Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
The identification of fibrillar and non-fibrillar bioactive forms of tau is an important issue in our understanding of the mechanism of diseases such as Alzheimer disease. The Stern and Selkoe commentary expresses concerns about the idea that non-fibrillar oligomeric tau exists, or is bioactive. We here review structural (atomic force microscopy), compositional (mass spectroscopy), biochemical, and functional data as well as unpublished results from our lab characterizing oligomeric and fibrillar tau, clarify a variety of technical issues, and cite an extensive and robust literature from tau labs across the world to support the thesis that oligomeric tau, as well as fibrillar tau, could contribute to tau pathobiology.
Because of the widely different extraction conditions, aqueous phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) homogenates and sarkosyl detergent insoluble fractions clearly enrich for different forms of tau. Beyond the long-standing use of these preparations in the tau field, and the marked differences between extraction conditions, we present substantial data in this [23] and other manuscripts [3, 5, 14, 28, 31,32,33] which demonstrate that tau present in the PBS fraction (referred to as HMW tau in our manuscript) is different than the fibrillar, classical paired helical filament (PHF) tau in the sarkosyl insoluble fraction, yet they are both bioactive (and, as shown in the current work, similarly bioactive). Multiple lines of evidence support this:
-
1) In our original 2015 description of the bioactive HMW fraction, we showed that it was detected by the oligomer-specific antibody T22, disappeared after urea incubation, could be detected in the interstitial fluid from mouse brain, and we demonstrated (by atomic force microscopy) that tau immunoprecipitated from the HMW fraction contained small globular structures, all consistent with the behavior of oligomeric species of tau [32]. Atomic force microscopy was also utilized by Kayed’s group to conclusively demonstrate a brain-derived oligomeric non-fibrillar tau species [20], isolated by size exclusion chromatography and immunoprecipitated by oligomer-specific T22. This non-fibrillar preparation also demonstrated propagation and seeding [20]. The atomic force microscopy studies show, conclusively, that bioactive tau in these preparations is structurally distinct from PHF tau.
-
2) By mass spectroscopy, the aqueous extract and the sarkosyl insoluble fraction are definitively different species with similar but distinct post-translational modifications ([5, 33] and Kumar et al. submitted). The tau present in the HMW fraction enters a blot and shows a smear of high-molecular-weight material on nondenaturing Western blots, which collapse to standard bands on a denaturing Western blot—unlike expectations for fibrillar tau. Additionally, in our manuscript, we show that HMW tau is significantly less resistant to proteinase K than SARK tau, which, as noted below, is consistent with the data from the Iqbal lab [21]. Thus bioactive tau in the aqueous extract is biochemically distinct from PHF tau.
-
3) Stern may have misinterpreted our brief methods section, and we are happy to expand on the details here. To clarify, we used two types of size exclusion columns (rather than the one mentioned)—a 25 mL column for small preps (referenced in the manuscript) and a 120 mL column [HiLoad 16/600 Superdex 200pg column (no. 28-9893-35, GE Healthcare)] for larger preps (matching the sample preparation in the manuscript). For example, for the 120 mL column, the void volume is 36 mL (approximately 30% of the column volume) and we used a nomenclature in which we start collecting fraction 1 at an elution volume of 37.5 mL. We collect 2.5 mL fractions and high-molecular-weight (HMW) tau appears in fractions 2, 3, and 4, near but not including the void volume. The amount of tau in individual fractions 2, 3, and 4, as well as seeding, does not drop off in each subsequent fraction—unlike expectations if the seeding in these fractions was residua from the void volume.
We reason that if the bioactivity of the HMW fractions was simply contamination by a small amount of fibrillar species, one would expect the two preparations to act qualitatively the same. However, since the PBS sample is at worst a non-purified version of fibrils, the sarkosyl insoluble concentrated fibrillar preparation would be expected to be more robust. Yet, they are equal, or, in some parameters, the PBS fraction is even more potent, and has additional characteristics compared to the sarkosyl insoluble preparation, both in our hands and in many other labs.
-
4) Electron microscopy (EM) was performed on the sarkosyl insoluble SARK tau material, and the PBS soluble HMW tau extract (after SEC and concentration of the high-molecular-weight fractions 2, 3, and 4 by ultracentrifugation) and not the 10,000 g PBS supernatant as stated by Stern and Selkoe. Equal amounts of total tau—quantified by WB—were loaded onto the EM grids (3 µl at 0.1 µg/µl tau).
-
5) Stern and Selkoe note that we demonstrate that the PBS soluble and sarkosyl insoluble preparations are not 100% “clean” and that some fibrillar tau is present even in the PBS fraction (Fig 1 in [23]). Not unexpectedly, some short fibrils can be observed in the minimally processed PBS fraction, in agreement with the supplemental data shown in Stern et al 2023 after a soak and spin protocol, using cryoEM [30]. Of note, we do not claim that we can observe oligomeric tau by negative stain transmission EM, which would require additional purification and optimization. Importantly, however, the absence of oligomeric forms in a cryoEM preparation, such as that reported by Stern et al. [30], is uninformative, since oligomers would likely be far less detectable, or even invisible by cryoEM, compared to the repeated structures of fibrils. Critically, we show in the manuscript (Fig S1d-f and surrounding text) that the fibrillar structures observed in the PBS fraction resolve upon sonication, but seeding activity remains unchanged, suggesting again that the main driver of the biological activity in the aqueous fraction is not the fibrillar species.
-
6) We note that published work from numerous other tau laboratories supports the idea that oligomers are distinct bioactive species rather than the “ill-defined, soluble, non-fibrillar tau species” asserted by Stern and Selkoe. Importantly, Li et al. isolated soluble, oligomeric, and sarkosyl insoluble fragments of tau from human brain by sedimentation and detergent solubility, and showed, in a manner very analogous to our study, that the oligomeric tau and the sarkosyl insoluble fractions were differentially resistant to proteinase K [21]. Both seeded tau aggregation in cell culture and induced significant tau aggregation both at the site of injection and distally in aged FVB mice [21], closely analogous to our results. The Wolozin lab similarly isolated oligomeric tau and fibrillar tau by differential ultracentrifugation, and found that both preparations led to seeding, and the characteristics of the two preparations differed [17]. Another paper from the Wolozin laboratory used PS19 mice as the source of tau, and compared oligomeric (Tris-buffered saline soluble material) to sarkosyl insoluble material (fibrillar tau) and came to similar conclusions about toxicity of oligomers, showing that the oligomeric preparation propagated across neural systems to a greater extent than fibrils [16]. These results, taken together, confirm our analyses, and support our fundamental results regarding seeding, proteinase K, and propagation of both oligomeric tau and sarkosyl insoluble preparations.
-
7) A further brief review of the recent literature shows unequivocally that soluble oligomers, in addition to, and distinct from, fibrillar forms of tau, are bioactive. These results derive from multiple labs, using multiple techniques, isolation procedures, and readouts. A recent paper from Spire-Jones shows that Alzheimer synaptic preparations contain oligomeric tau but not fibrillar tau (as assessed biochemically or by EM) and show tau bioactivity [2], extending work from the Diamond group [13] and our group that are consistent with the conclusion that Alzheimer brain contains oligomeric non-fibrillar tau [3, 31, 34] in sites such as synapses, where fibrils do not occur. Recent work from Lasagna Reeves shows that HMW tau propagates across synapses in several systems [22]. The Kayed lab has published numerous papers on the isolation, biochemical characteristics, and toxic properties of soluble oligomeric tau including recent work, showing that it drives cellular senescence [8,9,10, 25]. Tau transfer from cell to cell, as demonstrated for example by the Kosik lab in their recent Nature paper, is via a soluble form of tau rather than a fibrillar form [27]. Diamond’s recent work suggests that even single molecules of misfolded tau, which are certainly not fibrillar forms, are sufficient to induce misfolding and aggregation [24]. Work done independently by Kayed [25], Frost [29], Westaway [18], Livesey [26], and our lab [6], all suggest that soluble misfolded tau binds molecules at the nuclear membrane to induce toxicity. The Mandelkow lab has demonstrated that non-fibrillar pro-aggregant tau has a clear impact on neural system function [11] which we have also seen in both a fibril forming line (tg4510) and in tg21221 mice that do not develop aggregates [1]. Very recently, super-resolution microscopy has been used to detect submicroscopic small globular aggregates of oligomeric tau that are distinct from tau fibrils [4, 12]. Thus, the established literature shows that oligomeric and fibrillar tau are distinct structural and biochemical species, and both are bioactive.
-
8) Finally, ongoing work in our laboratory provides further insight into the question of fibrillar vs non-fibrillar tau species. In unpublished studies, we have further purified the material that comes off the early fractions of the SEC column, and examined its properties on ion-exchange columns. The bioactivity and tau immunoreactivity elute in fractions expected if they interact with the column, consistent with them being smaller, oligomeric forms. Accordingly, transmission electron microscopy of the bioactive eluate does not contain any fibrils. In ongoing work using an in vivo amplification protocol, we find that the HMW tau fraction does not generate bioactive fibrils, whereas sarkosyl insoluble tau does.
We agree with Stern and Selkoe that the question of which species of tau are bioactive is vital, and that careful comparison of different preparations is a key approach to improve understanding of which characteristics of tau are important for its propensity to induce aggregation, propagate across neural systems, and cause neurotoxicity. Our study does exactly that, comparing two widely used preparations, derived from the same brain tissue, to one another, and coming to the conclusion that the classical fibrillar tau that is enriched in sarkosyl insoluble fractions, and a form of tau that is soluble in just PBS homogenate, appears by native gel and by SEC column to be “high molecular weight” and thus potentially oligomeric, can both lead to the evolution of AT8-positive cells at the injection site and distal to it, and, at least for the PBS fraction, gliosis.
These data reinforce and provide orthogonal information to our previous observations from human cases that the characteristics of this PBS soluble fraction differ across cases by mass spectroscopy and correlate with rate of disease progression [5, 28]. Since cryoEM structures of fibrils are the same across cases [7], we postulate that these correlations are best explained by differences in the structure of non-fibrillar, but still bioactive species. No doubt further work will help clarify the critical aspects of how tau differs across cases, and while the exact mechanisms of how those differences lead to correlations with rate of disease progression remain to be discovered, our work, as well as others, suggest strongly that classically defined fibrils [19], small fibrils [15], and more recently highlighted oligomeric species [5, 28] each play a role [14]. Understanding how will be both fascinating and critically important.
References
Busche MA, Wegmann S, Dujardin S, Commins C, Schiantarelli J, Klickstein N et al (2019) Tau impairs neural circuits, dominating amyloid-beta effects, in Alzheimer models in vivo. Nat Neurosci 22:57–64. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41593-018-0289-8
Colom-Cadena M, Davies C, Sirisi S, Lee JE, Simzer EM, Tzioras M et al (2023) Synaptic oligomeric tau in Alzheimer’s disease—a potential culprit in the spread of tau pathology through the brain. Neuron 111:2170-2183 e2176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2023.04.020
DeVos SL, Corjuc BT, Oakley DH, Nobuhara CK, Bannon RN, Chase A et al (2018) Synaptic Tau seeding precedes tau pathology in human Alzheimer’s disease brain. Front Neurosci 12:267. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2018.00267
Dimou E, Katsinelos T, Meisl G, Tuck BJ, Keeling S, Smith AE et al (2023) Super-resolution imaging unveils the self-replication of tau aggregates upon seeding. Cell Rep 42:112725. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2023.112725
Dujardin S, Commins C, Lathuiliere A, Beerepoot P, Fernandes AR, Kamath TV et al (2020) Tau molecular diversity contributes to clinical heterogeneity in Alzheimer’s disease. Nat Med 26:1256–1263. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-020-0938-9
Eftekharzadeh B, Daigle JG, Kapinos LE, Coyne A, Schiantarelli J, Carlomagno Y et al (2018) Tau protein disrupts nucleocytoplasmic transport in Alzheimer’s disease. Neuron 99:925-940 e927. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2018.07.039
Falcon B, Zhang W, Schweighauser M, Murzin AG, Vidal R, Garringer HJ et al (2018) Tau filaments from multiple cases of sporadic and inherited Alzheimer’s disease adopt a common fold. Acta Neuropathol 136:699–708. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00401-018-1914-z
Gaikwad S, Puangmalai N, Bittar A, Montalbano M, Garcia S, McAllen S et al (2021) Tau oligomer induced HMGB1 release contributes to cellular senescence and neuropathology linked to Alzheimer’s disease and frontotemporal dementia. Cell Rep 36:109419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2021.109419
Gerson JE, Sengupta U, Kayed R (2017) Tau oligomers as pathogenic seeds: preparation and propagation in vitro and in vivo. Methods Mol Biol 1523:141–157. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-6598-4_9
Ghag G, Bhatt N, Cantu DV, Guerrero-Munoz MJ, Ellsworth A, Sengupta U et al (2018) Soluble tau aggregates, not large fibrils, are the toxic species that display seeding and cross-seeding behavior. Protein Sci 27:1901–1909. https://doi.org/10.1002/pro.3499
Green C, Sydow A, Vogel S, Anglada-Huguet M, Wiedermann D, Mandelkow E et al (2019) Functional networks are impaired by elevated tau-protein but reversible in a regulatable Alzheimer’s disease mouse model. Mol Neurodegener 14:13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13024-019-0316-6
Gyparaki MT, Arab A, Sorokina EM, Santiago-Ruiz AN, Bohrer CH, Xiao J et al (2021) Tau forms oligomeric complexes on microtubules that are distinct from tau aggregates. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2021461118
Holmes BB, Furman JL, Mahan TE, Yamasaki TR, Mirbaha H, Eades WC et al (2014) Proteopathic tau seeding predicts tauopathy in vivo. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111:E4376-4385. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1411649111
Hyman B (2023) All the Tau we cannot see. Annu Rev Med 74:503–514. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-med-042921-023749
Jackson SJ, Kerridge C, Cooper J, Cavallini A, Falcon B, Cella CV et al (2016) Short fibrils constitute the major species of seed-competent tau in the brains of mice transgenic for human P301S Tau. J Neurosci 36:762–772. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3542-15.2016
Jiang L, Ash PEA, Maziuk BF, Ballance HI, Boudeau S, Abdullatif AA et al (2019) TIA1 regulates the generation and response to toxic tau oligomers. Acta Neuropathol 137:259–277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00401-018-1937-5
Jiang L, Zhao J, Cheng JX, Wolozin B (2020) Tau oligomers and fibrils exhibit differential patterns of seeding and association with RNA binding proteins. Front Neurol 11:579434. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2020.579434
Kang SG, Han ZZ, Daude N, McNamara E, Wohlgemuth S, Molina-Porcel L et al (2021) Pathologic tau conformer ensembles induce dynamic, liquid-liquid phase separation events at the nuclear envelope. BMC Biol 19:199. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12915-021-01132-y
Kim C, Haldiman T, Kang SG, Hromadkova L, Han ZZ, Chen W et al (2022) Distinct populations of highly potent TAU seed conformers in rapidly progressing Alzheimer’s disease. Sci Transl Med. 14:eabg0253. https://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.abg0253
Lasagna-Reeves CA, Castillo-Carranza DL, Sengupta U, Guerrero-Munoz MJ, Kiritoshi T, Neugebauer V et al (2012) Alzheimer brain-derived tau oligomers propagate pathology from endogenous tau. Sci Rep 2:700. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep00700
Li L, Shi R, Gu J, Tung YC, Zhou Y, Zhou D et al (2021) Alzheimer’s disease brain contains tau fractions with differential prion-like activities. Acta Neuropathol Commun 9:28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40478-021-01127-4
Martinez P, Patel H, You Y, Jury N, Perkins A, Lee-Gosselin A et al (2022) Bassoon contributes to tau-seed propagation and neurotoxicity. Nat Neurosci 25:1597–1607. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41593-022-01191-6
Mate De Gerando A, Welikovitch LA, Khasnavis A, Commins C, Glynn C, Chun JE et al (2023) Tau seeding and spreading in vivo is supported by both AD-derived fibrillar and oligomeric tau. Acta Neuropathol 146:191–210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00401-023-02600-1
Mirbaha H, Chen D, Mullapudi V, Terpack SJ, White CL 3rd, Joachimiak LA et al (2022) Seed-competent tau monomer initiates pathology in a tauopathy mouse model. J Biol Chem 298:102163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbc.2022.102163
Montalbano M, Majmundar L, Sengupta U, Fung L, Kayed R (2023) Pathological tau signatures and nuclear alterations in neurons, astrocytes and microglia in Alzheimer’s disease, progressive supranuclear palsy, and dementia with Lewy bodies. Brain Pathol 33:e13112. https://doi.org/10.1111/bpa.13112
Paonessa F, Evans LD, Solanki R, Larrieu D, Wray S, Hardy J et al (2019) Microtubules deform the nuclear membrane and disrupt nucleocytoplasmic transport in tau-mediated frontotemporal dementia. Cell Rep 26:582-593 e585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2018.12.085
Rauch JN, Luna G, Guzman E, Audouard M, Challis C, Sibih YE et al (2020) LRP1 is a master regulator of tau uptake and spread. Nature 580:381–385. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2156-5
Sepulveda-Falla D, Chavez-Gutierrez L, Portelius E, Velez JI, Dujardin S, Barrera-Ocampo A et al (2021) A multifactorial model of pathology for age of onset heterogeneity in familial Alzheimer’s disease. Acta Neuropathol 141:217–233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00401-020-02249-0
Sohn C, Ma J, Ray WJ, Frost B (2023) Pathogenic tau decreases nuclear tension in cultured neurons. Front Aging 4:1058968. https://doi.org/10.3389/fragi.2023.1058968
Stern AM, Yang Y, Jin S, Yamashita K, Meunier AL, Liu W et al (2023) Abundant Abeta fibrils in ultracentrifugal supernatants of aqueous extracts from Alzheimer’s disease brains. Neuron 111:2012-2020 e2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2023.04.007
Tai HC, Wang BY, Serrano-Pozo A, Frosch MP, Spires-Jones TL, Hyman BT (2014) Frequent and symmetric deposition of misfolded tau oligomers within presynaptic and postsynaptic terminals in Alzheimer’s disease. Acta Neuropathol Commun 2:146. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40478-014-0146-2
Takeda S, Wegmann S, Cho H, DeVos SL, Commins C, Roe AD et al (2015) Neuronal uptake and propagation of a rare phosphorylated high-molecular-weight tau derived from Alzheimer’s disease brain. Nat Commun 6:8490. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms9490
Wesseling H, Mair W, Kumar M, Schlaffner CN, Tang S, Beerepoot P et al (2020) Tau PTM profiles identify patient heterogeneity and stages of Alzheimer’s disease. Cell 183:1699-1713 e1613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2020.10.029
Wu HY, Kuo PC, Wang YT, Lin HT, Roe AD, Wang BY et al (2018) Beta-amyloid induces pathology-related patterns of Tau hyperphosphorylation at synaptic terminals. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol 77:814–826. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnen/nly059
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Mate de Gerando, A., Quittot, N., Frosch, M.P. et al. Reply: Soluble oligomers or insoluble fibrils?. Acta Neuropathol 146, 863–866 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00401-023-02634-5
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00401-023-02634-5