Advertisement

Neurochemical Research

, Volume 44, Issue 2, pp 323–332 | Cite as

Phosphoglycerate Mutase 1 Promotes Cell Proliferation and Neuroblast Differentiation in the Dentate Gyrus by Facilitating the Phosphorylation of cAMP Response Element-Binding Protein

  • Hyo Young Jung
  • Hyun Jung Kwon
  • Woosuk Kim
  • Sung Min Nam
  • Jong Whi Kim
  • Kyu Ri Hahn
  • Dae Young Yoo
  • Moo-Ho Won
  • Yeo Sung Yoon
  • Dae Won KimEmail author
  • In Koo HwangEmail author
Original Paper
  • 137 Downloads

Abstract

In a previous study, we observed a significant increase in phosphoglycerate mutase 1 (PGAM1) levels after pyridoxine treatment. In the present study, we investigated the effects of PGAM1 on novel object recognition, cell proliferation, and neuroblast differentiation in the dentate gyrus. We generated a Tat-PGAM1 fusion protein to cross the blood–brain barrier and neuronal plasma membrane. We administered the Tat peptide, control-PGAM1, or Tat-PGAM1 fusion protein to 8-week-old mice once a day for 3 weeks and tested novel object recognition memory. The mice were then euthanized to conduct western blot analysis for polyhistidine expression and immunohistochemical analysis for Ki67, doublecortin, and phosphorylated cAMP response element-binding protein. Mice treated with Tat peptide showed similar exploration times for familiar and new objects and the discrimination index was significantly lower in this group than in the control group. Tat-PGAM1 moderately increased the exploration time of new objects when compared to familiar objects, while the discrimination index was significantly higher in the Tat-PGAM1-treated group, but not in the control-PGAM1-treated group, when compared with the control group. Higher PGAM1 protein expression was observed in the hippocampus of Tat-PGAM1-treated mice when compared with the hippocampi of control, Tat peptide-, and control-PGAM1-treated mice, using western blot analysis. In addition, the numbers of proliferating cells and differentiated neuroblasts were significantly lower in the Tat peptide-treated group than in the control group. In contrast, the numbers of proliferating cells and differentiated neuroblasts in the dentate gyrus were higher in the Tat-PGAM1-treated group than in the control group. Administration of Tat-PGAM1 significantly facilitated the phosphorylation of cAMP response element-binding protein in the dentate gyrus. Administration of control-PGAM1 did not show any significant effects on novel object recognition, cell proliferation, and neuroblast differentiation in the dentate gyrus. These results suggest that PGAM1 plays a role in cell proliferation and neuroblast differentiation in the dentate gyrus via the phosphorylation of cAMP response element-binding protein in the hippocampus.

Keywords

Phosphoglycerate mutase 1 Dentate gyrus Novel object recognition Neurogenesis 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Promising-Pioneering Researcher Program through Seoul National University (SNU) in 2015 and by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government (MSIP) (Nos. NRF-2016R1A2B4009156 and NRF-2018R1A2B6001941). In addition, this study was partially supported by the Research Institute for Veterinary Science of Seoul National University.

Author Contributions

HYJ, HJK, WK, SMN, JWK, KRH, DYY, MHW, YSY, DWK, and IKH conceived the study. HYJ, HJK, DWK, and IKH designed the study and wrote the manuscript. HYJ, WK, JWK, and KRH conducted the animal experiments and HJK and DWK conducted biochemical experiments. SMN, DYY, MHW, and YSY participated in designing and critical discussing the study. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

