MD simulations and force field parametrizations of molecules.

- Analysis of parameter settings of MD simulations from how researchers *actually* run simulations can provide valuable feedback to MD code developers for how to document/educate users. This approach is much better than analyzing what authors write in the Methods sections.

- The authors make a prototype search engine available.

- The guidelines for FAIR MD data are based on experience gained from trying to make sense of the data.

Weaknesses:

- So far the work is a proof-of-concept that focuses on MD data produced by Gromacs (which was prevalent under all indexed and identified packages).

As discussed in the manuscript, some types of biomolecules are likely underrepresented because different communities have different preferences for force fields/MD codes (for example: carbohydrates with AMBER/GLYCAM using AMBER MD instead of Gromacs).

- Materials sciences seem to be severely under-represented --- commonly used codes in this area such as LAMMPS are not even detected, and only very few examples could be identified. As it is, the paper primarily provides an insight into the *biomolecular* MD simulation world.

The authors succeed in providing a first realistic view on what MD data is available in public repositories. In particular, their explore-expand approach has the potential to be customized for all kinds of specialist simulation data, whereby specific artifacts are<br /> used as fiducial markers instead of metadata. The more detailed analysis is limited to Gromacs simulations and primarily biomolecular simulations (even though MD is also widely used in other fields such as the materials sciences). This restricted view may simply be correlated with the user community of Gromacs and hopefully, follow-up studies from this work will shed more light on this shortcoming.

The study quantified the number of trajectories currently held in structured databases as ~10k vs ~30k in generalist repositories. To go beyond the proof-of-principle analysis it would be interesting to analyze the data in specialist repositories in the same way as the one in the generalist ones, especially as there are now efforts underway to create a database for MD simulations (Grant 'Molecular dynamics simulation for biology and chemistry research' to establish MDDB' DOI 10.3030/101094651). One should note that structured databases do not invalidate the approach pioneered in this work; if anything they are orthogonal to each other and both will likely play an important role in growing the usefulness of MD simulations in the future.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Molecular dynamics (MD) simulations nowadays are an essential element of structural biology investigations, complementing experiments and aiding their interpretation by revealing transient processes or details (such as the effects of glycosylation on the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, for example (Casalino et al. ACS Cent. Sci. 2020; 6, 10, 1722-1734 https://doi.org/10.1021/acscentsci.0c01056) that cannot be observed directly. MD simulations can allow for the calculation of thermodynamic, kinetic, and other properties and the prediction of biological or chemical activity. MD simulations can now serve as "computational assays" (Huggins et al. WIREs Comput Mol Sci. 2019; 9:e1393. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcms.1393). Conceptually, MD simulations have played a crucial role in developing the understanding that the dynamics and conformational behaviour of biological macromolecules are essential to their function, and are shaped by evolution. Atomistic simulations range up to the billion atom scale with exascale resources (e.g. simulations of SARS-CoV-2 in a respiratory aerosol. Dommer et al. The International Journal of High Performance Computing Applications. 2023; 37:28-44. doi:10.1177/10943420221128233), while coarse-grained models allow simulations on even larger length- and timescales. Simulations with combined quantum mechanics/molecular mechanics (QM/MM) methods can investigate biochemical reactivity, and overcome limitations of empirical forcefields (Cui et al. J. Phys. Chem. B 2021; 125, 689 https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcb.0c09898).

MD simulations generate large amounts of data (e.g. structures along the MD trajectory) and increasingly, e.g. because of funder mandates for open science, these data are deposited in publicly accessible repositories. There is real potential to learn from these data en masse, not only to understand biomolecular dynamics but also to explore methodological issues. Deposition of data is haphazard and lags far behind experimental structural biology, however, and it is also hard to answer the apparently simple question of "what is out there?". This is the question that Tiemann et al explore in this nice and important work, focusing on simulations run with the widely used GROMACS package. They develop a search strategy and identify almost 2,000 datasets from Zenodo, Figshare and Open Science Framework. This provides a very useful resource. For these datasets, they analyse features of the simulations (e.g. atomistic or coarse-grained), which provides a useful snapshot of current simulation approaches. The analysis is presented clearly and discussed insightfully. They also present a search engine to explore MD data, the MDverse data explorer, which promises to be a very useful tool.

As the authors state: "Eventually, front-end solutions such as the MDverse data explorer tool can evolve being more user-friendly by interfacing the structures and dynamics with interactive 3D molecular viewers". This will make MD simulations accessible to non-specialists and researchers in other areas. I would envisage that this will also include approaches using interactive virtual reality for an immersive exploration of structure and dynamics, and virtual collaboration (e.g. O'Connor et al., Sci. Adv.4, eaat2731 (2018). DOI:10.1126/sciadv.aat2731)

The need to share data effectively, and to compare simulations and test models, was illustrated clearly in the COVID-19 pandemic, which also demonstrated a willingness and commitment to data sharing across the international community (e.g. Amaro and Mulholland, J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2020, 60, 6, 2653-2656 https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.0c00319; Computing in Science & Engineering 2020, 22, 30-36 doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2020.3024155). There are important lessons to learn here, for simulations to be reproducible and reliable, for rapid testing, for exploiting data with machine learning, and for linking to data from other approaches. Tiemann et al. discuss how to develop these links, providing good perspectives and suggestions.

I agree completely with the statement of the authors that "Even if MD data represents only 1 % of the total volume of data stored in Zenodo, we believe it is our responsibility, as a community, to develop a better sharing and reuse of MD simulation files - and it will neither have to be particularly cumbersome nor expensive. To this end, we are proposing two solutions. First, improve practices for sharing and depositing MD data in data repositories. Second, improve the FAIRness of already available MD data notably by improving the quality of the current metadata."

This nicely states the challenge to the biomolecular simulation community. There is a clear need for standards for MD data and associated metadata. This will also help with the development of standards of best practice in simulations. The authors provide useful and detailed recommendations for MD metadata. These recommendations should contribute to discussions on the development of standards by researchers, funders, and publishers. Community organizations (such as CCP-BioSim and HECBioSim in the UK, BioExcel, CECAM, MolSSI, learned societies etc) have an important part to play in these developments, which are vital for the future of biomolecular simulation.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> Khaitova and co-workers present here an analysis of centromere composition and function during elevated temperatures in the plant Arabidopsis. The work relates to the ongoing climate change during which spikes in high temperatures will be found. Hence, the paper addresses a timely subject.

The authors start by confirming earlier studies that high temperatures reduce the fertility of Arabidopsis plants. Interestingly, a hypomorphic mutant of the centromeric histone variant CENH3 (CENP-A), which was previously described by the authors, sensitizes plants to heat and results in a drop in viable pollen and silique length. The drop in fertility coincides with the formation of micronuclei in meiosis and an extension of meiotic progression as revealed by live cell imaging. Based on this finding, the authors then show that at high temperatures, the fluorescence intensity of a YFP:CENH3 declines in meiosis but remarkably not in the surrounding cells (tapetum cells). In addition, the amount of BMF1 (a Bub1 homolog and part of the spindle assembly checkpoint) also appears to decline on the kinetochores of meiocytes as judged by BMF1 reporter line. However, whether this is dependent on a decline of CENH3 or represents a separate pathway is not clear. Finally, the authors measure the duration of the spindle checkpoint and find that it is extended under high temperatures from which they conclude that the attachment of spindle fibers to kinetochores is compromised under heat.

Strengths:<br /> This is an interesting and important paper as it links centromere organization/function to heat stress in plants. A major conclusion of the authors is that weakened centromeres, presumably by heat, may be less effective in establishing productive interactions with spindle microtubules.

Weaknesses:<br /> The paper does not explain the molecular reason why CENH3 levels in meiocyctes are reduced or why the attachment of spindle fibers to kinetochore is less efficient at high versus low temperatures.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> This work investigates how increased temperature affects pollen production and fertility of Arabidopsis thaliana plants grown at selected temperature conditions ranging from 16C to 30C. They report that pollen production and fertility decline with increasing temperature. To identify the cause of reduced pollen and fertility, they resort to living cell imaging of male meiotic cells to identify that the duration of meiosis increases with an increase in temperature. They also show that pollen sterility is associated with the increased presence of micronuclei likely originating from heat stress-induced impaired meiotic chromosome segregation. They correlate abnormal meiosis to weakened centromere caused by meiosis-specific defective loading of the centromere-specific histone H3 variant (CenH3) to the meiotic centromeres. Similar is the case with kinetochore-associated spindle assembly checkpoint(SAC) protein BMF1. Intriguingly, they observe a reverse trend of strong CENH3 presence in the somatic cells of the tapetum in contrast to reduced loading of CENH3 in male meiocytes with increasing temperature. In contrast to CENH3 and BMF1, the SAC protein BMF3 persists for longer periods than the WT control, based on which authors conclude that the heat stress prolongs the duration of SAC at metaphase I, which in turn extends the time of chromosome biorientation during meiosis I. The study provides preliminary insights into the processes that affect plant reproduction with increasing temperatures which may be relevant to develop climate-resilient cultivars.

Strengths:<br /> The authors have mastered the live cell imaging of male meiocytes which is a technically demanding exercise, which they have successfully employed to examine the time course of meiosis in Arabidopsis thaliana plants exposed to different temperature conditions. In continuation, they also monitor the loading dynamics and resident time of fluorescently tagged centromere/kinetochore proteins and spindle assembly checkpoint proteins to precisely measure the time duration of respective proteins to study their precise dynamics and function in male meiosis.

