Ber (Table S1). Thus, we assume that the majority of the

Ber (Table S1). Thus, we assume that the majority of the RNAi transgenes provide efficient silencing of their target.Tau[R406W], respectively. In case of suppressor activity on both REPs, gene silencing might influence expression strength of the toxic proteins (Tau[R406W] or polyQ) per se. We therefore considered these candidates as a separate group. The 25033180 low number of candidates showing modification in both disease models implied that most of the identified modifiers are rather specific for polyQinduced toxicity.Suppression of polyQ-induced toxicity is not restricted to the retinaOur primary screen was based on retina degeneration. Consequently, identified modifications might be specific to the retina. We wanted to test whether our candidates also protect against polyQ-induced toxicity in neurons different from photoreceptors. Pan-neural (elav-GAL4) expression of the polyQ construct used for screening did not result in viable offspring [23]. However, in combination with identified suppressors, a large portion of tested MedChemExpress 298690-60-5 suppressors rescued lethality in these flies (Table S2). Thus, protective effects on polyQ-induced toxicity of the majority of suppressors are not restricted to photoreceptors but also apply to other neuron types.Toxicity does not correlate with polyQ aggregationAggregation of proteins containing an elongated glutamine expansion is a common feature of polyQ diseases [12,14,28,29,30]. In addition, polyQ aggregation is considered to be at least partially causative for toxicity. Therefore we assumed that suppressors of polyQ toxicity identified in our screen might reduce polyQ aggregation, whereas enhancers might increase aggregate load. The so-called filter retardation assay is a widely used method to visualize SDS-insoluble, aggregated polyQcontaining proteins or peptides (Figure 2A) [31]. The main number of candidate enhancers (457) caused a lethal interaction in combination with polyQ expression. Thus, the absence of viable progeny did not allow to test for aggregation. Nevertheless, we analyzed remaining modifiers with respect to polyQ aggregation (Figure 2B, Figure S1). Only 3 of 34 suppressors analyzed showed a significant reduction of aggregate load. Despite that, the analyzed suppressors displayed no clear trend with respect to aggregate load. An increase as well as a decrease of aggregates was observed. In contrast, most of the analyzed enhancers of polyQ toxicity displayed a slight reduction in aggregate load. In summary, we can conclude that obvious changes in toxicity do not seem to coincide with equivalent changes in aggregate load.Modifiers are specific for polyQ-induced toxicityIn our primary screen, we identified a large number of enhancers and few suppressors of polyQ-induced toxicity (Figure 1D). Next, we analyzed if the identified modifiers are specific for polyQ-induced toxicity. Mutations in the tau gene like Tau[R406W] cause Frontotemporal Dementia and Eledoisin chemical information Parkinsonism linked to chromosome 17 (FTDP-17) [24]. GMR-driven expression of Tau (WT and FTLD-17-linked mutant variants) results in REPs, that are also sensitive towards genetic modifications. Such REPs induced by Tau variants (e. g. WT and V337M) have previously been used for modifier screens [25,26,27]. Using the Tau[R406W]-induced REP, we asked if identified polyQ modifiers might have similar effects on Tau-induced toxicity. Interestingly, only 4 of polyQ modifiers (21) similarly affected the Taudependent REP (Table 1). Silencing of these genes migh.Ber (Table S1). Thus, we assume that the majority of the RNAi transgenes provide efficient silencing of their target.Tau[R406W], respectively. In case of suppressor activity on both REPs, gene silencing might influence expression strength of the toxic proteins (Tau[R406W] or polyQ) per se. We therefore considered these candidates as a separate group. The 25033180 low number of candidates showing modification in both disease models implied that most of the identified modifiers are rather specific for polyQinduced toxicity.Suppression of polyQ-induced toxicity is not restricted to the retinaOur primary screen was based on retina degeneration. Consequently, identified modifications might be specific to the retina. We wanted to test whether our candidates also protect against polyQ-induced toxicity in neurons different from photoreceptors. Pan-neural (elav-GAL4) expression of the polyQ construct used for screening did not result in viable offspring [23]. However, in combination with identified suppressors, a large portion of tested suppressors rescued lethality in these flies (Table S2). Thus, protective effects on polyQ-induced toxicity of the majority of suppressors are not restricted to photoreceptors but also apply to other neuron types.Toxicity does not correlate with polyQ aggregationAggregation of proteins containing an elongated glutamine expansion is a common feature of polyQ diseases [12,14,28,29,30]. In addition, polyQ aggregation is considered to be at least partially causative for toxicity. Therefore we assumed that suppressors of polyQ toxicity identified in our screen might reduce polyQ aggregation, whereas enhancers might increase aggregate load. The so-called filter retardation assay is a widely used method to visualize SDS-insoluble, aggregated polyQcontaining proteins or peptides (Figure 2A) [31]. The main number of candidate enhancers (457) caused a lethal interaction in combination with polyQ expression. Thus, the absence of viable progeny did not allow to test for aggregation. Nevertheless, we analyzed remaining modifiers with respect to polyQ aggregation (Figure 2B, Figure S1). Only 3 of 34 suppressors analyzed showed a significant reduction of aggregate load. Despite that, the analyzed suppressors displayed no clear trend with respect to aggregate load. An increase as well as a decrease of aggregates was observed. In contrast, most of the analyzed enhancers of polyQ toxicity displayed a slight reduction in aggregate load. In summary, we can conclude that obvious changes in toxicity do not seem to coincide with equivalent changes in aggregate load.Modifiers are specific for polyQ-induced toxicityIn our primary screen, we identified a large number of enhancers and few suppressors of polyQ-induced toxicity (Figure 1D). Next, we analyzed if the identified modifiers are specific for polyQ-induced toxicity. Mutations in the tau gene like Tau[R406W] cause Frontotemporal Dementia and Parkinsonism linked to chromosome 17 (FTDP-17) [24]. GMR-driven expression of Tau (WT and FTLD-17-linked mutant variants) results in REPs, that are also sensitive towards genetic modifications. Such REPs induced by Tau variants (e. g. WT and V337M) have previously been used for modifier screens [25,26,27]. Using the Tau[R406W]-induced REP, we asked if identified polyQ modifiers might have similar effects on Tau-induced toxicity. Interestingly, only 4 of polyQ modifiers (21) similarly affected the Taudependent REP (Table 1). Silencing of these genes migh.

Leave a Reply