  1. 1.
    Kempermann G, Gage FH (1999) New nerve cells for the adult brain. Sci Am 280:48–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Drew LJ, Fusi S, Hen R (2013) Adult neurogenesis in the mammalian hippocampus: why the dentate gyrus? Learn Mem 20:710–729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kee N, Teixeira CM, Wang AH, Frankland PW (2007) Preferential incorporation of adult-generated granule cells into spatial memory networks in the dentate gyrus. Nat Neurosci 10:355–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dupret D, Revest JM, Koehl M et al (2008) Spatial relational memory requires hippocampal adult neurogenesis. PLoS ONE 3:e1959CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rikani AA, Choudhry Z, Choudhry AM, Zenonos G, Tariq S, Mobassarah NJ (2013) Spatially regulated adult neurogenesis. Ann Neurosci 20:67–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bond AM, Ming GL, Song H (2015) Adult mammalian neural stem cells and neurogenesis: five decades later. Cell Stem Cell 17:385–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fothergill-Gilmore LA, Watson HC (1989) The phosphoglycerate mutases. Adv Enzymol Relat Areas Mol Biol 62:227–313Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Usuba T, Ishibashi Y, Okawa Y, Hirakawa T, Takada K, Ohkawa K (2001) Purification and identification of monoubiquitin-phosphoglycerate mutase B complex from human colorectal cancer tissues. Int J Cancer 94:662–668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Li C, Xiao Z, Chen Z et al (2006) Proteome analysis of human lung squamous carcinoma. Proteomics 6:547–558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Durany N, Joseph J, Jimenez OM et al (2000) Phosphoglycerate mutase, 2,3-bisphosphoglycerate phosphatase, creatine kinase and enolase activity and isoenzymes in breast carcinoma. Br J Cancer 82:20–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fang MZ, Liu C, Song Y et al (2004) Over-expression of gastrin-releasing peptide in human esophageal squamous cell carcinomas. Carcinogenesis 25:865–871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Turhani D, Krapfenbauer K, Thurnher D, Langen H, Fountoulakis M (2006) Identification of differentially expressed, tumor-associated proteins in oral squamous cell carcinoma by proteomic analysis. Electrophoresis 27:1417–1423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gao H, Yu B, Yan Y et al (2013) Correlation of expression levels of ANXA2, PGAM1, and CALR with glioma grade and prognosis. J Neurosurg 118:846–853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jain R, Kulkarni P, Dhali S, Rapole S, Srivastava S (2015) Quantitative proteomic analysis of global effect of LLL12 on U87 cell’s proteome: an insight into the molecular mechanism of LLL12. J Proteomics 113:127–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Xu Z, Gong J, Wang C et al (2016) The diagnostic value and functional roles of phosphoglycerate mutase 1 in glioma. Oncol Rep 36:2236–2244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Liu ZG, Ding J, Du C et al (2018) Phosphoglycerate mutase 1 is highly expressed in C6 glioma cells and human astrocytoma. Oncol Lett 15:8935–8940Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ren F, Wu H, Lei Y et al (2010) Quantitative proteomics identification of phosphoglycerate mutase 1 as a novel therapeutic target in hepatocellular carcinoma. Mol Cancer 9:81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hitosugi T, Zhou L, Elf S et al (2012) Phosphoglycerate mutase 1 coordinates glycolysis and biosynthesis to promote tumor growth. Cancer Cell 22:585–600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Scatena R, Bottoni P, Pontoglio A, Mastrototaro L, Giardina B (2008) Glycolytic enzyme inhibitors in cancer treatment. Expert Opin Investig Drugs 17:1533–1545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jacobowitz DM, Jozwik C, Fukuda T, Pollard HB (2008) Immunohistochemical localization of Phosphoglycerate mutase in capillary endothelium of the brain and periphery. Microvasc Res 76:89–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Imperlini E, Orrù S, Corbo C, Daniele A, Salvatore F (2014) Altered brain protein expression profiles are associated with molecular neurological dysfunction in the PKU mouse model. J Neurochem 129:1002–1012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sharma NK, Sethy NK, Bhargava K (2013) Comparative proteome analysis reveals differential regulation of glycolytic and antioxidant enzymes in cortex and hippocampus exposed to short-term hypobaric hypoxia. J Proteomics 79:277–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Martins-de-Souza D, Alsaif M, Ernst A et al (2012) The application of selective reaction monitoring confirms dysregulation of glycolysis in a preclinical model of schizophrenia. BMC Res Notes 5:146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Prabakaran S, Swatton JE, Ryan MM et al (2004) Mitochondrial dysfunction in schizophrenia: evidence for compromised brain metabolism and oxidative stress. Mol Psychiatry 9:684–697CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zhang D, Jin N, Sun W et al (2017) Phosphoglycerate mutase 1 promotes cancer cell migration independent of its metabolic activity. Oncogene 36:2900–2909CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yoo DY, Kim W, Kim DW et al (2011) Pyridoxine enhances cell proliferation and neuroblast differentiation by upregulating the GABAergic system in the mouse dentate gyrus. Neurochem Res 36:713–721CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jung HY, Kim DW, Nam SM et al (2017) Pyridoxine improves hippocampal cognitive function via increases of serotonin turnover and tyrosine hydroxylase, and its association with CB1 cannabinoid receptor-interacting protein and the CB1 cannabinoid receptor pathway. Biochim Biophys Acta 1861:3142–3153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Liebner S, Dijkhuizen