Weaknesses:<br /> Here the authors use only one representative centromere protein CENH3, one kinetochore-associated SAC protein BMF1, and the SAC protein BMF3 to conclude that heat stress impairs centromere function and prolongs SAC with increased temperatures. Centromere and its associated protein complex the kinetochores and the SAC contain a multitude of proteins, some of which are well characterized in Arabidopsis thaliana. Hence the authors could have used additional such tagged proteins to further strengthen their claim. Though the results presented here are interesting and solid, the study lacks a deeper mechanistic understanding of what causes the defective loading of CenH3 to the centromeres, and why the SAC protein BMF3 persists only at meiotic centromeres to prolong the spindle assembly checkpoint. Also, this observation should be interpreted in light of the fact that SAC is not that robust in plants as several null mutants of plant SAC components are known to grow as healthy as wild-type plants at normal growth conditions without any vegetative and reproductive defects. One of the immediate responses to heat stress is the production of heat shock proteins(Hsps), which act as molecular chaperones to safeguard the proteome. It will be interesting to see if the expression levels of known HsPs can be correlated with their role in stabilizing the structure of SAC proteins like BMF1 to prolong its presence at the meiotic kinetochores.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> Khaitova et al. report the formation of micronuclei during Arabidopsis meiosis under elevated temperatures. Micronuclei form when chromosomes are not correctly collected to the cellular poles in dividing cells. This happens when whole chromosomes or fragments are not properly attached to the kinetochore microtubules. The incidence of micronuclei formation is shown to increase at elevated temperatures in wild-type and more so in the weak centromere histone mutant cenH3-4. The number of micronuclei formed at high temperatures in the recombination mutant spo11 is like that in wild-type, indicating that the increased sensitivity of cenh3-4 is not related to the putative role of cenh3 in recombination. The abundance of CENH3-GFP at the centromere declines with higher temperature and correlates with a decline in spindle assembly checkpoint factor BMF1-GFP at the centromeres. The reduction in CENH3-GFP under heat is observed in meiocytes whereas CENH3-GFP abundance increases in the tapetum, suggesting there is a differential regulation of centromere loading in these two cell types. These observations are in line with previous reports on haploidization mutants and their hypersensitivity to heat stress.

Strengths:<br /> This paper is an important contribution to our insights into the impact of heat stress on sexual reproduction in plants.

Weaknesses:<br /> While it is highly significant, I struggled to interpret the results because of the poor quality of the figures and the videos.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Su et al propose the existence of two mechanisms repressing SBF activity during entry into meiosis in budding yeast. First, a decrease in Swi4 protein levels by a LUTI-dependent mechanism where Ime1 would act closing a negative feedback loop. Second, the sustained presence of Whi5 would contribute to maintaining SBF inhibited under sporulation conditions. The article is clearly written and the experimental approaches used are adequate to the aims of this work. The results obtained are in line with the conclusions reached by the authors but, in my view, they could also be explained by the existing literature and, hence, would not represent a major advance in the field of meiosis regulation.

Regarding the first mechanism, Fig 1 shows that Swi4 decreases very little after 1-2h in sporulation medium, whereas G1-cyclin expression is strongly repressed very rapidly under these conditions (panel D and work by others). This fact dampens the functional relevance of Swi4 downregulation as a causal agent of G1 cyclin repression. The authors use overexpression of Swi4 in Figs 2 and 3 to test the relevance of Swi4 downregulation but the pATG8-SWI4 construct produces levels much higher (4-5 fold) than the wild-type gene at time 0, which may likely introduce artifactual effects in the resulting observations. In addition, the LUTI-deficient SWI4 mutant does not cause any noticeable relief in CLN2 repression, arguing against the relevance of this mechanism in the repression of G1-cyclin transcription during entry into meiosis.

The authors propose a second mechanism where Whi5 would maintain SBF inactive under sporulation conditions. The role of Whi5 as a negative regulator of the SBF regulon is well known. On the other hand, the double WHI5-AA SWI4-dLUTI mutant does not upregulate CLN2, the G1 cyclin with the strongest negative effect on sporulation, raising serious doubts on the functional relevance of this backup mechanism during entry into meiosis.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The manuscript highlights a mechanistic insight into meiotic initiation in budding yeast. In this study, the authors addressed a genetic link between mitotic cell cycle regulator SBF (the Swi4-Swi6 complex) and a meiosis inducing regulator Ime1 in the context of meiotic initiation. The authors' comprehensive analyses with cytology, imaging, RNA-seq using mutant strains lead the authors to conclude that Swi4 levels regulates Ime1-Ume6 interaction to activate expression of early meiosis genes for meiotic initiation. The major findings in this paper are that (1) the higher level of Swi4, a subunit of SBF transcription factor for mitotic cell cycle regulation, is the limiting factor for mitosis-to-meiosis transition; (2) G1 cyclins (Cln1, Cln2), that are expressed under SBF, inhibit Ime1-Ume6 interaction under overexpression of SWI4, which consequently leads to downregulation of early meiosis genes; (3) expression of SWI4 is regulated by LUTI-based transcription in the SWI4 locus that impedes expression of canonical SWI4 transcripts; (4) expression of SWI4 LUTI is likely negatively regulated by Ime1; (5) Action of Swi4 is negatively regulated by Whi5 (homologous to Rb)-mediated inhibition of SBF, which is required for meiotic initiation. Thus, the authors proposed that meiotic initiation is regulated under the balance of mitotic cell cycle regulator SBF and meiosis-specific transcription factor Ime1.

Strengths:<br /> The most significant implication in their paper is that meiotic initiation is regulated under the balance of mitotic cell cycle regulator and meiosis-specific transcription factor. This finding will provide a mechanistic insight in initiation of meiosis not only into the budding yeast also into mammals. The manuscript is overall well written, logically presented and raises several insights into meiotic initiation in budding yeast. Therefore, the manuscript should be open for the field. I would like to raise the following concerns, though they are not mandatory to address. However, it would strengthen their claims if the authors could technically address and revise the manuscript by putting more comprehensive discussion.

Weaknesses:<br /> The authors showed that increased expression of the SBF targets, and reciprocal decrease in expression of meiotic genes upon SWI4 overexpression at 2 h in SPO (Figure 2F). However, IME1 was not found as a DEG in Supplemental Table 1. Meanwhile, IME1 transcript level was decreased at 2 h SPO condition in pATG8-CLN2 cells in Fig S4C.

Now this reviewer still wonders with confusion whether expression of IME1 transcripts per se is directly or in directly suppressed under SBF-activated gene expression program at 2 h SPO in pATG8-SWI4 and pATG8-CLN2 cells. This reviewer wonders how Fig S4C data reconciles with the model summarized in Fig 6F.

One interpretation could be that persistent overexpression of G1 cyclin caused active mitotic cell cycle, and consequently delayed exit from mitotic cell cycle, which may have given rise to an apparent reduction of cell population that was expressing IME1. For readers to better understand, it would be better to explain comprehensively this issue in the main text.

The % of cells with nuclear Ime1 was much reduced in pATG8-CLN2 cells (Fig 2B) than in pATG8-SWI4 cells (Fig 4C). Is the Ime1 protein level comparable or different between pATG8-CLN2 strain and pATG8-SWI4 strain? Since it is difficult to compare the quantifications of Ime1 levels in Fig S1D and Fig S4B, it would be better to comparably show the Ime1 protein levels in pATG8-CLN2 and pATG8-SWI4 strains.<br /> Further, it is uncertain how pATG8-CLN2 cells mimics the phenotype of pATG8-SWI4 cells in terms of meiotic entry. It would be nice if the authors could show RNA-seq of pATG8-CLN2/WT and/or quantification of the % of cells that enter meiosis in pATG8-CLN2.

The authors stated that reduced Ime1-Ume6 interaction is a primary cause of meiotic entry defect by CLN2 overexpression (Line 320-322, Fig 4J-L). This data is convincing. However, the authors also showed that GFP-Ime1 protein level was decreased compared to WT in pATG8-CLN2 cells by WB (Fig S4A). Further, GFP-Ime1 signals were overall undetectable through nuclei and cytosol in pATG8-CLN2 cells (Fig 4B), and accordingly cells with nuclear Ime1 were reduced (Fig 4C). Although the authors raised a possibility that the meiotic entry defect in the pATG8-CLN2 mutant arises from downregulation of IME1 expression (Line 282-283), causal relationship between meiotic entry defect and CLN2 overexpression is still not clear. Is the Ime1 protein level reduced in the pATG8-CLN2;UME6-⍺GFP strain compared to WT? It would be better to comparably show the Ime1 protein levels in the pATG8-CLN2 strain and the pATG8-CLN2;UME6-⍺GFP strain by WB. Also, it would be nice if the authors could show quantification of the % of cells that enter meiosis in the pATG8-CLN2;UME6-⍺GFP strain to see how and whether artificial tethering of Ime1 to Ume6 rescued normal meiosis program rather than simply showing % sporulation in Fig4A.

The authors showed Ume6 binding at the SWI4LUTI promoter (Figure 5K). However, since Ume6 forms a repressive form with Rpd3 and Sin3a and binds to target genes independently of Ime1, Ume6 binding at the SWI4LUTI promoter bind does not necessarily represent Ime1-Ume6 binding there. Instead, it would be better to show Ime1 ChIP-seq at the SWI4LUTI promoter.

The authors showed ∆LUTI mutant and WHI5-AA mutant did not significantly change the expression of SBF targets nor early meiotic genes relative to wildtype (Figure 6A, C). Accordingly, they concluded that LUTI- or Whi5-based repression of SBF alone was not sufficient to cause a delay in meiotic entry (Line451-452), and perturbation of both pathways led to a significant delay in meiotic entry (Figure 6E). This reviewer wonders whether Ime1 expression level and nuclear localization of Ime1 was normal in ∆LUTI mutant and WHI5-AA mutant.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

The paper by Su, Yendluri and Unal reports several regulatory processes that control the activity of the SBF complex (Swi4/Swi6) in S. cerevisiae and its interaction with the meiotic inducer Ime1.

Entry into meiosis requires both the turning down of some components of the mitotic program and turning on meiotic genes. SBF (Swi4/Swi6) is an important player in entry in the mitotic cycle, acting at the G1/S transition. Previous data suggest the possibility that SBF may be differentially regulated during meiosis, potentially down-regulated. Here the authors first show a down regulation of Swi4 at the protein level, and then investigate downstream consequences. Overall the study is revealing several regulations of Swi4, with a repression of activity and a reduction of protein level by the Swi4-LUT1 transcript. The authors identify several components involved in this SWI4 pathway: 1) CLN1 and 2, which are targets of Swi4, and which mutation allows rescuing delay in meiotic entry when Swi4 is overexpressed; 2) Ime1 which activity is antigonized by Swi4, and more specifically its interaction with Ume6.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary: The authors use the innovative CRISPRi method to uncover regulators of cell density and volume in neutrophils. The results show that cells require NHE activity during chemoattractant-driven cell migration. Before migration occurs, cells also undergo a rapid cell volume increase. These results indicate that water flux, driven by ion channels, appears to play a central role in neutrophil migration. The paper is very well written and clear. I suggest adding some discussion about the role of actin in the process, but this is not essential.

Strengths: The novel use of CRIPSPi to uncover cell density regulators is very novel. Some of the uncovered molecules were known before, e.g. discussed in Li & Sun, Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology, 2021. Others are more interesting, for example PI3K-gamma. The use of caged fMLP is also nice.

Weaknesses: One area of investigation that seems to be absent is mentioned in the introduction. I.e., actin is expected to play a role in regulating cell volume increase. Did the authors perform any experiments with LatA? What was seen there? Do cells still migrate with LatA, or is a different interplay seen? The role of PI3K is interesting, and maybe somewhat related to actin. But this may be a different line of inquiry for the future.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Nagy et al investigated the role of volume increase and swelling in neutrophils in response to the chemoattractant. Authors show that following chemoattractant response cells lose their volume slightly owing to the cell spreading phase and then have a relatively rapid increase in the cell volume that is concomitant with cell migration. The authors performed an impressive genome-wide CRISPR screen and buoyant density assay to identify the regulators of neutrophil swelling. This assay showed that stimulating cells with chemoattractant fMLP led to an increase in the cell volume that was abrogated with the FPR1 receptor knockout. The screen revealed a cascade that could potentially be involved in cell swelling including NHE1 (sodium-proton antiporter) and PI3K. NHE1 and PI3K are required for chemoattractant-induced swelling in human primary neutrophils. Authors also suggest slightly different functions of NHE1 and PI3K activity where PI3K is also required to maintain chemoattractant-induced cell shape changes. The authors convincingly show that chemoattractant-induced cell swelling is linked to cell migration and NHE1 is required for swelling at the later stages of swelling since the cells at the early point work on low-volume and low-velocity regime. Interestingly, the authors also show that lack of swelling in NHE1-inhibited cells could be rescued by mild hypo-osmotic swelling strengthening the argument that water influx followed chemoattractant stimulation is important for potentiation for migration.

The conclusions of this paper are mostly well supported by data and are pretty convincing, but some aspects of image acquisition and data analysis need to be clarified and extended.

Weaknesses<br /> 1) It would really help if the authors could add the missing graph for the footprint area when cells are treated with Latranculin. Graph S1F for volume changes with Lat treatment should be compared with DMSO-treated controls.<br /> 2) The authors show inhibition of NHE1 blocked cell swelling using Coulter counter, a similar experiment should be done with PI3K inhibitions especially since they see PI3K inhibition impact chemoattractant-induced cell shape change.<br /> 3) It would be more convincing visually if the authors could also include the movie of cell spreading (footprint) and then mobility with PI3K inhibition.<br /> 4) It is not clear how cell spreading and later volume increase are linked to overall mobility of neutrophils. Are authors suggesting that cell spreading is not required for cell mobility in neutrophils?<br /> 5) Volume fluctuations associated with motility were impacted by NHE1 inhibition at the baselines, what about PI3K inhibitions? Does that impact the actual fluctuations?<br /> 6) It would really help if the authors compared similar analyses and drew conclusions from that, for example, it is unclear what the authors mean by they found no change in the angular persistence of WT and NHE1 inhibited cells which is in contrast to PI3K inhibition since they do not really have an analysis for angular persistence in PI3K inhibited cells. (S4A and S4B).

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

In this work, Vezina et al. present Bactabolize, a rapid reconstruction tool for the generation of strain-specific metabolic models. Similar to other reconstruction pipelines such as CarveMe, Bactabolize builds a strain-specific draft reconstruction and subsequently gap-fills it. The model can afterwards be used to predict growth on carbon sources. The authors constructed a pan-model of the Klebsiella pneumoniae species complex (KpSC) and used it as input for Bactabolize to construct a genome-sale reconstruction of K. pneumoniae KPPR1. They compared the generated reconstruction with a reconstruction built through CarveMe as well as a manually curated reconstruction for the same strain. They then compared predictions of carbon, nitrogen, phosphor, and sulfur sources and found that the Bactabolize reconstruction had the overall highest accuracy. Finally, they built draft reconstructions for 10 clinical isolates of K. pneumoniae and evaluated their predictive performance. Overall, this is a useful tool, the data is well-presented, and the paper is well-written.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

The authors present a pipeline for generating strain-specific genome-scale metabolic models for bacteria using Klebsiella spp. as the demonstrative data. This paper claims to provide a high-throughput tool for generating strain-specific models for bacteria. However, in reality, the tool requires a reference pan-genome-based complete model to generate the strain-specific model of the species of interest, which in this study is Klebsiella pneumoniae. This requirement renders the tool redundant for high-throughput purposes since the process of building or generating the pan-genome reference model is performed separately. Additionally, the quality of the newly built strain-specific model will depend on the reference model used. Therefore, this tool, on its own, can only work specifically with the available pan-genome model of reference, which in this case is only applicable to Klebsiella pneumoniae. Its effectiveness with other bacteria has not been proven. I would suggest that the authors either reframe the performance and results to be applicable only to Klebsiella or consider adding more reference pan-genome models for the study.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:

Chartampila et al. describe the effect of early-life choline supplementation on cognitive functions and epileptic activity in a mouse model of Alzheimer's disease. The cognitive abilities are assessed by the novel object recognition test and the novel object location test, performed in the same cohort of mice at 3 months and 6 months of age. Neuronal loss was tested using NeuN immunoreactivity, and neuronal hyperexcitability was examined using FosB and video-EEG recordings.

Strengths:

The study was designed as a 6-month follow-up, with repeated behavioral and EEG measurements through disease development, providing valuable and interesting findings on AD progression and the effect of early-life choline supplantation. Moreover, the behavioral data that suggest an adverse effect of low choline in WT mice are interesting and important beyond the context of AD.

Weaknesses:

1. The multiple headings and subheadings, focusing on the experimental method rather than the narrative, reduce the readability.<br /> 2. Quantification of NeuN and FosB in WT littermates is needed to demonstrate rescue of neuronal death and hyperexcitability by high choline supplementation and also to gain further insights into the adverse effect of low choline on the performance of WT mice in the behavioral test.<br /> 3. Quantification of the discrimination ratio of the novel object and novel location tests can facilitate the comparison between the different genotypes and diets.<br /> 4. The longitudinal analyses enable the performance of multi-level correlations between the discrimination ratio in NOR and NOL, NeuN and Fos levels, multiple EEG parameters, and premature death. Such analysis can potentially identify biomarkers associated with AD progression. These can be interesting in different choline supplementation, but also in the standard choline diet.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

In this study, authors have investigated the effects of TMEM127 depletion on RET regulation and function that could potentially contribute to PCC pathogenesis. They have demonstrated that the loss of TMEM127 leads to cell surface accumulation and constitutive activation of RET due to membrane organization, leading to reduced efficiency of endocytosis, decreased internalization of RET, and a global impairment of membrane trafficking. TMEM127 depletion has contributed to increased RET half-life, constitutive RET-mediated signaling, increased membrane protein diffusibility, impaired normal membrane transitions, and inappropriate accumulation of actively signaling RET molecules at the cell membrane. Collectively, these findings have shown that the mis-localized RET is the pathogenic mechanism in TMEM127-mutant pheochromocytoma.

Experimental design and mechanistic studies are thorough and sound. The methodological weakness lies in the lack of pheochromocytoma cell line utility to reproduce novel findings observed in generated cell lines. This may represent a significant challenge that could undermine the inferred value of these potentially paradigm-changing findings. 3-dimensional patient-derived pheochromocytoma organoid in vitro model and/or patient-derived organoid xenograft in vivo model may aid in reconciling these exciting new findings and factoring in that the pheochromocytoma is a hormonally active tumor.

Fundamentally, the authors have successfully achieved all proposed aims supported by their conclusions.

These findings carry potentially significant clinical impact and may offer new therapeutic venues in patients with pheochromocytoma.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary: Walker et al have proposed that the tumor suppressor TMEM127 converges with RET activation to drive adrenal phenochromocytoma. RET is a common oncogene both in familial and sporadic forms of this cancer, and TMEM127 has also been observed as a loss of function mutation in sporadic disease. The authors hypothesize that loss of the TMEM127 might signal stabilization of RET on the cell surface, mimicking an activating mutation. Through a nice set of experiments, they show that TMEM127 loss impairs endosome function and promotes RET surface accumulation. This expression was resistant to GDNF, suggesting that recycling via endosome recirculation was impaired such that the half-life of RET on the cell surface was extended. RET interaction with clathrin-coated pits was also disrupted, as the CCPs themselves were significantly smaller, and plasma membrane organization was affected by the impaired endosome recycling. Notably, a number of proteins were found to be accumulating on the cell surface via the purported mechanism, EGFR, TFR1, N cadherin, integrin beta 3. The authors applied a RET inhibitor to cells, showing decreased cellular proliferation.

Strengths: In summary, this is an interesting finding, that is preliminary in nature and is incompletely validated currently. It is certainly worth further investigation as a central feature linking TMEM127 mutations and pheochromocytoma through a common pathway of RET activation by fixing this factor in an active state on the cell surface.

Weaknesses: Although this is a provocative finding, and the authors test the interaction in a number of ways, there are several factors that limit the enthusiasm for this work as currently presented. The work is limited to one isogenic cell line with limited validation.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

In this study, the authors aim to understand why decision formation during behavioural tasks is distributed across multiple brain areas. They hypothesize that multiple areas are used in order to implement an information bottleneck (IB). Using neural activity recorded from monkey DLPFC and PMd performing a 2-AFC task, they show that DLPFC represents various task variables (decision, color, target configuration), while downstream PMd primarily represents decision information. Since decision information is the only information needed to make a decision, the authors point out that PMd has a minimal sufficient representation (as expected from an IB). They then train 3-area RNNs on the same task and show that activity in the first and third areas resemble the neural representations of DLPFC and PMd, respectively. In order to propose a mechanism, they analyse the RNN and find that area 3 ends up with primarily decision information because feedforward connections between areas primarily propagate decision information.

The paper addresses a deep, normative question, namely why task information is distributed across several areas.

Overall, it reads well and the analysis is well done and mostly correct (see below for some comments). My major problem with the paper is that I do not see that it actually provides an answer to the question posed (why is information distributed across areas?). I find that the core problem is that the information bottleneck method, which is evoked throughout the paper, is simply a generic compression method. Being a generic compressor, the IB does not make any statements about how a particular compression should be distributed across brain areas - see major points (1) and (2).

If I ignore the reference to the information bottleneck and the question of why pieces of information are distributed, I still see a more mechanistic study that proposes a neural mechanism of how decisions are formed, in the tradition of RNN-modelling of neural activity as in Mante et al 2013. Seen through this more limited sense, the present study succeeds at pointing out a good model-data match. I point out some suggestions for improvement below.

Major points<br /> (1) It seems to me that the author's use of the IB is based on the reasoning that deep neural networks form decisions by passing task information through a series of transformations/layers/areas and that these deep nets have been shown to implement an IB. Furthermore, these transformations are also loosely motivated by the data processing inequality.

However, assuming as a given that deep neural networks implement an IB does not mean that an IB can only be implemented through a deep neural network. In fact, IBs could be performed with a single transformation just as well. More formally, a task associates stimuli (X) with required responses (Y), and the IB principle states that X should be mapped to a representation Z, such that I(X;Z) is minimal and I(Y,Z) is maximal. Importantly, the form of the map Z=f(X) is not constrained by the IB. In other words, the IB does not impose that there needs to be a series of transformations. I therefore do not see how the IB by itself makes any statement about the distribution of information across various brain areas.

A related problem is that the authors really only evoke the IB to explain the representation in PMd: Fig 2 shows that PMd is almost only showing decision information, and thus one can call this a minimal sufficient representation of the decision (although ignoring substantial condition independent activity). However, there is no IB prediction about what the representation of DLPFC should look like. Consequently, there is no IB prediction about how information should be distributed across DLPFC and PMd.

(2) Now the authors could change their argument and state that what is really needed is an IB with the additional assumption that transformations go through a feedforward network. However, even in this case, I am not sure I understand the need for distributing information in this task. In fact, in both the data and the network model, there is a nice linear readout of the decision information in dPFC (data) or area 1 (network model). Accordingly, the decision readout could occur at this stage already, and there is absolutely no need to tag on another area (PMd, area 2+3).

Similarly, I noticed that the authors consider 2,3, and 4-area models, but they do not consider a 1-area model. It is not clear why the 1-area model is not considered. Given that e.g. Mante et al, 2013, manage to fit a 1-area model to a task of similar complexity, I would a priori assume that a 1-area RNN would do just as well in solving this task.

I think there are two more general problems with the author's approach. First, transformations or hierarchical representations are usually evoked to get information into the right format in a pure feedforward network. An RNN can be seen as an infinitely deep feedforward network, so even a single RNN has, at least in theory, and in contrast to feedforward layers, the power to do arbitrarily complex transformations. Second, the information coming into the network here (color + target) is a classical xor-task. While this task cannot be solved by a perceptron (=single neuron), it also is not that complex either, at least compared to, e.g., the task of distinguishing cats from dogs based on an incoming image in pixel format.

(3) I am convinced of the author's argument that the RNN reproduces key features of the neural data. However, there are some points where the analysis should be improved.

(a) It seems that dPCA was applied without regularization. Since dPCA can overfit the data, proper regularization is important, so that one can judge, e.g., whether the components of Fig.2g,h are significant, or whether the differences between DLPFC and PMd are significant.

(b) I would have assumed that the analyses performed on the neural data were identical to the ones performed on the RNN data. However, it looked to me like that was not the case. For instance, dPCA of the neural data is done by restretching randomly timed trials to a median trial. It seemed that this restretching was not performed on the RNN. Maybe that is just an oversight, but it should be clarified. Moreover, the decoding analyses used SVC for the neural data, but a neural-net-based approach for the RNN data. Why the differences?

(4) The RNN seems to fit the data quite nicely, so that is interesting. At the same time, the fit seems somewhat serendipitous, or at least, I did not get a good sense of what was needed to make the RNN fit the data. The authors did go to great lengths to fit various network models and turn several knobs on the fit. However, at least to me, there are a few (obvious) knobs that were not tested.

First, as already mentioned above, why not try to fit a single-area model? I would expect that a single area model could also learn the task - after all, that is what Mante et al did in their 2013 paper and the author's task does not seem any more complex than the task by Mante and colleagues.

Second, I noticed that the networks fitted are always feedforward-dominated. What happens when feedforward and feedback connections are on an equal footing? Do we still find that only the decision information propagates to the next area? Quite generally, when it comes to attenuating information that is fed into the network (e.g. color), then that is much easier done through feedforward connections (where it can be done in a single pass, through proper alignment or misalignment of the feedforward synapses) than through recurrent connections (where you need to actively cancel the incoming information). So it seems to me that the reason the attenuation occurs in the inter-area connections could simply be because the odds are a priori stacked against recurrent connections. In the real brain, of course, there is no clear evidence that feedforward connections dominate over feedback connections anatomically.

More generally, it would be useful to clarify what exactly is sufficient:

(a) the information distribution occurs in any RNN, i.e., also in one-area RNNs<br /> (b) the information distribution occurs when there are several, sparsely connected areas<br /> (c) the information distribution occurs when there are feedforward-dominated connections between areas

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Kleinman and colleagues conducted an analysis of two datasets, one recorded from DLPFC in one monkey and the other from PMD in two monkeys. They also performed similar analyses on trained RNNs with various architectures.

The study revealed four main findings. (1) All task variables (color coherence, target configuration, and choice direction) were found to be encoded in DLPFC. (2) PMD, an area downstream of PFC, only encoded choice direction. (3) These empirical findings align with the celebrated 'information bottleneck principle,' which suggests that FF networks progressively filter out task-irrelevant information. (4) Moreover, similar results were observed in RNNs with three modules.

While the analyses supporting results 1 and 2 were convincing and robust, I have some concerns and recommendations regarding findings 3 and 4, which I will elaborate on below. It is important to note that findings 2 and 4 had already been reported in a previous publication by the same authors (ref. 43).

Major recommendation/comments:<br /> The interpretation of the empirical findings regarding the communication subspace in relation to the information bottleneck theory is very interesting and novel. However, it may be a stretch to apply this interpretation directly to PFC-PMd, as was done with early vs. late areas of a FF neural network.

In the RNN simulations, the main finding indicates that a network with three or more modules lacks information about the stimulus in the third or subsequent modules. The authors draw a direct analogy between monkey PFC and PMd and Modules 1 and 3 of the RNNs, respectively. However, considering the model's architecture, it seems more appropriate to map Area 1 to regions upstream of PFC, such as the visual cortex, since Area 1 receives visual stimuli. Moreover, both PFC and PMd are deep within the brain hierarchy, suggesting a more natural mapping to later areas. This contradicts the CCA analysis in Figure 3e. It is recommended to either remap the areas or provide further support for the current mapping choice.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Funabiki et al, performed a co-evolutionary analysis of Lsh/HELLS and CDCA7, two factors with links to DNA methylation pathways in mammals, amphibia and fish. The authors suggest that conserved roles for the two factors in DNA methylation maintenance pathways can be traced back to the last eukaryotic common ancestor. Overall, the findings are important and the results could be useful for researchers studying DNA methylation pathways in many different organisms.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

In this manuscript, Funabiki and colleagues investigated the co-evolution of DNA methylation and nucleosome remolding in eukaryotes. This study is motivated by several observations: (1) despite being ancestrally derived, many eukaryotes lost DNA methylation and/or DNA methyltransferases; (2) over many genomic loci, the establishment and maintenance of DNA methylation relies on a conserved nucleosome remodeling complex composed of CDCA7 and HELLS; (3) it remains unknown if/how this functional link influenced the evolution of DNA methylation. The authors hypothesize that if CDCA7-HELLS function was required for DNA methylation in the last eukaryote common ancestor, this should be accompanied by signatures of co-evolution during eukaryote radiation.

To test this hypothesis, they first set out to investigate the presence/absence of putative functional orthologs of CDCA7, HELLS and DNMTs across major eukaryotic clades. They succeed in identifying homologs of these genes in all clades spanning 180 species. To annotate putative functional orthologs, they use similarity over key functional domains and residues - such as ICF related mutations for CDCA7 and SNF2 domains for HELLS - as well as maximum likelihood phylogenetic analyses. Using established eukaryote phylogenies, the authors conclude that the CDCA7-HELLS-DNMT axis arose in the last common ancestor to all eukaryotes. Importantly, they found recurrent loss events of CDCA7-HELLS-DNMT in at least 40 eukaryotic species, most of them lacking DNA methylation.

Having identified these factors, they successfully identify signatures of co-evolution between DNMTs, CDCA7 and HELLS using CoPAP analysis - a probabilistic model inferring the likelihood of interactions between genes given a set of presence/absence patterns. As a control, such interactions are not detected with other remodelers or chromatin modifying pathways also found across eukaryotes. Expanding on this analysis, the authors found that CDCA7 was more likely to be lost in species without DNA methylation.

In conclusion, the authors suggest that the CDCA7-HELLS-DNMT axis is ancestral in eukaryotes and raise the hypothesis that CDCA7 becomes quickly dispensable upon the loss of DNA methylation and/or that CDCA7 might be the first step toward the switch from DNA methylation-based genome regulation to other modes.

The data and analyses reported are significant and solid. Overall, this work is a conceptual advance in our understanding of the evolutionary coupling between nucleosome remolding and DNA methylation. It also provides a useful resource to study the early origins of DNA methylation related molecular process. Finally, it brings forward the interesting hypothesis that since eukaryotes are faced with the challenge of performing DNA methylation in the context of nucleosome packed DNA, loosing factors such as CDCA7-HELLS likely led to recurrent innovations in chromatin-based genome regulation.

Strengths:<br /> - The hypothesis linking nucleosome remodeling and the evolution of DNA methylation.<br /> - Deep mapping of DNA methylation related process in eukaryotes.<br /> - Identification and evolutionary trajectories of novel homologs/orthologs of CDCA7.<br /> - Identification of CDCA7-HELLS-DNMT co-evolution across eukaryotes.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

This paper focuses on the effects of a L114P mutation in the TALK-1 channel on islet function and diabetes. This mutation is clinically relevant and a cause of MODY diabetes. This work employs a mouse model with heterozygous and homozygous mutants. The homozygous mice are homozygous lethal from severe hyperglycemia. The work shows that the mutation increases K+ currents and inhibits insulin secretion. This is a very nice paper with mechanistic insight and clear clinical importance. It is generally well-written and the data is well-presented.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> This work follows previous work from the group where they have demonstrated the role of TASK1 in the regulation of glucose-stimulated insulin secretion. Moreover, a recent study links a mutation in KCNK16, the gene encoding TALK-1 channels to MODY. Here the authors have constructed a mouse model with the specific mutation (TALK-1 L114P mutation) and investigated the phenotype. They have to perform a couple of breeding tricks to find a model that is lethal in adult which might complicate the conclusions, however, the phenotype of the heterozygote model used has a MODY-like phenotype. The study is convincing and solid.

Strengths:<br /> 1) The work is a natural follow-up from previous studies from the groups.

2) The authors present convincing and solid data that in the long perspective will help patients with these mutations.

3) Both in vivo and in vitro data are presented to give the full picture of the phenotype.

4) Data from both female and male mice are presented.

Weaknesses:<br /> 1) The authors perform an RNA-sequencing showing that the cAMP amplifying pathway is upregulated. A weakness is that this is not further followed up. The remaining questions include; Is this also true in humans with this mutation? Would treatment with incretins improve glucose-stimulated insulin secretion and and lower blood glucose?<br /> 2) The authors avoid further investigating what it means that the glucagon area and secretion are increased in the model.<br /> 3) The performance of measurements in both male and female mice is praiseworthy. However, despite differences in the response, the authors do not investigate the potential reason for this. Are hormonal differences of importance?

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The L114P gain of function mutation in the K2P channel TALK-1 encoded by KCNJ16 has been associated with MODY. In this study, Nakhe et al. generated mice carrying L114P TALK-1 and evaluated the impact of the mutation on glucose homeostasis. The authors report that the mutation increases neonatal lethality, owing to hyperglycemia caused by a lack of glucose-stimulated Ca2+ influx and insulin secretion. Adult mutant mice showed glucose intolerance and fasting hyperglycemia, which is attributed to blunted glucose-stimulated insulin secretion as well as increased glucagon secretion. Interestingly, male mice were more affected than female mice. Islets from adult mutant mice were found to have reduced Ca2+ entry upon glucose stimulation but also enhanced IP3-induced ER Ca2+ release, consistent with previous studies from the group showing a role of TALK-1 in ER Ca2+ homeostasis. Finally, a comparison of bulk RNA sequencing results from WT and mutant islets revealed altered expression of genes involved in β-cell identification, function, and signalling, which also contributes to the observed islet dysfunction.

The study is in general well designed and executed, and the conclusions are largely supported by the experimental evidence. The results confirm the pathogenic effect of L114P TALK-1 in human MODY. The findings that the mutation causes neonatal diabetes and affects male mice more than female mice have potential clinical implications with regard to genetic screening and diagnosis.

Strengths:<br /> A major strength of the study is the detailed characterization of the mutant mice in two different genetic backgrounds. The overall results provide compelling evidence that L114P TALK-1 disrupts glucose-stimulated insulin secretion and causes hyperglycemia. The neonatal diabetes phenotype and the gender difference in adults uncovered by the study are significant and should be considered in human patients. Results showing that the mutation not only attenuates membrane depolarization and Ca2+ entry upon glucose stimulation but also enhances IP3-induced ER Ca2+ release is consistent with the channel's dual role in membrane hyperpolarization and in providing counter currents to support ER Ca2+ release. The observed altered islet cell composition and the RNA seq data also add to the story and suggest the mutation has secondary effects that could explain the phenotypes observed.

Weaknesses:<br /> Some conclusions lack definitive evidence. For example, the authors conclude that L114P TALK-1 causes transient neonatal diabetes but there is no longitudinal glucose monitoring data to show remission of the diabetes. The contribution to defective insulin response from defects in plasma membrane depolarization relative to that from ER Ca2+ mishandling is not addressed. It is unclear whether the altered Ca2+ release in response to Ach is a direct result of GOF TALK-1 in the ER membrane or is due to the many transcriptional changes observed in the mutant islets.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

In this manuscript, the authors are developing a new protocol that aims at expanding pancreatic progenitors derived from human pluripotent stem cells under GMP-compliant conditions. The strategy is based on hypothesis-driven experiments that come from knowledge derived from pancreatic developmental biology.

The topic is of major interest in the view of the importance of amplifying human pancreatic progenitors (both for fundamental purposes and for future clinical applications). There is indeed currently a major lack of information on efficient conditions to reach this objective, despite major recurrent efforts by the scientific community.

Using their approach that combines stimulation of specific mitogenic pathways and inhibition of retinoic acid and specific branches of the TGF-beta and Wnt pathways, the authors claim to be able, in a highly robust and reproducible manner) to amplify in 10 passages the number of pancreatic progenitors (PP) by 2,000 folds, which is really an impressive breakthrough.

The work is globally well-performed and quite convincing. I have however some technical comments mainly related to the quantification of pancreatic progenitor amplification and to their differentiation into beta-like cells following amplification.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:

The paper presents a novel approach to expand iPSC-derived pdx1+/nkx6.1+ pancreas progenitors, making them potentially suitable for GMP-compatible protocols. This advancement represents a significant breakthrough for diabetes cell replacement therapies, as one of the current bottlenecks is the inability to expand PP without compromising their differentiation potential. The study employs a robust dataset and state-of-the-art methodology, unveiling crucial signaling pathways (eg TGF, Notch...) responsible for sustaining pancreas progenitors while preserving their differentiation potential in vitro.

Strengths:

This paper has strong data, guided omics technology, clear aims, applicability to current protocols, and beneficial implications for diabetes research. The discussion on challenges adds depth to the study and encourages future research to build upon these important findings.

Weaknesses:

The paper does have some weaknesses that could be addressed to improve its overall clarity and impact. The writing style could benefit from simplification, as certain sections are explained in a convoluted manner and difficult to follow, in some instances, redundancy is evident. Furthermore, the legends accompanying figures should be self-explanatory, ensuring that readers can easily understand the presented data without the need to be checking along the paper for information.

The culture conditions employed in the study might benefit from more systematic organization and documentation, making them easier to follow.

Another important aspect is the functionality of the expanded cells after differentiation. While the study provides valuable insights into the expansion of pancreas progenitors in vitro and does the basic tests to measure their functionality after differentiation the paper could be strengthened by exploring the behavior and efficacy of these cells deeper, and in an in vivo setting.

Quantifications for immunofluorescence (IF) data should be displayed.

Some claims made in the paper may come across as somewhat speculative.

Additionally, while the paper discusses the potential adaptability of the method to GMP-compatible protocols, there is limited elaboration on how this transition would occur practically or any discussion of the challenges it might entail.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary:

In this work, Jarc et al. describe a method to decouple the mechanisms supporting progenitor self-renewal and expansion from feed-forward mechanisms promoting their differentiation.

The authors aimed at expanding pancreatic progenitor (PP) cells, strictly characterized as PDX1+/SOX9+/NKX6.1+ cells, for several rounds. This required finding the best cell culture conditions that allow sustaining PP cell proliferation along cell passages, while avoiding their further differentiation. They achieve this by comparing the transcriptome of PP cells that can be expanded for several passages against the transcriptome of unexpanded (just differentiated) PP cells.

The optimized culture conditions enabled the selection of PDX1+/SOX9+/NKX6.1+ PP cells and their consistent, 2000-fold, expansion over ten passages and 40-45 days. Transcriptome analyses confirmed the stabilization of PP identity and the effective suppression of differentiation. These optimized culture conditions consisted of substituting the Vitamin A containing B27 supplement with a B27 formulation devoid of vitamin A (to avoid retinoic acid (RA) signaling from an autocrine feed-forward loop), substituting A38-01 with the ALK5 II inhibitor (ALK5i II) that targets primarily ALK5, supplementation of medium with FGF18 (in addition to FGF2) and the canonical Wnt inhibitor IWR-1, and cell culture on vitronectin-N (VTN-N) as a substrate instead of Matrigel.

Strengths:

The strength of this work relies on a clever approach to identify cell culture modifications that allow expansion of PP cells (once differentiated) while maintaining, if not reinforcing, PP cell identity. Along the work, it is emphasized that PP cell identity is associated with the co-expression of PDX1, SOX9, and NKX6.1. The optimized protocol is unique (among the other datasets used in the comparison shown here) in inducing a strong upregulation of GP2, a unique marker of human fetal pancreas progenitors. Importantly GP2+ enriched hPS cell-derived PP cells are more efficiently differentiating into pancreatic endocrine cells (Aghazadeh et al., 2022; Ameri et al., 2017).

The unlimited expansion of PP cells reported here would allow scaling-up the generation of beta cells, for the cell therapy of diabetes, by eliminating a source of variability derived from the number of differentiation procedures to be carried out when starting at the hPS cell stage each time. The approach presented here would allow the selection of the most optimally differentiated PP cell population for subsequent expansion and storage. Among other conditions optimized, the authors report a role for Vitamin A in activating retinoic acid signaling in an autocrine feed-forward loop, and the supplementation with FGF18 to reinforce FGF2 signaling.

This is a relevant topic in the field of research, and some of the cell culture conditions reported here for PP expansion might have important implications in cell therapy approaches. Thus, the approach and results presented in this study could be of interest to researchers working in the field of in vitro pancreatic beta cell differentiation from hPSCs. Table S1 and Table S4 are clearly detailed and extremely instrumental to this aim.

Weaknesses:

The experiments performed and the methods used to evaluate the treatment effects are well-suited and state-of-the-art. However, further details on the characterization or the discussion of some of the results might help to more clearly contextualize their findings, and improve their impact on the field.

The authors strictly define PP cells as PDX1+/SOX9+/NKX6.1+ cells, and this phenotype was convincingly characterized by immunofluorescence, RT-qPCR, and FACS analysis along the work. However, broadly defined PDX1+/SOX9+/NKX6.1+ could include pancreatic multipotent progenitor cells (MPC, defined as PDX1+/SOX9+/NKX6.1+/PTF1A+ cells) or pancreatic bipotent progenitors (BP, defined as PDX1+/SOX9+/NKX6.1+/PTF1A-) cells. It has been indeed reported that Nkx6.1/Nkx6.2 and Ptf1a function as antagonistic lineage determinants in MPC (Schaffer, A.E. et al. PLoS Genet 9, e1003274, 2013), and that the Nkx6/Ptf1a switch only operates during a critical competence window when progenitors are still multipotent and can be uncoupled from cell differentiation. It would be important to define whether culturing PDX1+/SOX9+/NKX6.1+ PP (as defined in this work) in the best conditions allowing cell expansion is reinforcing either an MPC or BP phenotype. Data from Figure S2A (last paragraph of page 7) suggests that PTF1A expression is decreased in C5 culture conditions, thus more homogeneously keeping BP cells in this media composition. However, on page 15, 2nd paragraph it is stated that "the strong upregulation of NKX6.2 in our procedure suggested that our ePP cells may have retracted to an earlier PP stage". Evaluating the co-expression of the previously selected markers with PTF1A (or CPA2), or the more homogeneous expression of novel BP markers described, such as DCDC2A (Scavuzzo et al. Nat Commun 9, 3356, 2018), in the different culture conditions assayed would more shield light into this relevant aspect.

In line with the previous comment, it would be extremely insightful if the authors could characterize or at least discuss a potential role for YAP underlying the mechanistic effects observed after culturing PP in different media compositions. It is well known that the nuclear localization of the co-activator YAP broadly promotes cell proliferation, and it is a key regulator of organ growth during development. Importantly in this context, it has been reported that TEAD and YAP regulate the enhancer network of human embryonic pancreatic progenitors and disruption of this interaction arrests the growth of the embryonic pancreas (Cebola, I. et al. Nat Cell Biol 17, 615-26, 2015). More recently, it has also been shown that a cell-extrinsic and intrinsic mechanotransduction pathway mediated by YAP acts as gatekeeper in the fate decisions of BP in the developing pancreas, whereby nuclear YAP in BPs allows proliferation in an uncommitted fate, while YAP silencing induces EP commitment (Mamidi, A. et al. Nature 564, 114-118, 2018; Rosado-Olivieri et al. Nature Communications 10, 1464, 2019). This mechanism was further exploited recently to improve the in vitro pancreatic beta cell differentiation protocol (Hogrebe et al., Nature Protocols 16, 4109-4143, 2021; Hogrebe et al, Nature Biotechnology 38, 460-470, 2020). Thus, YAP in the context of the findings described in this work could be a key player underlying the proliferation vs differentiation decisions in PP.

Regarding the improvements made in the PP cell culture medium composition to allow expansion while avoiding differentiation, some of the claims should be better discussed and contextualized with current state-of-the-art differentiation protocols. As an example, the use of ALK5 II inhibitor (ALK5i II) has been reported to induce EP commitment from PP, while RA was used to induce PP commitment from the primitive gut tube cell stage in recently reported in vitro differentiation protocols (Hogrebe et al., Nature Protocols 16, 4109-4143, 2021; Rosado-Olivieri et al. Nature Communications 10, 1464, 2019). In this context, and to the authors' knowledge, is Vitamin A (triggering autocrine RA signaling) usually included in the basal media formulations used in other recently reported state-of-the-art protocols? If so, at which stages? Would it be advisable to remove it?

In this line also, the supplementation of cell culture media with the canonical Wnt inhibitor IWR-1 is used in this work to allow the expansion of PP while avoiding differentiation. A role for Wnt pathway inhibition during endocrine differentiation using IWR1 has been previously reported (Sharon et al. Cell Reports 27, 2281-2291.e5, 2019). In that work, Wnt inhibition in vitro causes an increase in the proportion of differentiated endocrine cells. It would be advisable to discuss these previous findings with the results presented in the current work. Could Wnt inhibition have different effects depending on the differential modulation of the other signaling pathways?

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

This study provides insights into the early detection of malignancies with noninvasive methods. The study contained a large sample size with an external validation cohort, which raises the credibility and universality of this model. The new model achieved high levels of AUC in discriminating malignancies from healthy controls, as well as the ability to distinguish tumor of origin. Based on these findings, prospective studies are needed to further confirm its predictive capacity.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

The authors tried to diagnose cancers and pinpoint tissues of origin using cfDNA. To achieve this goal, they developed a framework to assess methylation, CNA, and other genomic features. They established discovery and validation cohorts for systematic assessment and successfully achieved robust prediction power.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary: The ciliary photoreceptor cells and its downstream neurons of larval annelid must be orchestrated in a specific pattern to promote downward swimming in response to long duration of UV exposure. The authors first conducted neuroanatomical examination of the circuit to identify NOS-expression neurons (INNOS) that are immediately downstream to the ciliary photoreceptor cells. The INNOS is activated by UV and produces NO. The NOS is required for UV avoidance by Platynereis larvae and neural dynamics of the photoreceptor cells and their downstream circuit. Following up the RNA-seq data with in situ hybridization experiments, the authors found that two unconventional guanylate cyclases, NIT-GC1 and NIT-GC2, are expressed and localized in different subcellular domain of the photoreceptor cells. Experiments using the culture cells and genetically encoded sensors demonstrated that NIT-GC1 can generate cGMP in response to nitric oxide. Finally, authors build a mathematical model that fit the live imaging data and used it to predict how the magnitude of the photoreceptor activation varied by intensity and duration of UV light.

Strengths: The authors conducted comprehensive interrogations of the UV avoidance pathway at the molecular and circuit levels, and constructed a mathematical model. The main conclusions are supported by layers of evidence from different assays.

Weaknesses: Statistics are missing in both figure legends and methods. The perturbations of genes and molecules were not cell-type-specific and therefore the observed behavioral defect could be attributed to the malfunction of the circuit elsewhere not examined in this study. I suggest adding more explanation about the functions of other NOS-expressing cells and conducting a control experiment to test behavioral response to a non-visual stimulus.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> This study is quite thorough, tackling this NO-dependent UV avoidance circuit with both breadth and depth. There are several novel discoveries throughout, but the whole package represents perhaps even more than the sum of these parts.

Strengths:<br /> The presentation of the work is compelling. The introduction sets up the question and the state of the field very nicely. The discovery of the non-canonical NO receptor pathway in the ciliary photoreceptors is fascinating and will likely open up new avenues for future research into NO-pathways in different species. The use of genetic and pharmacological manipulations of circuit components was well thought-out. The authors applied different experimental techniques expertly throughout the study so that they could develop a comprehensive view from the molecular to the behavioral levels.

Weaknesses:<br /> While I appreciate the intent of bringing together a large set of measurements from connectomics and calcium imaging in the framework of a model, the model seemed rather poorly constrained. How many parameters are in the model shown in Figure 6A? How many of them are well constrained by experimental measurements? The authors also don't perform sensitivity analysis on the parameters of the model. And ultimately, the conclusion over the model in Figure 7 is somewhat trivial within the unitless construction: larger amplitude and longer duration stimuli lead to increased activation of the downstream neuron thought to lead to the downward swim behavior. I could imagine that a large family of models would arrive at this same result, and without units, there is no way to really test it with new behavioral experiments.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

The transition from planktonic to benthic depends upon several physical and chemical cues. Nitric oxide (NO) is known as a critical player in the induction of larval metamorphosis in several invertebrates. Although NO is a widespread signalling molecule in a broad range of organisms regulating key physiological processes, internal regulatory mechanisms studies are scarce. While the UV sensing in larvae of the annelid Platynereis dumerilii using ciliary photoreceptors has been studied, the neuronal signalling mechanism remains unknown. In this study, Kei Jokura et al. investigated how annelid Platynereis dumerilii larvae detect UV sensing and modulate swimming behaviour through nitric oxide feedback. Using existing resources of Platynereis larval connectome/volume EM data, they identified NOS-expressing interneurons within the ciliary photoreceptors circuit (cPRCs). They demonstrated that NO is produced in cPRCs during UV/violet stimulation by using a fluorescent NO-reporter line. Further, they demonstrated that Nitric oxide signalling mediates UV-avoidance behaviour by using NOS-mutant larvae. Finally, they mapped out the signalled mechanisms of the cPRC circuit using published spatially mapped single-cell transcriptome data of Platynereis larvae, the Ca sensor lines, in situ HCR, and immunostaining. Additionally, by using their findings from Ca imagining data of cPRC, INNOS and INRGWa cells collected in wild-type, NOS knockout and NIT-GC2 morphant larvae, Kei Jokura et al. developed a mixed cellular-circuit-level mathematical model. However, my expertise in mathematical modelling is limited, so I cannot comment on this section.

No doubt, the study has been conducted extensively. However, I have a few comments, please see below.

Page 4: "In contrast, both two- and three-day-old homozygous NOS-mutant larvae showed a strongly diminished UV avoidance response (Figure 3A, B and Figure 3-figure supplement 1B, C)." Instead of using subjective terms like "strongly," it would be more relevant to provide statistical values. However, I could not locate any means of statistical analysis on larval behaviour. Can the authors indicate the statistical values for all behaviour studies?

Page 5: "(D) Vertical displacement in 30 sec bins of wild type and mutant (NOSΔ11/Δ11 and NOSΔ23/Δ23) three-day-old larvae stimulated with 395 nm light from the side, 488 nm light from the top and 395 nm light from the top." The error bars for WT are too long at the end of the experiment. It is not clear how the authors decided to use this time frame. Did the authors try carrying this out for an extended time period? How did the authors decide on 120 seconds as the time frame for exposure? Authors should provide data on larval behaviour for an extended time.

Page 13: "During the UV response, prototroch cilia beat slower than trunk cilia, resulting in a head-down stable state ('rear-wheel drive'). In contrast, during the pressure response prototroch cilia beat faster than trunk cilia, leading to a head-up orientation ('front-wheel drive'). Testing this hypothesis will require biophysical experiments and mathematical modelling." Authors should carry out ciliary beating analysis under UV light in the current study with NOS mutant larvae. Since the pressure and UV detection systems are closely related, comparing the difference in ciliary beating is important to demonstrate this hypothesis. Further, did the authors check the Ca sensor GCaMP6s under pressure conditions?

Page 18: "strips. One strip contained UV (395 nm) LEDs (SMB1W-395, Roithner Lasertechnik) and the other infrared (810 nm) LEDs (SMB1W-810NR-I, Roithner Lasertechnik)." Authors should test larval swimming behaviour at different wavelengths. Even though they are performed in previous work, the experiment with different wavelengths is necessary to be conducted in NOS mutant larvae in parallel with a control. This will confirm that NOS is principally associated with UV. Further, to demonstrate that this mechanism is associated with ciliary movement, authors need to provide this evidence.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary<br /> In this manuscript, the authors generate an AAV-deliverable tool that generates action potentials in response to red light, but not blue light, when expressed in neurons. To do this, they screen some red light-excitatory/blue light-inhibitory opsin pairs to find ones that are spectrally and temporally matched. They first show that this works with Chrimson and GtACR2, however, they expand their search after finding that the tau-off (inactivation after light cessation) kinetics of these two opsins are not well-matched. They directly examine a small set of options based on a literature search and settle on a variant of red light-excitatory Chrimson and blue light-inhibitory ZipACR. To more closely match the kinetics of this pair, the authors create a structure homology model of the ZipACR retinal binding pocket and use this to guide the generation of a small mutagenesis panel, leading to a more optimized ZipACR mutant. They then show that a bicistronically expressed fusion arrangement of these opsins, plus some functional peptides, can drive action potentials up to 20hz with red light and does not do so with blue light, in hippocampal cells transduced by AAV. They also show function in vivo, in a mouse, using a physiological readout. They conclude that their new tool may be useful for complex experimental designs requiring multiple optical channels for write-in/read-out.

The major advantage claimed by the authors over existing tools is the temporal time-locking of their inhibitory opsin - this is driven by the contrast between the tau-off kinetics of their ZipACR variant compared to gtACR2, which is used by the leading competitor tool (BiPOLES).

Big thoughts<br /> While the authors were carefully thoughtful about the potential influence of temporal kinetics on the efficiency of a tool such as this one, there were no experiments conducted that made use of the unique properties of this molecular strategy. To understand why they embarked on this engineering program, I was required to put on my neuroscientist hat and contemplate this question myself:

First, experimental designs where I require multiple optical channels of control. This appears to be aligned with the author's thoughts, as they state, correctly, that opsins utilizing retinal as a light-sensing chromophore are universally activated by blue light (the so-called 'blue shoulder'). Therefore, their tool may be useful for stimulating multiple populations using a blue excitatory opsin in neuron A and their tool for red excitation of neuron B - or, in the author's own words, "A potential solution to the problem of cross-talk...". Yet, there are no data presented that showcases their new tool for this purpose (e.g. Vierock, Johannes, et al. "BiPOLES is an optogenetic tool developed for bidirectional dual-color control of neurons." Nature Communications 12.1 (2021): 4527. Figure 4f-I; 6). The same set-up could be imagined for green GECI (or equivalent) imaging of cells in the same volume that their tool is being used in - for instance, interleaving red stimulation light and blue imaging light, (perhaps) without the typical concern of imaging light bleed-through activating the opsin itself.

Second, for high-frequency temporal control over both excitation and inhibition in the same neuron. The red light turns the cell on, and blue light turns the cell off (see, for instance, Zhang, Feng, et al. "Multimodal fast optical interrogation of neural circuitry." Nature 446.7136 (2007): 633-639. Figure 2; Vierock as above, Figure 4a,b). Again, here the authors are long on theory ("The new system...can drive time-locked high-frequency action potentials in response to red pulses") and short on data. While they do show that red light = excitation and blue light = inhibition, they neither show 1) all-optical on/off modulation of the same cell; nor 2) high-frequency inhibition or excitation (max stim rate of 20hz, which is the same as the BiPOLES paper used for their LC stimulation paradigm; Vierock, as above, Figure 7a-d).

Despite these major shortcomings, the further development and characterization of tandem opsins, such as this one, is of interest to the community. There is ongoing work by the BiPOLES team to create new iterations (e.g. Wahid, J., et al. "P-15 BiPOLES2 is a bidirectional optogenetic tool with a narrow activation spectrum and low red-light excitability." Clinical Neurophysiology 148 (2023): e16.). To make the case that the tool described in this manuscript is worth the effort that the authors are requesting the neuroscience community invest in trialing it in their own hands, they must revise the manuscript to show that their approach is both 1) different in some way when compared to BiPOLES (it is my understanding that they did not do this, as per the supplementary alignment of the BiPOLES sequence and the sequence of the BiPOLES-like construct that they did test) and 2) that the properties that the investigators specifically tailored their construct to have confer some sort of experimental advantage when compared to the existing standard.

There are a number of additional concerns and clarifications that will strengthen the manuscript that are communicated directly to the authors through this peer-review process.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> One often wishes to combine activation of a neural population via red light with simultaneous modulation of a different population via blue light, or simultaneous imaging of a blue-excited fluorescent reporter. The problem is that all red-shifted opsins have an action spectrum with a long blue tail, leading to spurious opsin activation by blue light.

This valuable paper presents a clever solution to this problem, by pairing an engineered blue-shifted inhibitory chloride-conducting opsin with a red-shifted excitatory opsin. The combined effect is excitation by red light and shunting inhibition by blue light. The paper is very thorough, with convincing spectroscopic and patch clamp characterization of the tools, and tests in brain slices and in vivo. This tool is likely to be useful in the neuroscience community.

Strengths:<br /> The methods are solid, including the complete characterization of each tool separately, as well as the combination in vivo. The array of testing gives a strong degree of confidence that this tool will work as expected.

Weaknesses:<br /> There are two discussion points and one experimental point which would make the paper stronger.

1) In the Introduction or Discussion, the authors could better motivate the need for a red-shifted actuator that lacks blue crosstalk, by giving some specific examples of how the tool could be productively used, e.g. pairing with another blue-shifted excitatory opsin in a different population, or pairing with a GFP-based fluorescent indicator, e.g. GCaMP. The motivation for the current tool is not obvious to non-experts.

2) Simultaneous excitation and inhibition are not the same as non-excitation. The authors mentioned shunting briefly. Another possible issue is changes in osmotic balance. Activation of a Na+ channel and a Cl- channel will lead to net import of NaCl into the cell, possibly changing osmotic pressure. Please discuss.

3) The authors showed that in ZipT-IvfChr, orange light drives excitation and blue light does not. But what about simultaneous blue and orange light? Can the blue light overwhelm the effect of the orange light? Since the stated goal is to open the blue part of the spectrum for other applications, one is now worried about "negative" crosstalk. Please discuss and, ideally, characterize this phenomenon.<br /> 3.1) Does the use of the new tool require careful balancing of the expression levels of the ZipT and the IvfChr? Does it require careful balancing of blue and orange light intensities?<br /> 3.2) Also, many opsins show complex and nonlinear responses to dual-wavelength illumination, so each component should be characterized individually under simultaneous blue + orange light.<br /> 3.3) I was expecting to see photocurrents at different holding potentials as a function of illumination wavelength for the co-expressed construct (i.e. to see at what wavelength it switches from being excitatory to inhibitory); and also to see I-V curves of the photocurrent at blue and orange wavelengths for the co-expressed constructs (i.e. to see the reversal potential under blue excitation). Overall, the patch clamp and spectroscopic characterization of the individual constructs was stronger than that of the combined constructs.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

This study addresses the important topic of dual-color optogenetic control of neuronal activity, which is challenging due to significant optical crosstalk between channelrhodopsins of different absorption colors and ion selectivity. However, Mermet-Joret et al. demonstrate in flies that simple coexpression of a strong blue light-activated inhibitory opsin, such as the chloride-selective channelrhodopsin GtACR2, can suppress the blue light activity of a red-shifted excitatory opsin, such as Chrimson, and allow dual-color optogenetic control of the expressing neuron. The same concept was previously discussed by Vierock et al. and led to the generation of BiPOLES, which combines both channels in a single fusion protein. In the present manuscript, the authors introduce an alternative combination of channels with accelerated off-kinetics that are coexpressed by a bicistronic expression cassette. The goal is to better match the duration of illumination and optogenetic manipulation in order to reduce potential side effects induced by prolonged channel opening.

The major novelty of this work lies in the choice of the employed ion channels: the excitatory cation channel vf-Chrimson and the inhibitory anion channel ZipACR, alongside their subsequent modifications (Fig. 2 - 4). Both channels belong to the fastest known ChRs, but the choice of ZipACR raises questions. First, it has a peak absorption at 515 nm that is 40 nm further red-shifted than GtACR2 tested in Figure 1 and accordingly important optical cross-talk with the coexpressed Chrimson channel. Second, it was reported to have reduced chloride selectivity, first by Govorunova et al. in 2017 and later also by Kato et al. in 2018. Both of these aspects are also mentioned by the authors but were not resolved through molecular engineering. Instead site-directed mutagenesis primarily focused on membrane expression and photoreceptor kinetics of the employed channels. Nonetheless, improving the membrane targeting of the vf-Chrimson channel by exchange of the N-terminus finally provided sufficient red light activation at low light intensities to reliably activate expressing neurons and allowed in combination with the decelerated ZipACR mutants dual color optogenetic control with millisecond time resolution. At higher light intensities inactivation of Chrimson and the optical crosstalk of both channels seem to limit its performance.

The experimental results are well presented; but, certain questions persist:

1. The enhanced vf-Chrimson could potentially be a highlight of the manuscript, serving broader applications. Yet, gauging the overall improvements of ivf-Chrimson in comparison to other Chrimson variants remains intricate due to several reasons. First, photocurrents from ivf-Chrimson seem smaller than those from C-Chrimson (Supplemental Figure 3), and a direct comparison with standard vf-Chrimson is absent. Second, while membrane expression of ivf-Chrimson appears enhanced in provided bright-field recordings, the quantitative analysis would necessitate confocal microscopy and a membrane marker (Supplemental Figure 2). Finally, other N-terminal modified Chrimson variants, like CsChrimson by Klapoetke et al. in 2014 and C1Chrimson by Oda et al. in 2018, have been generated. Comparing ivf-Chrimson to vf-CsChrimson or vf-C1Chrimson would be important to evaluate the benefits of the applied N-terminal modification.

2. The action spectra of ZipACR suggest peak absorption of ZipACR WT and its mutant at 525 - 550 nm (Fig. 3). This is even further red-shifted than previously reported by Govorunova et al. Further action spectra recordings differ for all constructs between recordings initiated with blue or red light (Supplementary Fig. 5). This discrepancy is unexpected and should be discussed. Additionally, the representative photocurrents of Zip(151V) in Fig. 3D1 do not align with the corresponding action spectrum in Fig. 3D2 as they show maximal photocurrents for 400 nm excitation.

3. The authors introduce two different bicistronic expression cassettes-ZipT-IvfChR and ZipV-IvfChR-without providing clear guidelines on their conditions of use. Although the authors assert that ZipT is slower and further red-shifted than ZipV, the differences in the data for both ACR mutants are small and the benefits of the different final constructs should be explained.

4. The ZipT/V-IvfChRs are designed as bicistronic constructs; yet, disparities in membrane trafficking and protein degradation between the two channels could lead to divergences in blue and red light photoresponses. For future applicants, understanding the extent of expression ratio variations across cells using the presented expression cassettes could be of significance and should be discussed.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary: By elevating Ca influx and inducing PTP, the authors have maximized the release probability. In this condition, the release probability is nearly one. Under such a condition, the release site can release another vesicle in a short time. By analyzing mean, variance, and covariance, the authors propose a release model that each release site contains a docking site and a replacement site. They excluded the LS-TS model (Neher and Brose) based on a discrepancy between the model and the data (mean and covariance).

Strengths: The authors have used minimal stimulation and modeling nicely to look into the stochastic nature of release sites with good resolution. This cannot be done at other synapses. Overall conclusions are reasonable and convincing.

Weaknesses: The interpretation is somewhat model-dependent, and it is unclear if the interpretation is unique. For example, it is unclear if the heterogeneous release probability among sites, silent sites, can explain the results. N estimates out of variance-mean analysis for example may be limited by the availability of postsynaptic receptors.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> Silva et al. describe an experimental study conducted on cerebellar parallel fiber-to-molecular interneuron synapses to investigate the size of the readily releasable pool (RRP) of synaptic vesicles (SVs) per docking site in response to trains of action potentials. The study aims to determine whether there are multiple binding sites for SVs at each docking site, which could lead to a higher RRP size than previously thought.

The researchers used this glutamatergic synapse to conduct their experiments. They employed various techniques and manipulations to enhance release probability, docking site occupancy, and synaptic depression. By counting the number of released SVs in response to action potential trains and normalizing the results based on the number of docking sites, they estimated the RRP size per docking site.

The key findings and observations in the manuscript are as follows:

Docking Site Occupancy and Release Probability Enhancement: The researchers used 4-amidopyridine (4-AP) and post-tetanic potentiation (PTP) protocols to enhance the release probability of docked SVs and the occupancy of docking sites, respectively.

Synchronous and Asynchronous Release: Synchronous release refers to SVs released in response to individual action potentials, while asynchronous release involves SVs released after the initial release response due to calcium elevation. The study observed changes in the balance between synchronous and asynchronous release under different conditions, revealing the degree of filling of the RRP.

Modeling of Release Dynamics: The researchers employed a modeling approach based on the "replacement site/docking site" (RS/DS) model, where SVs bind to a replacement site before moving to a docking site and eventually undergoing release. The model was adjusted to experimental conditions to estimate parameters like docking site occupancy and release probabilities.

Comparison of Different Models: The study compared the RS/DS model with an alternative model known as the "loosely docked/tightly docked" (LS/TS) model. The LS/TS model assumes that a docking site can only accommodate one SV at a time, while the RS/DS model considers the possibility of accommodating multiple SVs.

Maximum RRP Size: Through a combination of experimental results and model simulations, the study revealed that the maximum RRP size per docking site reached close to two SVs under certain conditions, supporting the idea that each docking site can accommodate multiple SVs.

Strengths:<br /> The study is rigorously conducted and takes into consideration the previous work on RRP size and SV docking site estimation. The study addresses a long-standing question in synaptic physiology.

Weaknesses:<br /> It remains unclear how generalizable the findings are to other types of synapses.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

This study explores the relationship between the most common spatial patterns of neurodegeneration and the density of different cell types in the cerebral cortex. The authors present data showing that atrophy patterns in Alzheimer's disease and Frontotemporal dementia strongly associate with the abundance of astrocytes and microglia. While the results here may be considered preliminary, this work takes a step in the right direction by emphasizing the critical role that cells other than neurons play in the degeneration patterns observable with neuroimaging.

I have two main comments:

1) The authors make an important innovation by applying the cellular deconvolution approach to create brain-wide maps of cellular abundance, and then comparing these maps to atrophy patterns from the most common neurodegenerative diseases and dementia syndromes.

2) I would have preferred to see more figures with brain images showing the cellular abundance maps and the atrophy maps. Without being able to see these figures, it's difficult for the reader to 1) validate the atrophy patterns or 2) gain intuition about how the cellular abundance maps vary across the brain. The images in Figure 1C give a small preview, but I'd like to see these maps in their entirety on the brain surface or axial image slices.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Pak et al. report on a study using a computational method to assess differences in the relative proportion of six canonical brain cell types, across eleven neurodegenerative classes (defined as both clinical syndromes (e.g. FTD, PD), groups of neurogenerative diseases (e.g. 4-repeat tauopathies) or distinct neuropathological entities (e.g. FTLD-TDP type C), as they relate to a standard map of class-dependent volume loss. The study uses innovative methods and is commendable in its goal to highlight the contribution of non-neuronal cell types to the pathobiology of neurodegeneration. The findings of the study are in part contradicting expected results based on extensive literature on the biology of these diseases. The authors based their methodology on the use of a deconvolutional cell classifier; however, do not extensively recognize that their data on gene expression are based on normal brain levels rather than on diseased ones. Also, while predicted levels are uniquely based on patterns of brain atrophy, it is not possible to know whether this strategy is generalizable to all diseases (for instance, it is known that pure DLB, PD and ALS are not associated with extensive brain atrophy), or even adequately comparable between subtypes of diseases within the same class (e.g., different forms of FTLD). The authors do not acknowledge that only data based on true neuropathological assessment may prove whether their findings are true. Subject characteristics, numbers, and diagnostic criteria are hard to assess and only described in the methods section. This format prevents the reader from assessing data robustness while going through the results, especially when fundamental biological bases of nomenclature and differences between clinical syndromes and pathological entities are omitted or uncharacteristically provided.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

This study is a fine example of a recent productive trend in the integration of neuroimaging and molecular biology of the brain: in brief, overlaying some neuroimaging data (usually from a large cohort) onto the high spatial resolution gene expression in the Allen Human Brain Atlas data, derived from 6 individuals. By projecting structural MRI images over cell type proportions identified in the Allen data, the authors can represent various diseases in terms of their spatially-associated cell types. The result has implications for prioritizing the contributions of various cell types to each disease and creates an even-handed cell type profile through which the 11 diseases can be compared.