| Title |
Augmenting neurogenesis rescues memory impairments in Alzheimer’s disease by restoring the memory-storing neurons
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The Journal of Experimental Medicine, August 2022
|
| DOI | 10.1084/jem.20220391 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rachana Mishra, Trongha Phan, Pavan Kumar, Zachery Morrissey, Muskan Gupta, Carolyn Hollands, Aashutosh Shetti, Kyra Lauren Lopez, Mark Maienschein-Cline, Hoonkyo Suh, Rene Hen, Orly Lazarov |
| Abstract |
Hippocampal neurogenesis is impaired in Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients and familial Alzheimer's disease (FAD) mouse models. However, it is unknown whether new neurons play a causative role in memory deficits. Here, we show that immature neurons were actively recruited into the engram following a hippocampus-dependent task. However, their recruitment is severely deficient in FAD. Recruited immature neurons exhibited compromised spine density and altered transcript profile. Targeted augmentation of neurogenesis in FAD mice restored the number of new neurons in the engram, the dendritic spine density, and the transcription signature of both immature and mature neurons, ultimately leading to the rescue of memory. Chemogenetic inactivation of immature neurons following enhanced neurogenesis in AD, reversed mouse performance, and diminished memory. Notably, AD-linked App, ApoE, and Adam10 were of the top differentially expressed genes in the engram. Collectively, these observations suggest that defective neurogenesis contributes to memory failure in AD. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 47 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 14 | 30% |
| Spain | 2 | 4% |
| India | 2 | 4% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Uruguay | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 27 | 57% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 28 | 60% |
| Scientists | 12 | 26% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 5 | 11% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 39 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 13% |
| Unknown | 11 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 12 | 31% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 8 | 21% |
| Unknown | 12 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 404. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 July 2023.
All research outputs
#73,813
of 25,392,582 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Experimental Medicine
#31
of 11,605 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,346
of 432,223 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Experimental Medicine
#3
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,392,582 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,605 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 432,223 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.