RM, Reiss Y, Plate KH, Agalliu D, Constantin G (2018) Functional morphology of the blood-brain barrier in health and disease. Acta Neuropathol 135:311–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Daneman R (2012) The blood-brain barrier in health and disease. Ann Neurol 72:648–672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Green M, Loewenstein PM (1988) Autonomous functional domains of chemically synthesized human immunodeficiency virus tat trans-activator protein. Cell 55:1179–1188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Frankel AD, Pabo CO (1988) Cellular uptake of the tat protein from human immunodeficiency virus. Cell 55:1189–1193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Eum WS, Kim DW, Hwang IK et al (2004) In vivo protein transduction: biologically active intact pep-1-superoxide dismutase fusion protein efficiently protects against ischemic insult. Free Radic Biol Med 37:1656–1669CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Yoo DY, Kim DW, Kwon HJ et al (2017) Chronic administration of SUMO1 has negative effects on novel object recognition memory as well as cell proliferation and neuroblasts differentiation in the mouse dentate gyrus. Mol Med Rep 16:3427–3432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kilkenny C, Browne WJ, Cuthill IC, Emerson M, Altman DG (2010) Improving bioscience research reporting: the ARRIVE guidelines for reporting animal research. PLoS Biol 8:e1000412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kwon HY, Eum WS, Jang HW et al (2000) Transduction of Cu, Zn-superoxide dismutase mediated by an HIV-1Tat protein basic domain into mammalian cells. FEBS Lett 485:163–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Bradford MM (1976) A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of proteindye binding. Anal Biochem 72:248254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Paxinos G, Franklin KBJ (2001) The mouse brain in stereotaxic coordinates. Academic Press, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Cortesi L, Barchetti A, De Matteis E et al (2009) Identification of protein clusters predictive of response to chemotherapy in breast cancer patients. J Proteome Res 8:4916–4933CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Buccarello L, Borsello T (2017) The Tat-Aβ1-6A2V(D) peptide against AD synaptopathy. Oncotarget 8:10773–10774Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Tu J, Zhang X, Zhu Y et al (2015) Cell-permeable peptide targeting the Nrf2-Keap1 interaction: a potential novel therapy for global cerebral ischemia. J Neurosci 35:14727–14739CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kim SM, Hwang IK, Yoo DY et al (2015) Tat-antioxidant 1 protects against stress-induced hippocampal HT-22 cells death and attenuate ischaemic insult in animal model. J Cell Mol Med 19:1333–1345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Gannon P, Khan MZ, Kolson DL (2011) Current understanding of HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders pathogenesis. Curr Opin Neurol 24:275–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Irish BP, Khan ZK, Jain P et al (2009) Molecular mechanisms of neurodegenerative diseases induced by human retroviruses: a review. Am J Infect Dis 5:231–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Ferrell D, Giunta B (2014) The impact of HIV-1 on neurogenesis: implications for HAND. Cell Mol Life Sci 71:4387–4392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Fan Y, Gao X, Chen J, Liu Y, He JJ (2016) HIV Tat impairs neurogenesis through functioning as a Notch ligand and activation of Notch signaling pathway. J Neurosci 36:11362–11373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Harricharan R, Thaver V, Russell VA, Daniels WM (2015) Tat-induced histopathological alterations mediate hippocampus-associated behavioural impairments in rats. Behav Brain Funct 11:3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Lonze BE, Riccio A, Cohen S, Ginty DD (2002) Apoptosis, axonal growth defects, and degeneration of peripheral neurons in mice lacking CREB. Neuron 34:371–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Redmond L, Kashani AH, Ghosh A (2002) Calcium regulation of dendritic growth via CaM kinase IV and CREB-mediated transcription. Neuron 34:999–1010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Segarra-Mondejar M, Casellas-Díaz S, Ramiro-Pareta M et al (2018) Synaptic activity-induced glycolysis facilitates membrane lipid provision and neurite outgrowth. EMBO J 37(9):e97368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Yoo DY, Lee KY, Park JH et al (2016) Glucose metabolism and neurogenesis in the gerbil hippocampus after transient forebrain ischemia. Neural Regen Res 11:1254–1259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Jung HY, Yim HS, Yoo DY et al (2016) Postnatal changes in glucose transporter 3 expression in the dentate gyrus of the C57BL/6 mouse model. Lab Anim Res 32:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Yoo DY, Kim W, Yoo KY et al (2012) Effects of pyridoxine on a high-fat diet-induced reduction of cell proliferation and neuroblast differentiation depend on cyclic adenosine monophosphate response element binding protein in the mouse dentate gyrus. J Neurosci Res 90:1615–1625CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology, College of Veterinary Medicine, and Research Institute for Veterinary ScienceSeoul National UniversitySeoulSouth Korea
  2. 2.Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Research Institute of Oral Sciences, College of DentistryGangneung-Wonju National UniversityGangneungSouth Korea
  3. 3.Department of Anatomy, College of Veterinary MedicineKonkuk UniversitySeoulSouth Korea
  4. 4.Department of Anatomy, College of MedicineSoonchunhyang UniversityCheonanSouth Korea
  5. 5.Department of Neurobiology, School of MedicineKangwon National UniversityChuncheonSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations